additional bigelow technology purchase

[Gravity_Ray]

Wouldnt it make sense if you are a private company working on making space available with cheap orbital platforms, to have your own way up and down? I often think it would make alot of sense for Bigelow Space to purchase the TPS system from NASA and develop and build his own way up and down from orbit. As you may know the TPS system is tested and very durable. The weakness of this system in the Space Shuttle is in the fact that the Space Shuttle is attached to the side of a liquid hydrogen fuel tank which naturally makes unstable ice on its surface and this loose material is shed during ascent.

I propose that Bigelow Space purchase the TPS system from NASA and facilitate the building of a 7 man mini-shuttle based on a current design (such as a lear jet) and launch this ship "atop" a rocket into space. This ship will then be able to land as the shuttle lands on most airports. I think I read that Bigelow still has quiet alot of money left over for the further design of its space stations. But possibily a way up and down may make more sense to develop.

Just a thought.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Hi Gravity_Ray
Welcome to Space.com

This thread would be better placed in the Space Business and Technology forum rather than here in Missions and Launches. I'll leave it here for now, but will probably move it there tomorrow. Spend a little time reading the various fora so you get a feel for where various subjects fit best.

Wayne

 

[Swampcat]

Wouldnt it make sense if you are a private company working on making space available with cheap orbital platforms, to have your own way up and down? I often think it would make alot of sense for Bigelow Space to purchase the TPS system from NASA and develop and build his own way up and down from orbit. As you may know the TPS system is tested and very durable. The weakness of this system in the Space Shuttle is in the fact that the Space Shuttle is attached to the side of a liquid hydrogen fuel tank which naturally makes unstable ice on its surface and this loose material is shed during ascent.

I propose that Bigelow Space purchase the TPS system from NASA and facilitate the building of a 7 man mini-shuttle based on a current design (such as a lear jet) and launch this ship "atop" a rocket into space. This ship will then be able to land as the shuttle lands on most airports. I think I read that Bigelow still has quiet alot of money left over for the further design of its space stations. But possibily a way up and down may make more sense to develop.

Just a thought.

Welcome to SDC, G_R.

Mr. Bigelow doesn't seem to be interested in developing his own orbital spacecraft and LV, but he is trying to provide some incentive for someone to do so. Check out America's Space Prize for more info.

He has also discussed this issue with Lockheed Martin. There was talk at one time about having LM develop a vehicle. However, there has been little if any additional information on this since the initial study was announced several years ago. Check out this article from NASASpaceflight.com for more.

Oh, and MW, I agree this belongs in SB&T.

 

[Boris_Badenov]

He has also discussed this issue with Lockheed Martin. There was talk at one time about having LM develop a vehicle. However, there has been little if any additional information on this since the initial study was announced several years ago. Check out this article from NASASpaceflight.com for more.

Oh, and MW, I agree this belongs in SB&T.

I too agree this belongs in SB&T.
There has been some talk over at NSF Forum that some Executives at LockMart got thumped on the muzzle for making that deal with Bigelow. The reason being, supposedly, NASA doesn't want LockMart involved in any lesser expensive competition for Constellation. With the politics involved in decisions like this it is difficult to dig through all the BS & get to the real reasons in the background.
Another option that was discussed a while back was to launch a DreamChaser on top of an Atlas V. That one looked like a winner to me, we'll see.

 

[MeteorWayne]

OK, I moved it. I'll leave the shadow in M&L until Gravity_Ray chimes in.

 

[Gravity_Ray]

Thanks for having me on the boards Wayne, I'll post better, and thanks for responses. Some good links there to check out swamp cat. Boris is probably right and its once again, politics of power over doing the right thing.

I used Bigelow because he has his own money and dosent need financing, but my point was mostly about the thermal tiles. I remember the first time I saw those things back in the early 80s. Remember the shot of some guy holding a glowing red hot block with the palm of his hand. Those tiles work like champs, there has been more than several shuttle flights where even with extensive tile damage the shuttle still got through the heat.

Im not a shuttle fan (it was designed poorly trying to be too many things to too many people). But to just throw away everything we have learned from that space ship is silly. The tiles would not be expensive and on a smaller shuttle that rides on top of a rocket or that is air launched. Makes me think why is it not being used better by private companies? If its a matter of paying for patents NASA should free it up or somebody like Bigelow should buy it and free it up for private use. Seems the best way to slow down from orbital speeds.

Cheers..

 

[tampaDreamer]

I think he's smart to try to get someone (someones?) else to provide the launch/descent services. Stick to your core business and let the emerging market for lift services be to your benefit. Only if he does not think he can get someone to ferry his passengers for him should he consider doing it himself. Even then, it might be better to wait a few years.

 

[aphh]

Another option that was discussed a while back was to launch a DreamChaser on top of an Atlas V. That one looked like a winner to me, we'll see.

DreamChaser would have been the mini-shuttle that was described in the original post.

Unlike many concepts that never left the drawing board, this design has actually flown and orbited the earth originally by the Russians. It is a Russian design (BOR-4) that NASA took and refined (HL-20). Many mockups have been built, by NASA and even SpaceDev built atleast one mockup.

I have no info on the current status of this design.

http://www.astronautix.com/gallery/chl20.htm

It is odd that NASA spent significant amount of money and effort to thoroughly evaluate this concept, found it to be viable, yet nothing ever came out of it. This is not ideal way to spend tax money.

 

[Gravity_Ray]

aphh

Dude those are awesome pictures. Thanks. Actually that is sort of what I had in mind, but I had in mind more of a lear jet look. Im a james bond fan. But like you said, why is this technology not used by private companies if its proven technology rather something you have to spend a lot of money to prove? Does anybody know if the TPS is pattented?

Like stated before I am sure this is more political than anything else? Why else aphh..