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
Did Genesis II die prematurely, so that it couldn't be properly deorbited, or is Bigelow just a terrible operator?
Edit:
No. They're a terrible operator. It's right on their wikipedia page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genesis_II "Although the design life of the spacecraft avionics was only six months, the avionics systems worked flawlessly for over two and a half years before failure."
Is there no penalty for a company that puts more than a metric ton of spacecraft in orbit with a known life span of 6 months and then doesn't deorbit it at the end of its life? They can seriously still get away with exceeding design life by a factor of 5 and receive no penalty?
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
Did Genesis II die prematurely, so that it couldn't be properly deorbited, or is Bigelow just a terrible operator?
Edit:
No. They're a terrible operator. It's right on their wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genesis_II "Although the design life of the spacecraft avionics was only six months, the avionics systems worked flawlessly for over two and a half years before failure."
Is there no penalty for a company that puts more than a metric ton of spacecraft in orbit with a known life span of 6 months and then doesn't deorbit it at the end of its life? They can seriously still get away with exceeding design life by a factor of 5 and receive no penalty?
Penalty? Penalized by who? AFAIK, there are guidlines, but they are strictly voluntary and don't apply to objects in low orbit that will reenter on their own in less than a decade.
Genesis II doesn't have any propulsion system - it used magnetorquers for orientation - so I don't think it could have deorbited even while it was active.
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
Did Genesis II die prematurely, so that it couldn't be properly deorbited, or is Bigelow just a terrible operator?
Edit:
No. They're a terrible operator. It's right on their wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genesis_II "Although the design life of the spacecraft avionics was only six months, the avionics systems worked flawlessly for over two and a half years before failure."
Is there no penalty for a company that puts more than a metric ton of spacecraft in orbit with a known life span of 6 months and then doesn't deorbit it at the end of its life? They can seriously still get away with exceeding design life by a factor of 5 and receive no penalty?
I am not a fan of Bigelow, but your comments are harsh, and your terms are confused.
The
operational lifetime was designed to be more than 6 months and made it to 2.5 years.
The predicted
orbital lifetime, based on the mass and cross section, was said to be 12 years, half of the NASA limit for its LEO spacecraft.
However, it is currently in a 480 by 550 orbit 12 years after launch.
Anyone know the orbit just after launch?
A crude comparison of data (from Wikipedia and Heavens Above) suggests that it has descended only 1.5 km in ~1.5 years. That would indicate a very long orbital lifetime, but can't be accurate.
Most LEO spacecraft have no propulsion or deorbit accelerating devices.
There is no sheriff in that there territory.
There are treaties that cover responsibility, but they only go so far.
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
Did Genesis II die prematurely, so that it couldn't be properly deorbited, or is Bigelow just a terrible operator?
Edit:
No. They're a terrible operator. It's right on their wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genesis_II "Although the design life of the spacecraft avionics was only six months, the avionics systems worked flawlessly for over two and a half years before failure."
Is there no penalty for a company that puts more than a metric ton of spacecraft in orbit with a known life span of 6 months and then doesn't deorbit it at the end of its life? They can seriously still get away with exceeding design life by a factor of 5 and receive no penalty?
There are no rules, only guidelines, and deorbit within 25 years of EOL is a standard guideline. At the current orbit of Genesis II, it may meet that guideline, since it is an altitude that based on rule of thumb decays on the order of magnitude of 10 years. Depends highly on ballistic coefficient and timing with the solar cycle.
The current guidelines are probably not good enough, especially with proliferation of cubesats, and large upcoming constellations. so it is odd of Bigelow to complain about the current status, when they haven't done anything to exceed current guidelines on their past launches.
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
Did Genesis II die prematurely, so that it couldn't be properly deorbited, or is Bigelow just a terrible operator?
Edit:
No. They're a terrible operator. It's right on their wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genesis_II "Although the design life of the spacecraft avionics was only six months, the avionics systems worked flawlessly for over two and a half years before failure."
Is there no penalty for a company that puts more than a metric ton of spacecraft in orbit with a known life span of 6 months and then doesn't deorbit it at the end of its life? They can seriously still get away with exceeding design life by a factor of 5 and receive no penalty?
US regulations are that satellites should deorbit within 25 years of end-of-life.
Per:
http://www.lizard-tail.com/isana/lab/orbital_decay/ From its current altitude of ~520 km Genesis II should reenter in about 8 years, let's say 2028.
It was launched in 2007, which means its orbital life would be about 21 years. Right on the mark.
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
Did Genesis II die prematurely, so that it couldn't be properly deorbited, or is Bigelow just a terrible operator?
Edit:
No. They're a terrible operator. It's right on their wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genesis_II "Although the design life of the spacecraft avionics was only six months, the avionics systems worked flawlessly for over two and a half years before failure."
Is there no penalty for a company that puts more than a metric ton of spacecraft in orbit with a known life span of 6 months and then doesn't deorbit it at the end of its life? They can seriously still get away with exceeding design life by a factor of 5 and receive no penalty?
I am not a fan of Bigelow, but your comments are harsh, and your terms are confused.
The operational lifetime was designed to be more than 6 months and made it to 2.5 years.
The predicted orbital lifetime, based on the mass and cross section, was said to be 12 years, half of the NASA limit for its LEO spacecraft.
However, it is currently in a 480 by 550 orbit 12 years after launch.
Anyone know the orbit just after launch?
A crude comparison of data (from Wikipedia and Heavens Above) suggests that it has descended only 1.5 km in ~1.5 years. That would indicate a very long orbital lifetime, but can't be accurate.
Most LEO spacecraft have no propulsion or deorbit accelerating devices.
There is no sheriff in that there territory.
There are treaties that cover responsibility, but they only go so far.
Estimates of satellite deorbit time is heavily dependent on the density of the very high upper atmosphere, which is more dense when the Sun is active and less dense when it's quieter. The past solar cycle has been very low activity, so the upper atmosphere has been less dense than predicted. Many LEO satellites have enjoyed extended lifetimes thanks to that.
twitter.com/chrisg_nsf/status/1174036377027129345
Since you tweeted, can you provide info on how @BigelowSpace plans to not contribute to orbital debris problem as Genesis I & II do not have the ability to move out of the way? As it stands, they are dead orbital debris contributing to the problem, unless I've missed something.
https://twitter.com/bigelowspace/status/1174074445599666176Anything we launch from here on out will have prop. capability. B330 has two dissimilar propulsion units, more than capable of performing end of life maneuvers. Destinations are not the future worry. They will be few and far between compared to the number of satellites.
https://twitter.com/LeoLabs_Space/status/1174320780198449152
Our data for this event shows a miss distance of approximately 59 meters at TCA, and a collision probability that climbed steadily over the past two days to 8.9e-4.
A collision probability of 0.00089?
I assume "1" is a 100% probability of impact?
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
Did Genesis II die prematurely, so that it couldn't be properly deorbited, or is Bigelow just a terrible operator?
Edit:
No. They're a terrible operator. It's right on their wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genesis_II "Although the design life of the spacecraft avionics was only six months, the avionics systems worked flawlessly for over two and a half years before failure."
Is there no penalty for a company that puts more than a metric ton of spacecraft in orbit with a known life span of 6 months and then doesn't deorbit it at the end of its life? They can seriously still get away with exceeding design life by a factor of 5 and receive no penalty?
And based on you Wikipedia knowledge, you've determined that they are a terrible operator? First, they are no longer an operator, and have not been since 2011, when all the operators were laid off. I'm not sure their is anyone left there that knows how to actually track the spacecraft.
I'm not sure who edited the page, but the initial design life for the avionics were indefinite. All of these were a secondary mission objective. The primary was to prove the ability of the MMOD to hold pressure and withstand impacts within the LEO environment during a long term period. The initial requirements were for an on-orbit lifetime of 12 years. Nominal insertion was for an orbit of 550 km, which the Dnepr launch system acheived within 400m. (the launch was watched very closely by SPACECOM). There are ways to detect impacts and leaks without the pressure sensors being active, but I'm not sure BA currently has anyone that has the expertise to analyze the data. Since the spacecraft were
experimental there were uncertainties in the drag coefficient and atmospheric models.
Correction, I know that someone from BA edited the page, because the 'flawlessly' quote is propaganda.
I will not dispute that BA may be a dysfunctional company. However, for you to so glibly characterize them as a bad operator, I take issue. Take a look at the COSMOS 1300. Two metric tons in orbit since 1981 with a mission life span of two months.
Perhaps better here than in the ISS threads..
I hope Mr. Bigelow has a plan going forward. He was rich enough to start his company and excited an awful lot of people. But he doesn't have the deep pockets of Elon Musk and even he almost went broke until NASA basically saved SpaceX, something for which Elon will ever be grateful. Mr. Bigelow is now speaking of funding concerns. I'm hopeful that it has to do with things he has going on that really won't allow him taking on another contract in the near term. That's my hope anyway. I would love to see his vision of free flying NGO and other governments stations bearing the Bigelow Aerospace logo come to fruition.
The comparison between Musk and Bigelow is less their fortunes, for which Bigelow had a substantial advantage when they started in their space businesses, but their skills and approaches to leading those efforts.
Musk is CTO, has wide knowledge of physics and aerospace technology, is seen directly supervising workers including welders and car assemblers, and sits in a cubicle.
Bigelow does none of that and posts guards to keep employees out of his office.
[humor]Bigelow believes extraterrestrials have visited in UFOs.
Musk believes extraterrestrials will be emigrating to Mars on Starships.
[/humor]
Perhaps better here than in the ISS threads..
I hope Mr. Bigelow has a plan going forward. He was rich enough to start his company and excited an awful lot of people. But he doesn't have the deep pockets of Elon Musk and even he almost went broke until NASA basically saved SpaceX, something for which Elon will ever be grateful. Mr. Bigelow is now speaking of funding concerns. I'm hopeful that it has to do with things he has going on that really won't allow him taking on another contract in the near term. That's my hope anyway. I would love to see his vision of free flying NGO and other governments stations bearing the Bigelow Aerospace logo come to fruition.
The comparison between Musk and Bigelow is less their fortunes, for which Bigelow had a substantial advantage when they started in their space businesses, but their skills and approaches to leading those efforts.
Musk is CTO, has wide knowledge of physics and aerospace technology, is seen directly supervising workers including welders and car assemblers, and sits in a cubicle.
Bigelow does none of that and posts guards to keep employees out of his office.
[humor]Bigelow believes extraterrestrials have visited in UFOs.
Musk believes extraterrestrials will be emigrating to Mars on Starships. [/humor]
After reading the posts above, including BA's response to Bolden, it seems in a very basic sense, that BA doesn't have any confidence that working with NASA on the ISS will result in much progress, or customers. Also it seems as if BA having spent $100M's feels that it is being derided, for not keeping the cash flowing. Unlike a government program, that an write off past expenses, and research, and still be awarded further funding, a private company has to actually raise the cash itself.
Once SS is flying launching a B330 will be much cheaper, as will ferrying astronauts/guests. As long as SpaceX doesn't capture the space tourism market for itself, using adapted Starships, working with them seems far more cost effective. BA has worked with NASA, invested a large fortune, and got one small test module on the ISS, which is used to store trash! Now an alternative is developing its time to move on!
twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1242205592803999746
Bigelow Aerospace has yet to confirm this, but I've heard from several people that the company is temporarily closing due to Covid-19 rules issued by the Nevada governor.
https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1242211281903517697To be clear, I have heard that this "temporary" closure at Bigelow may in fact be permanent. But so far the company has not commented.
https://twitter.com/nasawatch/status/1242207253945556997Sources report that @BigelowSpace laid off their entire work force this morning.
Edit to add:twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1242216852480299009
According to a company spokesperson, Bigelow Aerospace did lay off all its employees today. That was done to comply with a Nevada state directive closing all non-essential businesses because of the coronavirus pandemic. [1/2]
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1242217301006524416 The spokesperson added that the company expected to hire employees back once that directive shuttering non-essential businesses ended. (Sources I talked with felt the layoffs were, in fact, permanent.) [2/2]
Doesn't provide any further clarity as to whether this is temporary or permanent, but SpaceNews did a
writeup:
According to sources familiar with the company’s activities, Bigelow Aerospace’s 68 employees were informed that they were being laid off, effective immediately. An additional 20 employees were laid off the previous week.
Those sources said that the company, based in North Las Vegas, Nevada, was halting operations because of what one person described as a “perfect storm of problems” that included the coronavirus pandemic.
What is the future of inflatable habitats? Is it possible that anyone else is going to acquire the patents and technology from Bigelow and continue investing in this area? The status of the patents is unclear but maybe some of the tech might be worth something.
With dragon, starliner and maybe starship coming up it seems like the prospect of commercial space stations is closer than ever and inflatables are the most efficient way to create provide habitable volume. So any company with expertise in this area has excellent opportunities.
What is the future of inflatable habitats? Is it possible that anyone else is going to acquire the patents and technology from Bigelow and continue investing in this area? The status of the patents is unclear but maybe some of the tech might be worth something.
With dragon, starliner and maybe starship coming up it seems like the prospect of commercial space stations is closer than ever and inflatables are the most efficient way to create provide habitable volume. So any company with expertise in this area has excellent opportunities.
Sierra Nevada Corp looks be working on inflatables and could get this IP & tech for cheap. Let the past die, kill it if you have to. It's the only way you can be what your meant to be.
[/humor]