-
#120 by CJ on 14 Sep, 2019 06:52
-
That and failing to incorporate windows. Number 1 rule is always to know your customers. Who is going to want to pay to go to space and not look out a real window? Obviously noone given their comments on the difficulty of selling $50million seats.
Having no windows was a jaw-dropper for me. Obviously, that won't work for space tourism. It is also a safety issue regarding docking/undocking ops; if the crew needs to have eyes on target, a screen won't do - no depth perception.
-
#121 by ZChris13 on 14 Sep, 2019 12:47
-
Screens and camera systems supporting binocular vision exist. I have one next to me right now, it was sold by Nintendo.
That and failing to incorporate windows. Number 1 rule is always to know your customers. Who is going to want to pay to go to space and not look out a real window? Obviously noone given their comments on the difficulty of selling $50million seats.
Having no windows was a jaw-dropper for me. Obviously, that won't work for space tourism. It is also a safety issue regarding docking/undocking ops; if the crew needs to have eyes on target, a screen won't do - no depth perception. -
#122 by banjo on 14 Sep, 2019 13:56
-
if robert bigelow died, would bigelow aerospace be likely to continue as a commercial venture?
-
#123 by clongton on 14 Sep, 2019 18:30
-
IMO Mr. Bigelow is no longer seriously interested in "tourists". He has done a fair amount of PR, but none of it has been geared toward tourism. On the other hand all of it has been geared toward the professional HSF sector, for ISS habs, lunar stations and deep space habs enroute to Mars. The current lack of windows, which really only matter to tourists, is a non-issue.
-
#124 by ncb1397 on 14 Sep, 2019 18:33
-
Their number one priority seems to be winning a gateway contract. Not sure how important it is for NASA to have a window on every module (worst comes to worst you can head over to the lander/Orion and look out the window).
-
#125 by GWH on 14 Sep, 2019 19:03
-
IMO Mr. Bigelow is no longer seriously interested in "tourists". He has done a fair amount of PR, but none of it has been geared toward tourism. On the other hand all of it has been geared toward the professional HSF sector, for ISS habs, lunar stations and deep space habs enroute to Mars. The current lack of windows, which really only matter to tourists, is a non-issue.
Other than that time 3 months ago when they said they were flying tourists to the ISS
https://twitter.com/BigelowSpace/status/1138517707140132864
And their offshoot Bigelow Space OPs: "The sales, space operations and customer service company for commercial space stations in low Earth orbit and beyond."
Problem is I don't think they know what it is they want to do at all. -
#126 by clongton on 14 Sep, 2019 19:18
-
IMO Mr. Bigelow is no longer seriously interested in "tourists". He has done a fair amount of PR, but none of it has been geared toward tourism. On the other hand all of it has been geared toward the professional HSF sector, for ISS habs, lunar stations and deep space habs enroute to Mars. The current lack of windows, which really only matter to tourists, is a non-issue.
Other than that time 3 months ago when they said they were flying tourists to the ISS
And their offshoot Bigelow Space OPs: "The sales, space operations and customer service company for commercial space stations in low Earth orbit and beyond."
Problem is I don't think they know what it is they want to do at all.
I didn't mean that he "wouldn't" accommodate tourists, only that it is no longer his focus, as evidenced by the direction all his expensive PR has taken in the recent past. Sorry for the confusion.
BTW Commercial Space Stations in LEO doesn't in any way imply tourism. His focus on them is specifically aimed at NGOs and other governmental space programs, not as a tourist destination. -
#127 by FutureSpaceTourist on 14 Sep, 2019 19:23
-
Problem is I don't think they know what it is they want to do at all.
I think the problem is that they don’t have any customers ... They are trying to find an offering that there’s a market for.
Obviously for over a decade they were stuck with no viable commercial route to get people to orbit. That issue is getting close to resolution, but still no confirmed customers for anything. I really hope they can keep going until they find a market. I fear they may be just a few years ahead of their time. -
#128 by DigitalMan on 15 Sep, 2019 01:27
-
Screens and camera systems supporting binocular vision exist. I have one next to me right now, it was sold by Nintendo.
That and failing to incorporate windows. Number 1 rule is always to know your customers. Who is going to want to pay to go to space and not look out a real window? Obviously noone given their comments on the difficulty of selling $50million seats.
Having no windows was a jaw-dropper for me. Obviously, that won't work for space tourism. It is also a safety issue regarding docking/undocking ops; if the crew needs to have eyes on target, a screen won't do - no depth perception.
Sometime back, one of my hobbies for many years was mountain climbing. I consider myself very fortunate to have been stargazing in clear air, above 18000 feet, during the new moon, in the middle of the night without a light on the ground for many miles.
It convinced me that I had never seen the night sky in all its glory before that. I would never trade that for viewing through any camera.
edit: I forgot to mention hours of getting accustomed to the darkness. -
#129 by GWH on 15 Sep, 2019 17:37
-
It convinced me that I had never seen the night sky in all its glory before that. I would never trade that for viewing through any camera.
Exactly this. No view on any digital screen has ever provided the same calming effect on me as simply looking out a window. This includes the HD views of Earth from the ISS.Quote“Windows are passé,” said Bigelow. “These TV screens make them obsolete.”
Keep in mind that even for Gateway one of the goals is to study astronauts physical and mental health during long duration spaceflight. In every astronaut interview I've read about their stay on the ISS they point out how much of their free time would be spend looking out through the cupola and how it made them feel.
Personally I recoiled in horror when I saw a single TV screen "window" in the prototype...I fear they may be just a few years ahead of their time.
I think they're behind the time to be honest. If they were truly ahead of their time they wouldn't have competition. But they do - Axiom Space and Nanoracks are both vying for the free docking port on the ISS that Bigelow wants to put their XBASE on. This competition is aggressively pursuing other customers and revenue streams, not hitching everything on one government program.
Axiom Space is targeting a diverse set of customers and revenue steams: governmental & private research & spaceflight and tourism. Their tourism plans start in 2020 (probably will slip) by making use of the ISS as is. With Micheal Suffredeni at the helm (former ISS Program Office Manager) I have no doubt they will navigate the hurdles Bigelow described as: “You have to negotiate then with 11 different legal departments,” Source Verge article
Nanoracks meanwhile is thriving as a commercial outfit operating on the station, and working to align future customers of their station while simultaneously pursuing additional government contracts through NextSTEP2.
Sierra Nevada isn't directly competing against Bigelow for ISS use, but they are in NextSTEP2 and also LEO payloads by partnering with the UN for a free flyer mission. Whether or not they have any interest in a station of any kind of their own hasn't emerged.
Where I really feel they are behind the times is embracing the new Public Private Partnership models of true commercial partners that NASA is embracing. Most of the competition for Gateway is with companies that have multiple revenue streams, and multiple business cases for their hardware. Northrup Grumman, Sierra Nevada, and to some extent Boeing and Lockheed are all looking to how their existing products can offset the costs of the product they are offering. Bigelow doesn't have that and until they demonstrate an ability to find customers for using their product they won't.
We've seen two Gateway contracts awarded already, both were to companies that could seriously reduce the purchase price to NASA because they are finding ways to sell that hardware to other customers or programs. That's the commercial spaceflight market today - and it doesn't look like a market Bigelow is prepared to play in.
Hoping he can do a reality TV show sure won't cut it.QuoteBigelow also noted that finding people who want to pay more than $50 million for a seat to go to space are hard to come by. Though he claims to have come up with a business case where tourists can be sent to a free-flying B330 habitat for free. Future tourists could agree to be part of a reality show contest where they compete to train and then launch to space. “This is all part of what could be a lot of fun to broadcast is the whole training regime,” he said. “It isn’t going to be for sissies.” In exchange, they’ll get a free trip to space with the rest of the US rooting for them to make it. The idea sounds vaguely familiar to one proposed by the now-bankrupt company Mars One, which proposed funding trips to Mars with massive reality TV shows.
Source Verge article -
#130 by mmonce on 15 Sep, 2019 18:30
-
If a paying customer wants windows, my guess is they will get windows. But as it was pointed out earlier, if you aren't accommodating tourists, and focused on only professional astronauts, windows are a "nice to have". Also pointed out here in other forums: submarines have no windows. Navy crews seem to do OK with it.
-
#131 by RonM on 15 Sep, 2019 18:49
-
If a paying customer wants windows, my guess is they will get windows. But as it was pointed out earlier, if you aren't accommodating tourists, and focused on only professional astronauts, windows are a "nice to have". Also pointed out here in other forums: submarines have no windows. Navy crews seem to do OK with it.
Not only that, but there can be windows on other modules. For a NASA mission, there's always the windows on the Orion capsule. -
#132 by whitelancer64 on 16 Sep, 2019 15:43
-
I really want Bigelow to succeed but it seems to me that this is just a NASA-funded ground-based demo and there are no clear plans to launch anything into space. Or did I miss something?
Bigelow has launched stuff before: Genesis and BEAM. But nothing resembling a launch date for B330 yet.
Do we even know what launchers it fits? Last I remember it slightly too large for Falcon9 which was a really silly limitation to build into your design.
Yes, that's exactly what it is, the mockup for NASA's NEXTStep habitat program. Bigelow is in a competition with 5 other companies to make the habitat module for the Gateway space station, and that contract hasn't been awarded yet.
A B330 would fit in the extended Atlas V fairing, but they appear to have switched to Vulcan. The Bigelow Operations web page says that the B330 is 50,000 lb, which is too heavy for an Atlas V to put into LEO. It would also fit in a Blue Origin New Glenn fairing. -
#133 by billh on 16 Sep, 2019 18:32
-
They were working on designs for windows at one time. They must have encountered technical issues.
-
#134 by edzieba on 17 Sep, 2019 11:19
-
As an ISS module rather than a standalone station, windows are the exception rather than the rule so B330 would hardly be unusual. Apart from the Cupola, there is WORF on Destiny (now partially obscured by a large frame for holding cameras), the window on Kibo, and a large number of portholes on Zvezda. The CBM and SSVP docking/berthing ports also have portholes (IIRC APAS-95 has no porthole).
-
#135 by GWH on 17 Sep, 2019 14:45
-
As an ISS module rather than a standalone station, windows are the exception rather than the rule so B330 would hardly be unusual.
B330 is supposed to be a standalone station as stated constantly by BA. It is supposed to be a one size fits all solution for LEO, LLO, NHRO and supposedly Lunar surface.
That one size fits all design should be cost competitive if they can sell multiples to different markets and spread out their dev costs
That is going to be significantly less likely if it's only appealing to a select group of users -
#136 by DigitalMan on 17 Sep, 2019 14:57
-
If you ignore personal preferences in regards to windows or not-windows, I find it interesting that SpaceX is planning numerous windows on Starship and Blue has large windows on New Shepard. It will be interesting to see what Blue does on orbital spacecraft.
It would seem to me that Bigelow is odd-man out. -
#137 by high road on 17 Sep, 2019 15:19
-
As an ISS module rather than a standalone station, windows are the exception rather than the rule so B330 would hardly be unusual.
B330 is supposed to be a standalone station as stated constantly by BA. It is supposed to be a one size fits all solution for LEO, LLO, NHRO and supposedly Lunar surface.
That one size fits all design should be cost competitive if they can sell multiples to different markets and spread out their dev costs
That is going to be significantly less likely if it's only appealing to a select group of users
Well, except for power production, waste heat removal, multiple docking ports for visiting vehicles, equipment to allow berthing instead of docking to acocomodate all kinds of vehicles,... no reason why you couldn't add a viewing module to that list. -
#138 by Rondaz on 17 Sep, 2019 17:30
-
Today, we were notified by the US Air Force that there is a 5.6% chance that Genesis II will collide with dead Russian satellite Cosmos 1300 in 15 hours. Although this is a relatively low probability, it brings to light that low Earth orbit is becoming increasingly more littered.
https://twitter.com/BigelowSpace/status/1174007949863211008?s=20 -
#139 by refsmmat on 17 Sep, 2019 18:54
-
About 9:40 UT on September 18th over Central Africa, with a closing angle greater than 90°?
