Bigelow Aerospace Update Thread (2)

[cro-magnon gramps]

Would a bigelow module seem to be a good or likely solution for the "2 guys in shirtsleeves" working on asteroidal material for the company Planetary Resources? 

I think there will be likely a place in Lunar Orbit or L2/1 for a SS to tele-operate the robotic mining ops on the Asteroid, as from the sounds of it that's their intention; but I see it as being part of a larger operation, involving Lunar exploration and Mining, by more than one company; sort of like an ISS but built by and for individual mega corporations to reduce costs in BEO; eventually I see them wanting their own SS; however with the initial push to get out there, and working, it will need co-operation to enable bringing Space/Lunar Resource Mining and Utilization within a reasonable time frame for ROI; I'm thinking 15 to 30 years out minimum; any further and it becomes a game for idealists and dreamers; so, yeah, I think Bigelow is perfectly positioned for the short term;

[Robotbeat]

One of Bigelow Aerospace's proposed space stations is painted on a new Thai Buddhist temple, along with Neo and squid/octopus sea monsters, a pod-racer, etc:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/26/thai-buddhist-temple-wat-rong-khun_n_1447032.html

[cro-magnon gramps]

One of Bigelow Aerospace's proposed space stations is painted on a new Thai Buddhist temple, along with Neo and squid/octopus sea monsters, a pod-racer, etc:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/26/thai-buddhist-temple-wat-rong-khun_n_1447032.html

looks like Iceland has either taken a hit or it's a volcano blowing it to smithereens ;( on a lighter note, could those octopus on that yellow globe represent Solar Flares on the Sun; aside from that, it sure is a mix of future and fantasy; excellent art

Cheers

[Orbital Debris]

Yeah that off axis complex thrusting picture fits properly into a fantasy montage.
It reminds me of the "I believe" image from earlier in the Bigelow days.  They tried to make knockoff of the X-files, but it really made it look like the complex was de-orbiting.  All we got was dirty looks when we pointed that out to the graphic artist that creates all those. 
But of course, I think I have more than a few of those rolled up in a tube somewhere.

[Orbital Debris]

New pix of the factory up on the Bigelow site.

Glad they are making progress on the bathrooms and Robert Bigelow's elevator. 

C'mon guys (BA not Pat), post some better pics.

OTOH, if you look at some of the earlier pics, you can see the Radome of the six meter antenna for the ground station.   

[Lurker Steve]

I've been thinking about the down-select talk on commerical crew.

Obviously, there are only going to be 2-3 ISS flights per year, max. Not really enough flights to support more than 1 provider.

How soon, and how much money would Bigelow need to spend to get a real Spacestation launched into LEO ? This means at least a semi-outfitted station with a working ECLSS, some sort of ability to manuver away from space debris, docking ports for multiple VV (need 1 for cargo, 1 for crew), etc.

Is it realistic to believe they can this done this decade, so that the commerical crew providers would have a destination other than the ISS ?

[beancounter]

I've been thinking about the down-select talk on commerical crew.

Obviously, there are only going to be 2-3 ISS flights per year, max. Not really enough flights to support more than 1 provider.

How soon, and how much money would Bigelow need to spend to get a real Spacestation launched into LEO ? This means at least a semi-outfitted station with a working ECLSS, some sort of ability to manuver away from space debris, docking ports for multiple VV (need 1 for cargo, 1 for crew), etc.

Is it realistic to believe they can this done this decade, so that the commerical crew providers would have a destination other than the ISS ?

All the guesses to date indicate a crew capability (U.S.) of around 2016.  NASA says they want at least 2 companies for redundancy in crew.  Bigelow has indicated willingness to spend up to $500 million on his space modules but he requires (IMO) assurance that commercial crew can do it. 
Still, that should be around 2015 with a bit of luck.  There should be good info' on whether or not commercial is going to succeed by then. 
If it's good, then yes, I'd say Bigelow will ramp back up and have a vehicle ready to go this decade.

[Lurker Steve]

I've been thinking about the down-select talk on commerical crew.

Obviously, there are only going to be 2-3 ISS flights per year, max. Not really enough flights to support more than 1 provider.

How soon, and how much money would Bigelow need to spend to get a real Spacestation launched into LEO ? This means at least a semi-outfitted station with a working ECLSS, some sort of ability to manuver away from space debris, docking ports for multiple VV (need 1 for cargo, 1 for crew), etc.

Is it realistic to believe they can this done this decade, so that the commerical crew providers would have a destination other than the ISS ?

All the guesses to date indicate a crew capability (U.S.) of around 2016.  NASA says they want at least 2 companies for redundancy in crew.  Bigelow has indicated willingness to spend up to $500 million on his space modules but he requires (IMO) assurance that commercial crew can do it. 
Still, that should be around 2015 with a bit of luck.  There should be good info' on whether or not commercial is going to succeed by then. 
If it's good, then yes, I'd say Bigelow will ramp back up and have a vehicle ready to go this decade.

But listening to OD, it doesn't sounds like they will be able to ramp up that quickly. It sounds like much of the talent has left the company.

[Danderman]

I've been thinking about the down-select talk on commerical crew.

Obviously, there are only going to be 2-3 ISS flights per year, max. Not really enough flights to support more than 1 provider.

How soon, and how much money would Bigelow need to spend to get a real Spacestation launched into LEO ? This means at least a semi-outfitted station with a working ECLSS, some sort of ability to manuver away from space debris, docking ports for multiple VV (need 1 for cargo, 1 for crew), etc.

Is it realistic to believe they can this done this decade, so that the commerical crew providers would have a destination other than the ISS ?

Based on the information presented here, Bigelow has no plans to orbit a commercial space station any time soon. Instead, the focus seems to be on providing the BEAM system for NASA.

That is your Bigelow Aerospace Update for today.

[Orbital Debris]

I've been thinking about the down-select talk on commerical crew.

Obviously, there are only going to be 2-3 ISS flights per year, max. Not really enough flights to support more than 1 provider.

How soon, and how much money would Bigelow need to spend to get a real Spacestation launched into LEO ? This means at least a semi-outfitted station with a working ECLSS, some sort of ability to manuver away from space debris, docking ports for multiple VV (need 1 for cargo, 1 for crew), etc.

Is it realistic to believe they can this done this decade, so that the commerical crew providers would have a destination other than the ISS ?

All the guesses to date indicate a crew capability (U.S.) of around 2016.  NASA says they want at least 2 companies for redundancy in crew.  Bigelow has indicated willingness to spend up to $500 million on his space modules but he requires (IMO) assurance that commercial crew can do it. 
Still, that should be around 2015 with a bit of luck.  There should be good info' on whether or not commercial is going to succeed by then. 
If it's good, then yes, I'd say Bigelow will ramp back up and have a vehicle ready to go this decade.

I don't think it is realistic.
Design: Boeing has staff on hand, and has publicly stated that anything less than 300-500 million to develop a capsule will push them to 2016, and probably 2017 until it is operational.  Using that as a benchmark, it would take Bigelow 5 years to go from a start to an operational vehicle.  This is being generous, CST 100 just completed their preliminary design review and Bigelow is at least 2 years from PDR on BA330. 

Financially:  Remember that RTB has stated that he has spent 175 million of that 500 (The mythical 500 million - I've covered that elsewhere). So that leaves 325 million, minus 100 million to spend for a launch vehicle, that leaves 225 million to spend on vehicle development.  Pretty tight when you compare to Boeing.  And as much as Bigelow pretends to be thrifty, they are not efficient at all.  They spend more on mockups than CAD software. On top of all that, Bigelow needs to develop a ground infrastructure.

They won't start production until someone fronts the money, and won't take in any money until the transport flies, or close to it.  That means 2015 at least.  So that puts them beyond 2020 to put a 330 in orbit. 

And that is even without addressing the fact that there is no one left there with human spaceflight experience, or from the Genesis softgoods development.

[mr. mark]

I think the question has to be, will Bigelow have a business case if Boeing is eliminated from commercial crew? Bigelow is tied to Boeing's leash and I seriously doubt that they could continue without Boeings continued support. My guess is SpaceX and Boeing will win the commercial crew awards. Bigelow will stay in business a while longer but, I see Bigelow closing it's doors sooner than later. There is "currently" no business case for their modules. It makes more sense having something like DragonLab that can continue unmanned on orbit operations than to have big habs that people or companies can do experiments in.

[Danderman]

I think the question has to be, will Bigelow have a business case if Boeing is eliminated from commercial crew?

If Boeing is eliminated, Bigelow would lose a source of study money.

The Bigelow business case depends on a BEAM contract. Without a NASA contract for BEAM, Bigelow does not have an independent existence at a very high level. Bigelow has been aiming at that NASA contract since TransHAB, and the buildings, models and mockups have been about that.

[neilh]

Random question: Does anybody know when the initial TransHab patents that Bigelow licensed from NASA were filed? I know Bigelow Aerospace has filed additional patents along the way, but I wonder if any of the original patents are due to expire in the next few years.

[go4mars]

Random question: Does anybody know when the initial TransHab patents that Bigelow licensed from NASA were filed? I know Bigelow Aerospace has filed additional patents along the way, but I wonder if any of the original patents are due to expire in the next few years.

lol.  I was just about to ask the same question!

Seems a pretty natural one (not random) given the rather grim assessment by OD:

Bigelow is at least 2 years from PDR on BA330. 
...mythical 500 million ...that leaves 225 million to spend on vehicle development. 
Bigelow ...they are not efficient at all.  They spend more on mockups than CAD software. On top of all that, Bigelow needs to develop a ground infrastructure.

...that puts them beyond 2020 to put a 330 in orbit. 

there is no one left there with human spaceflight experience, or from the Genesis softgoods development.

[beancounter]

My understanding is that NASA's stated that anything less than $500 million in funding this coming year, brings the whole commercial crew program into question due to the extended timeframes involved.  This would naturally mean an end to possible independent Bigelow spacecraft.

[Lurker Steve]

My understanding is that NASA's stated that anything less than $500 million in funding this coming year, brings the whole commercial crew program into question due to the extended timeframes involved.  This would naturally mean an end to possible independent Bigelow spacecraft.

NASA needs to listen to it's Congressional oversight committees.
Congress is telling them to make the best use of available funding. Funding isn't going to be available for 4 companies in the next round. They might not even get the 500-525 million due to the issues of passing appropriations bills in an election year, so NASA needs to plan on operating under the continuing resolution until at least early 2013. I am of the opinion that it would be best to provide a single company enough funding for them to bring their commerical crew into service before the Soyuz contract with the Russians runs out in 2016. That company would still be required to invest their own funds into the development of the integrated system. This procurement would happen under the FAR acquistion rules that Congress is asking for. That fulfills goal #1 of commerical crew. US access to the ISS.

NASA would reserve a lesser amount, say 100-150 million per FY, to fulfill goal #2 of commerical crew. That is, trying to develop some sort of commerical HSF industry. Provide some funding under Space Act Agreements for the "other" guys to complete their HSF systems. The other guys probably aren't going to be finished by 2017 with lesser funding, unless they find non-NASA funding sources, but there isn't anywhere for them to go anyway.

Provider #1 gets the initial ISS commerical crew contract, for the period FY2017-2020. If the ISS gets extended beyond that, the other guys can compete for the next ISS commerical crew contract, and maybe there is a Bigelow station available as a second destination.

[spectre9]

Bigelow has said he's buying an Atlas V to launch in 2014.

If anybody has actual confirmation this is not the plan any more I'd like to see it.

[rcoppola]

What happens if NASA is forced, because of funds, to down-select to one provider. I believe that provider would be SpaceX. So if SpaceX is the only domestic supplier of crew to LEO, what happens to Boeing agreements with Bigelow? And for that matter, if Falcon 9H comes on line and can launch the BA 330 for a 1/2 to a 1/3 the cost of an Atlas V, then what are the implications?

Could SpaceX take on Bigelow as a customer?

[A_M_Swallow]

{snip}
Could SpaceX take on Bigelow as a customer?

They already have.  Bigelow was one of SpaceX's first customers.  Although the flight is on permanent slip.

[Orbital Debris]

Bigelow has said he's buying an Atlas V to launch in 2014.

If anybody has actual confirmation this is not the plan any more I'd like to see it.

When and where did he say this publicly? 
RTB says lots of things, I'll believe it when I hear an announcement from ULA.