Author Topic: Bigelow type modules  (Read 4398 times)

Offline PMN1

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Bigelow type modules
« on: 08/20/2007 01:37 PM »
When is the earliest a Bigelow type module could be developed?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11186
  • Likes Given: 331
RE: Bigelow type modules
« Reply #1 on: 08/20/2007 01:55 PM »
Quote
PMN1 - 20/8/2007  9:37 AM

When is the earliest a Bigelow type module could be developed?

they already exists

Offline PMN1

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Bigelow type modules
« Reply #2 on: 08/20/2007 02:00 PM »
Quote
Jim - 20/8/2007  8:55 AM

Quote
PMN1 - 20/8/2007  9:37 AM

When is the earliest a Bigelow type module could be developed?

they already exists

Should have been could have been developed...

 :(

Offline Skyrocket

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2150
  • Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • Liked: 319
  • Likes Given: 92
RE: Bigelow type modules
« Reply #3 on: 08/20/2007 03:01 PM »
Quote
Jim - 20/8/2007  3:55 PM

Quote
PMN1 - 20/8/2007  9:37 AM

When is the earliest a Bigelow type module could be developed?

they already exists

At least as sub scale prototypes (Genesis 1 and 2) in orbit. A human capable version called "Sundancer" is under development.


Offline khallow

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1956
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 4
RE: Bigelow type modules
« Reply #4 on: 08/21/2007 12:18 PM »
Quote
PMN1 - 20/8/2007  7:00 AM

Quote
Jim - 20/8/2007  8:55 AM

Quote
PMN1 - 20/8/2007  9:37 AM

When is the earliest a Bigelow type module could be developed?

they already exists

Should have been could have been developed...

 :(

There're already two in orbit. So I guess (not being knowledgeable on Bigelow Aerospace history) 2003-2005 is the earliest that they could develope the Bigelow type module.
Karl Hallowell

Offline colbourne

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 351
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Bigelow type modules
« Reply #5 on: 08/28/2007 03:18 AM »
The problem is that there is no low cost way of getting to these orbital modules yet.

I would think that the way to achieve this for a mass market is to use a sub-orbital space plane such as Rutan and Virgin are developing and then transferring to orbit by use of a rotorvator. This would result in a non- circular orbit, but if the "hotel" is in the same orbit this would possibly be OK. (N.B. A cheap way to launch the hotel module and extras such as food as well)

We could even arrange for the hotel to travel on sight seeing trips to the Moon if we could arrange for the orbits to be correct.

Offline mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7454
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 76
  • Likes Given: 171
Re: Bigelow type modules
« Reply #6 on: 02/02/2010 11:25 PM »
Replying in a more appropriate thread.

2. Hence diversification in stimulating private spaceflight. If necessary it can be partly replicated by Bigelow and EELV/Falcon 9.

Partly? Wouldn't two Bigelow modules by themselves offer more volume than the entire ISS?

ISS has a lot more power, thermal radiators, provision for exposed pallets, arms, etc. etc. It's going to take a lot to replicate those capabilities even with the weight savings of inflatables.

I've wondered about power and things like trusses for inflatable modules. Would a multi-module Bigelow station need a truss? There doesn't appear to be anything like that on the CSS Skywalker artwork.
We will be vic-toooooo-ri-ous!!!

Online docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5020
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 2132
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Bigelow type modules
« Reply #7 on: 02/03/2010 02:32 AM »
Their modules have internal metal box-frame cores with bulkheads at either end and are connected to each other by a central hub + power bus (read: orbital maneuvering system), so they're plenty stiff.
« Last Edit: 02/03/2010 02:34 AM by docmordrid »
DM

Offline mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7454
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 76
  • Likes Given: 171
Re: Bigelow type modules
« Reply #8 on: 02/03/2010 02:34 AM »
That second picture does have some sort of truss or frame. What's the correct term for that in English?
We will be vic-toooooo-ri-ous!!!

Online docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5020
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 2132
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Bigelow type modules
« Reply #9 on: 02/03/2010 02:40 AM »
That's the power bus - the orbital maneuvering system.

When Sundancer goes up it'll use this to go to a higher orbit for a shakedown then come back down to a lower orbit to rendezvous with a crew transporter - Dragon, Orion Lite (a Bigelow/Lockheed cooperation) or Dream Chaser...all have been discussed.
« Last Edit: 02/03/2010 02:43 AM by docmordrid »
DM

Offline mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7454
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 76
  • Likes Given: 171
Re: Bigelow type modules
« Reply #10 on: 02/03/2010 02:42 AM »
Thanks!
We will be vic-toooooo-ri-ous!!!

Offline clb22

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 646
  • Europa
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Bigelow type modules
« Reply #11 on: 02/03/2010 05:20 PM »
To answer the question from the OP, as said on the Bigelow updates thread elsewhere, the currently updated schedule is 2014/2015 for a full-up functioning module. That schedule has severely slipped in the last 2 years, however, so it might slip further, if NASA isn't providing serious seed money or even an order for a module within its new mandate.
Spirals not circles, Mr. President. Spirals!

Online docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5020
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 2132
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Bigelow type modules
« Reply #12 on: 02/04/2010 12:13 AM »
Bigelow recently stated that the economic slowdown slowed them to the point their construction hangar won't be finished until this fall. That plus they just chose the contractor for their environmental systems.
DM

Tags: