Author Topic: Affordable habitats means more Buck Rogers for less money says Bigelow (Read 39522 times)

Chris Bergin · « **on:** 02/07/2014 05:17 pm »

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/02/affordable-habitats-more-buck-rogers-less-money-bigelow/

Great article, and a lot of work, by Yves-A. Grondin.

Included some images from the Gate Report - imagery of which we've acquired in L2 via scans of the paper document (no digital version) that was supplied with permission from Bigelow.

--
L2 Members:

Bigelow Gates 1 & 2 Spacecraft Range (LEO to Lunar) Graphics/Overview:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=33951.0

Bigelow Gates 1 & 2 (Lunar Modules) Graphics/Overview (Imagery will be used in Part 2 of Yves' feature, next week):
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=33957.0

DMeader · « **Reply #1 on:** 02/07/2014 05:23 pm »

The picture of the Olympus carrier module was a bit of a shock. Would you want to bring a spacecraft with (I assume) live thrusters inside? Even inhibited from operating, they could leak. Seems some provisions for purging would have to be created.

tigerade · « **Reply #2 on:** 02/07/2014 05:23 pm »

Very interesting, and very appealing visuals. However what is the likelihood of any of this becoming real hardware?

Rocket Science · « **Reply #3 on:** 02/07/2014 05:27 pm »

Nice written and presented Yves!

Lars_J · « **Reply #4 on:** 02/07/2014 05:35 pm »

Nice article, and a very intriguing proposals!

(except for the Olympus carrier, which is a bit "out there")

So listen up, Congress. Here are some great payloads that could make great use out of SLS - will you fund missions that can launch them?

A_M_Swallow · « **Reply #5 on:** 02/07/2014 05:40 pm »

Bigelow will have to recruit a lot of people to make those spacecraft. IMHO He should have accurate cost estimates when a BA-330 has been in use in LEO for a year.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #6 on:** 02/07/2014 05:51 pm »

Getting a lot of action on Twitter, including a retweet from Bigelow themselves!

Bigelow Aerospace ‏@BigelowSpace 5m
Cost Effective Habitats Are Key to America’s Space Exploration - http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/02/affordable-habitats-more-buck-rogers-less-money-bigelow/#.UvUpXMHYs38.twitter …

yg1968 · « **Reply #7 on:** 02/07/2014 06:00 pm »

Quote from: DMeader on 02/07/2014 05:23 pm

The picture of the Olympus carrier module was a bit of a shock. Would you want to bring a spacecraft with (I assume) live thrusters inside? Even inhibited from operating, they could leak. Seems some provisions for purging would have to be created.

It wasn't mentionned in the report but I am assuming that the spacecraft would be decontaminated in the large airlock first.

Danderman · « **Reply #8 on:** 02/07/2014 06:02 pm »

Quote from: A_M_Swallow on 02/07/2014 05:40 pm

Bigelow will have to recruit a lot of people to make those spacecraft. IMHO He should have accurate cost estimates when a BA-330 has been in use in LEO for a year.

I hope no one here expects that Bigelow is actually going to build any of this stuff.

Be prepared to see iterations of these cartoons over the years.

As for "BA-330 being in use", there are no concrete plans today for that to happen.

A_M_Swallow · « **Reply #9 on:** 02/07/2014 06:11 pm »

Quote from: DMeader on 02/07/2014 05:23 pm

The picture of the Olympus carrier module was a bit of a shock. Would you want to bring a spacecraft with (I assume) live thrusters inside? Even inhibited from operating, they could leak. Seems some provisions for purging would have to be created.

The reason people are unhappy about the Olympus Carrier is that rocket fuels are very dangerous and are likely to kill the astronauts. Some propellants, including hydrazine, are poisonous. Even non-toxic ones like hydrogen and methane can burn in oxygen. Consequently astronauts will have to wear spacesuits when working on fuel tanks and engines. It is easier and safer to leave the spaceship outside and work on it using robotic arms.

A space dock will need a control and living cabin to house the repair astronauts. See the attached picture for a suggestion.

The ability to bring a cabinet full of electronics inside may be useful. Possibly even an engine, providing all the fuel has been vented to space first. Arms will still be needed to insert and remove the item being repaired.

A_M_Swallow · « **Reply #10 on:** 02/07/2014 06:25 pm »

Quote from: Danderman on 02/07/2014 06:02 pm

Quote from: A_M_Swallow on 02/07/2014 05:40 pm
Bigelow will have to recruit a lot of people to make those spacecraft. IMHO He should have accurate cost estimates when a BA-330 has been in use in LEO for a year.

I hope no one here expects that Bigelow is actually going to build any of this stuff.

Be prepared to see iterations of these cartoons over the years.

As for "BA-330 being in use", there are no concrete plans today for that to happen.

Bigelow is building the BEAM for NASA. His website shows a vacancy for an ECLSS specialist. He has orbited 2 unmanned space stations. He has subcontracted and fired a thruster suitable for station keeping. First flights of manned Dragon, CST-100 and Dream Chaser spacecraft are 3 - 4 years away.

I would say there was a reasonable chance Bigelow Aerospace would build a BA-330 if someone gave them a contract.

yg1968 · « **Reply #11 on:** 02/07/2014 06:26 pm »

Quote from: Rocket Science on 02/07/2014 05:27 pm

Nice written and presented Yves!

Thanks! I had some help from Chris which improved the article.

BrightLight · « **Reply #12 on:** 02/07/2014 06:36 pm »

I have doubts that large space facilities will be built without substantial government support in the next say 5 years but, it is wonderful to see entrepreneurs like Bigelow and Musk thinking big and into the future - this is certainly a path that is worth watching and if the case can be made of commercial and DoD applications even funding.
P.S. super article, great read.

Danderman · « **Reply #13 on:** 02/07/2014 06:46 pm »

Quote from: A_M_Swallow on 02/07/2014 06:25 pm

Bigelow is building the BEAM for NASA. His website shows a vacancy for an ECLSS specialist. He has orbited 2 unmanned space stations. He has subcontracted and fired a thruster suitable for station keeping. First flights of manned Dragon, CST-100 and Dream Chaser spacecraft are 3 - 4 years away.

I would say there was a reasonable chance Bigelow Aerospace would build a BA-330 if someone gave them a contract.

If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

We have had people here posting for almost 10 years that BA was just about ready to fly a large platform IF "X" were to happen.

All I am saying is that X hasn't happened, and so Bigelow has no concrete plans to fly any of those concepts.

I am not saying that Bigelow won't fly subscale models, or build mockups, or more new buildings until X happens.

BrightLight · « **Reply #14 on:** 02/07/2014 07:04 pm »

Quote from: Danderman on 02/07/2014 06:46 pm

Quote from: A_M_Swallow on 02/07/2014 06:25 pm

Bigelow is building the BEAM for NASA. His website shows a vacancy for an ECLSS specialist. He has orbited 2 unmanned space stations. He has subcontracted and fired a thruster suitable for station keeping. First flights of manned Dragon, CST-100 and Dream Chaser spacecraft are 3 - 4 years away.

I would say there was a reasonable chance Bigelow Aerospace would build a BA-330 if someone gave them a contract.

If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

We have had people here posting for almost 10 years that BA was just about ready to fly a large platform IF "X" were to happen.

All I am saying is that X hasn't happened, and so Bigelow has no concrete plans to fly any of those concepts.

I am not saying that Bigelow won't fly subscale models, or build mockups, or more new buildings until X happens.

More to the point, Bigelow not only needs several ECLSS engineers, he really needs packaging engineers - It is my understanding that BEAM is small enough to be trucked or even air shipped. I doubt that a BA330 sized package can go across interstate highways and it might not even fit on a AN-224. The lack of serious packaging engineers suggest that Bigelow is far from ready to launch a large module or system.

Elmar Moelzer · « **Reply #15 on:** 02/07/2014 07:15 pm »

Great article Chris! Very happy to see that Bigelow is considering the FH as a means to transport the large modules into space. That could make the project a lot more affordable and realistic from a financial point of view.
Would it be possible to have larger versions of the pictures?
Edit: should have said "Great article Yves!" Sorry.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #16 on:** 02/07/2014 07:19 pm »

Quote from: Elmar Moelzer on 02/07/2014 07:15 pm

Great article Chris! Very happy to see that Bigelow is considering the FH as a means to transport the large modules into space. That could make the project a lot more affordable and realistic from a financial point of view.
Would it be possible to have larger versions of the pictures?

I didn't write it. Yves did.

Larger images were scanned from the paper document into L2, per the links in the opening post.

banjo · « **Reply #17 on:** 02/07/2014 07:27 pm »

'I hope no one here expects that Bigelow is actually going to build any of this stuff.'

i like being optimistic.

Elmar Moelzer · « **Reply #18 on:** 02/07/2014 07:52 pm »

Well, I do think it is safe to assume that Bigelow really believes that at least his BA 330 stations will happen. He did already invest quite a bit of money into the Genesis I and Genesis II modules and their test flights.

dcporter · « **Reply #19 on:** 02/07/2014 07:56 pm »

Taking Bigelow at his word, X = cheap Soyuz or commercial crew. I take him at his word in terms of his aspirations – I believe that the lack of impending taxi service is why he put the brakes on several years back. It sounds like (as predicted) he's back on the gas now that taxi service seems impending again, so I think we will soon see if he's able to execute what he says he can execute.