What's Happening at Bigelow?

[Ben the Space Brit]

I'm curious if a Laguna Madre, Texas site would give Bigelow any advantages?

Potentially water transit for very wide payloads to CCAFS.

[ChefPat]

I'm curious if a Laguna Madre, Texas site would give Bigelow any advantages?

Potentially water transit for very wide payloads to CCAFS.

Laguna Madre/South Padre Island is the location of the rumored South Texas Spaceport.
Would the inclinations from there be of any advantage to Bigelow?

[go4mars]

I'm curious if a Laguna Madre, Texas site would give Bigelow any advantages?

It would be hard to ship BA-2100 or larger modules from Vegas to a launch pad.  If he built another factory along the gulf coast at some future date, the large canal systems near Laguna Madre could be very useful.   

[manboy]

Pat, I thought the 330 was 20 tons. Do you have a source for the 23? The website doesn't say.

Wiki, BA-330 Page
Mass Between 20,000 kg and 23,000 kg

I was the one who put that number there, but if you look at the source than you realize that the number is from 2005 so I'm not sure how accurate of a figure it is.

[clongton]

Can anyone here explain how the Bigelow modules are folded in the deflated condition?

[ChefPat]

Can anyone here explain how the Bigelow modules are folded in the deflated condition?

Anything we say will be a WAG.
That said, the "seams" on a BA-330 run the length of the module. It appears from the vid on Bigelow's home page that the "fold" is there, on the seam.
The vid does not actually show it expanding though.

[Danderman]

I'm curious if a Laguna Madre, Texas site would give Bigelow any advantages?

It would be hard to ship BA-2100 or larger modules from Vegas to a launch pad.  If he built another factory along the gulf coast at some future date, the large canal systems near Laguna Madre could be very useful.   

I am sure that there are people here who would believe Bob Bigelow if he said he was going to build a canal from Las Vegas to the sea.

Having said that, if the module is going to fit inside a real rocket, it should be transportable from Las Vegas to a launch site, without a canal.

[docmordrid]

If an Atlas V core is 3.81 meters and these cuts from their launch animation is any indication (I know!) then it looks like it takes the 5.4 meter  fairing. Wouldn't that make the folded module at least a meter smaller?

[ChefPat]

If an Atlas V core is 3.81 meters and these cuts from their launch animation is any indication (I know!) then it looks like it takes the 5.4 meter  fairing. Wouldn't that make the folded module at least a meter smaller?

I'm not sure when this was last updated, or how accurate their numbers are.

Encyclopedia Astronautica; Nautilus
Length: 13.70 m (44.90 ft).
Basic Diameter: 4.57 m (14.99 ft).
Maximum Diameter: 6.70 m (21.90 ft).
Habitable Volume: 330.00 m3.
Mass: 20,000 kg (44,000 lb).
Electrical System: Solar cells.

[baldusi]

Per Payload's User Guide, the stock fairing has space for a maximum diameter of 4.65m.

[joek]

Can anyone here explain how the Bigelow modules are folded in the deflated condition?

I believe they use the same geometry as TransHab, which is the image on the right below, thus the ~3:1 inflated:core diameter ratio.  The image on the left is from the proposed NASA ISS Inflatable Module Mission presentation, which has a lower inflated:core ration.  (From this post.)




edit: Not like TransHab, per Orbital Debris comment below.

[Orbital Debris]

Most of the gathering occurs in folds perpendicular to the long axis of the core. 

Current working mass of the BA330 is 43,000 lbm.

[docmordrid]

Roughly 19.5 metric tons 'eh?

Atlas V Heavy, D-4H, Ariane 5ES, FH, Proton....

[ChefPat]

Most of the gathering occurs in folds perpendicular to the long axis of the core. 

Current working mass of the BA330 is 43,000 lbm.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if 3.5 metric tons have been trimmed off the launch weight won't it just have to be put back in on out fitting?
In the early pix, structures that ran parallel to the length were in the module. The recent ones show only empty space.
If an FH is used can that mass be put in on launch as opposed to scheduling a outfitting flight?
Or does Mr B. have something else in mind? An FH should be able to get 19.5 metric tons up to GTO, or at least a good portion of the way there.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

There are a lot of options:
1) FH with Raptor should be able to get to LLO or L2
2) As well as SLS

The cheapest to most expensive is in the following order:
1) FH available NET 2013 (~$85M)
2) Proton currently available (~$95M)
3) Ariane currently available (~$120M)
4) DIVH currently available (~$140M)
5) SLS available NET 2017 (~$500M-$1B)

[baldusi]

There are a lot of options:
1) FH with Raptor should be able to get to LLO or L2
2) As well as SLS

The cheapest to most expensive is in the following order:
1) FH available NET 2013 (~$85M)
2) Proton currently available (~$95M)
3) Ariane currently available (~$120M)
4) DIVH currently available (~$140M)
5) SLS available NET 2017 (~$500M-$1B)

New Worlds had a quotation for Delta IV Heavy of 260M. And Falcon Heavy would be 130M, unless they can dual manifest, which I highly doubt due to volume restriction.
May be a more interesting question would be if they could fill it up with something extra, and how much would that cost. In other words, if they are going to a 28.5 350km orbit (for argument's sake), and the BA330 weights 19.5tn, but they can cram more weight inside, or in an additional enclosure pre docked, whatever extra weight they can put, is a cargo mission less. So the lower the USD/kg of the launcher, the more incentive they would have to actually fill it up.
Let's say that the Delta IV is 260M. But with the new RS-68A they can put 27tn to that orbit. So they would get a single BA330 plus 7.5tn of extra cargo.
Apparently each Dragon mission is 133M, for 6000kg of cargo. That's 22,166USD/kg. The Delta IV would have something like 9,630 USD/kg. So it would actually be cheaper, since they would be saving more than a whole Dragon mission. So that extra 7.5tn would be worth 166M. If those prices held for Bigelow, the effective cost of the DH would be closer to 94M. The FH would seem to be way cheaper, still. But I was just making the point.

[Nomadd]

 Dragon missions also tend to deliver Dragons and CRS prices for delivered cargo have little to do with Bigelow or price for mass to LEO.
 I can't make heads or tails oiut of that last paragraph.

[baldusi]

I mean that if we base the cost of extra cargo and supplies of the CRS, as the price point for Bigelow, then they have to account each extra kg of cargo and supplies that they can put in the habitat launch, at what it will cost to them afterwards. Since cargo delivery requires a delivery ship with a multitude of restrictions, the cheapest cargo ever will be whatever they can cram in the initial launch. So, if they go with a bigger and more expensive launcher, but can put a lot of supplies in said launch, it would probably be way cheaper than a less expensive initial launcher (like Proton), but with no margin for extra cargo, since they will have to then buy a cargo mission for those same supplies.

[joek]

The other argument for launching the module as fully provisioned as possible is the need for a CBM and requisite RMS for large items.  Maybe Bigelow has plans to add those or has another solution planned?  Very little has been said about cargo resupply requirements.

[ChefPat]

The other argument for launching the module as fully provisioned as possible is the need for a CBM and requisite RMS for large items.  Maybe Bigelow has plans to add those or has another solution planned?  Very little has been said about cargo resupply requirements.

If Bigelow proves out his business case, then there may be reason to build a dedicated 40 or 50 ton cargo container as well.