B
bwhite
Guest
<i> NASA dropped the transhab proposal after studies showed it wouldn't result in any cost savings for the ISS. </i><br /><br />Cost savings for ISS? What about developing technology for the Moon and Mars? Using ISS to get two for one deals? As I recall, TransHab got axed precisely because it had dual use capability. <br /><br />= = =<br /><br />Daughter radiation issues leads to plastic habitats as a critical technology for moving beyond the van Allen belts. Adding layers of hydrogen rich plastics and water protects astronauts and avoids showers of particles when fast movers strike aluminum nucleii.<br /><br />Constance Adams also pointed out that TransHabs are more roomy and retain heat far better than metal cans.<br /> <br />= = =<br /><br />So Bigelow bought the patents. Should we now ignore the technology?