Author Topic: Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (2) (Read 353502 times)

docmordrid · « **Reply #100 on:** 09/16/2011 03:06 pm »

If it has a good ISS test it'll be interesting to see if Bigelow considers NOFBX. Lots riding on that test....

Orbital Debris · « **Reply #101 on:** 09/17/2011 02:42 am »

Interesting that Mike is now trying to drum up support for being able to control NASA's procurement process. It seems to indicate that Bigelow is trying to sell to NASA now.

jabe · « **Reply #102 on:** 09/30/2011 12:21 am »

here is a surprise..

Quote

Bigelow just laid off over half the company, myself included. Anyone want software engineer? :-)

interesting turn of events.. Bigelow needs comm crew ASAP i think..
jb

docmordrid · « **Reply #103 on:** 09/30/2011 12:51 am »

I'd retain my core skillsets & lay off the rest to minimize cash burnthrough while waiting out crew access.

A_M_Swallow · « **Reply #104 on:** 09/30/2011 01:25 am »

SpaceX is talking about manned Dragon flying in 3 years, so Bigelow may think the space station can be built in less than 4 years.

Has construction of the extra factory space been terminated?

carlweathers · « **Reply #105 on:** 09/30/2011 01:26 am »

Quote from: jabe on 09/30/2011 12:21 am

here is a surprise..

Quote
Bigelow just laid off over half the company, myself included. Anyone want software engineer? :-)

interesting turn of events.. Bigelow needs comm crew ASAP i think..
jb

Can someone explain what this means to someone not in the know? Is the whole thing going under?

robertross · « **Reply #106 on:** 09/30/2011 02:18 am »

Quote from: carlweathers on 09/30/2011 01:26 am

Quote from: jabe on 09/30/2011 12:21 am
here is a surprise..

Quote
Bigelow just laid off over half the company, myself included. Anyone want software engineer? :-)

interesting turn of events.. Bigelow needs comm crew ASAP i think..
jb

Can someone explain what this means to someone not in the know? Is the whole thing going under?

It means there are no buyers, like much of the current economic climate.

mr. mark · « **Reply #107 on:** 09/30/2011 03:22 am »

I'm not saying that it is but, if Bigelow scaled back for lack of clients, I'm wondering if Boeing's CST-100 would have a business case as part of their plan was to service a Bigelow station and the business associated with that. I'm not sure a few trips to the ISS makes for much of a business case. Same goes for Dreamchaser. Someone who knows more can spin the numbers. Going further, without several of the commercial providers Liberty no longer makes sense as well. It's like a house of cards remove several and the whole stack starts to fall. Only Spacex seems to stand alone having a complete system and a proposed DragonLab. Of course, that depends on a customer base as well but, they can spread it out because of their commercial satellite business.

Patchouli · « **Reply #108 on:** 09/30/2011 03:35 am »

Quote from: carlweathers on 09/30/2011 01:26 am

Quote from: jabe on 09/30/2011 12:21 am
here is a surprise..

Quote
Bigelow just laid off over half the company, myself included. Anyone want software engineer? :-)

interesting turn of events.. Bigelow needs comm crew ASAP i think..
jb

Can someone explain what this means to someone not in the know? Is the whole thing going under?

I hope not as the technology Bigelow is developing is an enabler in that it makes things that before where very difficult or even impossible practical.

Being able to stuff a Skylab sized module into an EELV sized fairing is a real game changer.

A good example it makes the Plymouth rock mission actually possible using a block I SLS or a Falcon Heavy and one EELV heavy.

Robert Thompson · « **Reply #109 on:** 09/30/2011 04:53 am »

I invest my wish in limitless visionaries like Bigelow and I invest my hope in those who follow Han Solo's principle, "She's got it where it counts," which includes Xcor and others who get the horse going (and possibly landing?). Carts are nice, Conestogas are nicer, a horse is nicest.

douglas100 · « **Reply #110 on:** 09/30/2011 07:52 am »

Unfortunately, mr. mark may be right. There has been some questioning of Bigelow's business case in this forum, but most people have concentrated on the technology. But if he has an insufficient number of customers, all the enthusiastic extrapolation of uses of his habitats, at L2, on the lunar surface or in deep space, disappears. No market, no Bigelow stations, it's as obvious and stark as that.

It's a tough business, steering the correct line between vision and realism. Look at the number of concepts and ideas that have been proposed in the space field over the last fifty years. Very few of them have come to fruition.

It looks like Bigelow may be in trouble. I hope I am wrong about this.

Diagoras · « **Reply #111 on:** 09/30/2011 02:10 pm »

While I agree that this would be concerning, let's keep some perspective here.

This is a Tweet from a (possibly disgruntled) ex-employee - that's all. Can anyone confirm the tweet's claim ("about half the company") through another source?

Robotbeat · « **Reply #112 on:** 09/30/2011 02:32 pm »

It looks like Congress's NASA anti-stimulus is working preemptively!

MP99 · « **Reply #113 on:** 09/30/2011 02:35 pm »

Quote from: Diagoras on 09/30/2011 02:10 pm

While I agree that this would be concerning, let's keep some perspective here.

This is a Tweet from a (possibly disgruntled) ex-employee - that's all. Can anyone confirm the tweet's claim ("about half the company") through another source?

Can't comment on that, but we do have user here on NSF with the same ID. Possibly the same person:-

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=profile;u=3726;sa=showPosts

cheers, Martin

Orbital Debris · « **Reply #114 on:** 09/30/2011 03:05 pm »

I am a former employee, happily employed at another company. Which is about as close to being 'non-disgruntled' as a former Bigelow employee can be.

This is confirmed. Bigelow had approximately 90-95 employees at the Las Vegas plant. I was told by former co-workers that 51 people were laid off last night.

Ostensibly, reasons given were lack of funding and economic downturn. Reading between the lines, that equates to a lack of funds, or a lack of desire to spend funds.

clongton · « **Reply #115 on:** 09/30/2011 04:33 pm »

I hope that this is a move designed to save the company and its future. Obviously a business owner cannot keep a large number of people on the payroll when there is no income. A wealthy business owner may, however, choose to keep a skeleton crew active over a lean time provided he sees an upturn coming in the reasonably foreseeable future. Let's hope that is the case because Bigelow Aerospace is a star in the commercial spaceflight world. A lot of things, and companies, have been made at least partially dependant on the availability of its product line.

Prober · « **Reply #116 on:** 09/30/2011 05:14 pm »

Quote from: Orbital Debris on 09/30/2011 03:05 pm

I am a former employee, happily employed at another company. Which is about as close to being 'non-disgruntled' as a former Bigelow employee can be.

This is confirmed. Bigelow had approximately 90-95 employees at the Las Vegas plant. I was told by former co-workers that 51 people were laid off last night.

Ostensibly, reasons given were lack of funding and economic downturn. Reading between the lines, that equates to a lack of funds, or a lack of desire to spend funds.

Sorry to hear this as Mr. Bigelow put his money where his mouth was.
http://www.8newsnow.com/story/14916667/i-team

"Bigelow Aerospace expects to add more than 1,000 jobs over the next three years once it finishes construction on a massive annex. "

Lars_J · « **Reply #117 on:** 09/30/2011 05:40 pm »

Business plans may change. As Chuck says, you just can't hire thousands - or even keep all of your employees, if the income isn't there.

go4mars · « **Reply #118 on:** 09/30/2011 06:05 pm »

I hope Mr. Bigelow releases a statement or does a luncheon. That must have been a bit heart-breaking for him too.

2552 · « **Reply #119 on:** 09/30/2011 06:09 pm »

Bigelow Aerospace Downsizes Dramatically | SpaceNews.com

Quote

“We are proceeding with a core group of fifty plus engineers, managers and support staff,” Mike Gold, Bigelow Aerospace’s director of Washington operations and business growth, said in an emailed response to questions from Space News. “This core group allows us to retain key human capital and capabilities, with which we are continuing to aggressively pursue the development and eventual deployment of the BA 330 system.”

Quote

Gold, in his email, said the layoffs “were caused by a perfect storm of events.”

“We had hoped that by 2014 or 2015 that America would again be able to fly its own astronauts. Unfortunately, the prospect of domestic crew transportation of any kind is apparently going to occur years after the first BA 330 could be ready,” Gold wrote. “For both business and technical reasons, we cannot deploy a BA 330 without a means of transporting crew to and from our station, and the adjustment to our employment levels was necessary to reflect this reality.

“If anything, Bigelow Aerospace has been suffering from its own early success, and we’re years ahead of where the rest of the industry is.”

Seems to be due to FAR-lite, not lack of demand.