Quote from: RocketScientist327 on 10/12/2011 06:47 amNo, the criticism is fair. NASA screwed up.NASA said Bigelow could send a module to ISS.Bigelow spent MILLIONS preparingNASA never sent "requirements"Bigelow had to lay off workers who would be building that moduleNASA is not as pure as the wind driven snow. NASA dropped the ball and everyone who is involved knows just how bad NASA screwed up.So yes, blame NASA. The bureaucracy of the old "only NASA" types cannot keep up with the free market.Get used to it.VRRE327I don't buy that scenario. NASA never said to Bigelow: You can send up a module to the ISS. NASA said: we might be interested to see one of your modules on the ISS.NASA showed interest. But they never made a solid commitment. And you can't blame NASA for that.
No, the criticism is fair. NASA screwed up.NASA said Bigelow could send a module to ISS.Bigelow spent MILLIONS preparingNASA never sent "requirements"Bigelow had to lay off workers who would be building that moduleNASA is not as pure as the wind driven snow. NASA dropped the ball and everyone who is involved knows just how bad NASA screwed up.So yes, blame NASA. The bureaucracy of the old "only NASA" types cannot keep up with the free market.Get used to it.VRRE327
Quote from: Orbital Debris on 10/12/2011 01:55 amQuote All of this speculation on Bigelow having problems is nonsense. Maybe if NASA got off their <censored> and allowed an inflatable on the ISS, this could have been avoided.No speculation, RTB stated internally that the layoffs were precipitated by a downturn in the economy. NASA's choice in this case is immaterial. The potential revenue from the BEAM project is a couple of million dollars at best. As a couple people have estimated here, that is not enough to cover the cash flow for 55 salaries. (and 55 was the final number of this round) A whole inflatable module costs only a couple of million dollars?
Quote All of this speculation on Bigelow having problems is nonsense. Maybe if NASA got off their <censored> and allowed an inflatable on the ISS, this could have been avoided.No speculation, RTB stated internally that the layoffs were precipitated by a downturn in the economy. NASA's choice in this case is immaterial. The potential revenue from the BEAM project is a couple of million dollars at best. As a couple people have estimated here, that is not enough to cover the cash flow for 55 salaries. (and 55 was the final number of this round)
All of this speculation on Bigelow having problems is nonsense. Maybe if NASA got off their <censored> and allowed an inflatable on the ISS, this could have been avoided.
Quote from: woods170 on 10/12/2011 07:25 amQuote from: RocketScientist327 on 10/12/2011 06:47 amNo, the criticism is fair. NASA screwed up.NASA said Bigelow could send a module to ISS.Bigelow spent MILLIONS preparingNASA never sent "requirements"Bigelow had to lay off workers who would be building that moduleNASA is not as pure as the wind driven snow. NASA dropped the ball and everyone who is involved knows just how bad NASA screwed up.So yes, blame NASA. The bureaucracy of the old "only NASA" types cannot keep up with the free market.Get used to it.VRRE327I don't buy that scenario. NASA never said to Bigelow: You can send up a module to the ISS. NASA said: we might be interested to see one of your modules on the ISS.NASA showed interest. But they never made a solid commitment. And you can't blame NASA for that. Someone from NASA or the Administration saying 10,000 new jobs in aerospace sold Bigelow this would happen.The building was built and, the NASA rep. showed up, and most of the media in town reported this as "a done deal" just needing the final signing and fine details.
No, the criticism is fair. NASA screwed up.NASA said Bigelow could send a module to ISS.Bigelow spent MILLIONS preparingNASA never sent "requirements"Bigelow had to lay off workers who would be building that module
Sure NASA can, and often will, be blamed for anything. Blaming NASA can be a very useful cathartic release.I know absolutely no details about Bigelow's situation. But in general, statements from company officials are not always the most impartial reflections of the reality. At least according to a poster in this thread who (claims he) is a former employee at Bigelow, things may not have been as ready as Mike Gold makes them sound.
Bigelow had planned to make habitable orbital modules available to international clients starting in late 2014. But today, he told reporters that the schedule has been put on hold, due to the economic downturn as well as questions about the availability of private spaceships capable of servicing the habitats. Once the decision is made to resume the project, it would probably take no more than three years to launch the modules, Bigelow said.Bigelow said the workforce at Nevada-based Bigelow Aerospace has been reduced from 115 workers to 51, due to the slowdown in work on the inflatable modules."
Quote Bigelow had planned to make habitable orbital modules available to international clients starting in late 2014. But today, he told reporters that the schedule has been put on hold, due to the economic downturn as well as questions about the availability of private spaceships capable of servicing the habitats. Once the decision is made to resume the project, it would probably take no more than three years to launch the modules, Bigelow said.Bigelow said the workforce at Nevada-based Bigelow Aerospace has been reduced from 115 workers to 51, due to the slowdown in work on the inflatable modules." Weird, I can remember that he said they were transitioning from an R&D company to a production company and that they would be hiring more people. Now he says he is reducing his workforce...
Will China take over the moon? article msnbchttp://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/10/19/8402070-will-china-take-over-the-moonAnother article on ww.space.comhttp://www.space.com/13331-china-space-race-moon-ownership-bigelow-ispcs.htmlRobert Bigelow is deeply worried about that scenario
Quote from: js117 on 10/20/2011 05:39 pmWill China take over the moon? article msnbchttp://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/10/19/8402070-will-china-take-over-the-moonAnother article on ww.space.comhttp://www.space.com/13331-china-space-race-moon-ownership-bigelow-ispcs.htmlRobert Bigelow is deeply worried about that scenario See also:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/20/bigelow-aerospace-layoffs-nasa_n_1021574.html
How far along was the Sundancer before cancelation this summer?How much solar power is generated by the solar panels on the Sundancer and the BA330 to compare?How much heat can the radiators give up on the Sundancer and the BA330 to compare?What would be needed to make a Sundancer handle a crew of 6? How much would it's mass increase at launch?
Quote from: RocketmanUS on 10/27/2011 10:58 pmHow far along was the Sundancer before cancelation this summer?How much solar power is generated by the solar panels on the Sundancer and the BA330 to compare?How much heat can the radiators give up on the Sundancer and the BA330 to compare?What would be needed to make a Sundancer handle a crew of 6? How much would it's mass increase at launch?Not cancelled, think its just put on the back burner.
Robert Bigelow worries about lots of things. Discovering what some of those things are might be why some potential supporters stop returning his calls.http://www.ufocasebook.com/2010/bigelowwarns.html
Quote from: Nomadd on 10/29/2011 01:56 am Robert Bigelow worries about lots of things. Discovering what some of those things are might be why some potential supporters stop returning his calls.http://www.ufocasebook.com/2010/bigelowwarns.htmlI've known he was a UFO nut for at least 8 years... That hasn't stopped me from cheering him on in spending his own money to create a human spacefaring society.We've had former Presidents who believe in UFOs so I don't put much credit into attempts to discredit folks by painting them with the 'whacko' brush for what they personally believe. Heck, I'd say somewhere north of 85% of us on here firmly believe in God, that he had a human son, and that that human son died and was raised 3 days later. THAT sounds just as crazy on the surface, but it is socially accepted.
Quote from: Prober on 10/28/2011 04:51 pmQuote from: RocketmanUS on 10/27/2011 10:58 pmHow far along was the Sundancer before cancelation this summer?How much solar power is generated by the solar panels on the Sundancer and the BA330 to compare?How much heat can the radiators give up on the Sundancer and the BA330 to compare?What would be needed to make a Sundancer handle a crew of 6? How much would it's mass increase at launch?Not cancelled, think its just put on the back burner.Its not dead, its just resting.
