space station

[gonjojest]

I know this must have been said a million times because it just seems a no brainer but as the space station ages and they say " the space station is now xx years because the first section was launched on xxxx year. SSSoooo we send new versions of the first three or four sections and walla, age is now 5-7 yrs less. Is somthing wrong with this? John

 

[docm]

Cost and complexity of the mission, especially without the shuttle. Not to mention that Bigelow Aerospace-style expandable modules are likely to be bigger, cheaper/unit-volume and launch-able on EELV's - no expensive to fly/maintain shuttle required.

Bigelow updates thread....

 

[hansolo0]

Yep. The private sector soon will make Nasa look silly. Nasa spent what? 100 B on the station or so? Bigelow and friends will do it for maybe a tenth if that and be bigger and safer. SpaceX if they have succeful launches will be cheaper.

 

[seth_381]

yea but how safe is flying in balloon ? Seriously I wouldn't feel safe at all in bigelow's so called space station NASA did the right and safe thing and used solid materials.

 

[pathfinder_01]

yea but how safe is flying in balloon ? Seriously I wouldn't feel safe at all in bigelow's so called space station NASA did the right and safe thing and used solid materials.

They are safe. NASA developed them and was going to use it for the US habitation module until it got cut. They are not made of rubber. A better word would be expandable. The material they are made out of is so good that the US was thinking of retrofitting the material over the aluminum of the station for better micrometriod protection. About the only fear I would have with them is fire and I am pretty sure they were tested for that. Also if they lose pressure they won’t collapse in zero g.

 

[js117]

yea but how safe is flying in balloon ? Seriously I wouldn't feel safe at all in bigelow's so called space station NASA did the right and safe thing and used solid materials.

Bigelows space hab is pound per pound stronger then the spacestation. The walls are a foot thick.
This is not Bigelows design it is a NASA design and Bigelow got it from them.
NASA was going to put it but didn't have the money.
Now there is talk about attaching it to the spacestation again.
Read a little more about it before you say its a balloon, its not.


Read this thread
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=11776&hilit=bigelow+update

 

[MeteorWayne]

Also, it would not collapse even in 1G, IIRC, once it expands, it locks into place.

 

[docm]

yea but how safe is flying in balloon ? Seriously I wouldn't feel safe at all in bigelow's so called space station NASA did the right and safe thing and used solid materials.

Bigelows space hab is pound per pound stronger then the spacestation. The walls are a foot thick.

Actually 16+ inches thick and with multiple layers of Kevlar and Vectran, both used in body armor, and several redundant air bladders to contain its internal atmosphere. Once expanded their modules are anything but a balloon in that the walls rigidify, turning them into solid structures with metal bulkheads and a rigid metal core made of hollow beams.

A few years ago the structure of NASA's TransHab, the predecessor to Bigelow's expandable habitat design, and an ISS module analog were fired at with a hypervelocity gun as a comparative survivability test. The ISS module material was shredded and completely penetrated while the TransHab structure was not, just its outer layers. Bigelow has improved it greatly and has the patents to prove it. So far Bigelow has launched 2 prototype modules, Genesis I and Genesis II, and both are still intact after 4 and 3 years in orbit respectively and their manned Sundancer module is under construction now.

Tough stuff and with the ability to use water blankets for radiation shielding.

Inside a BA-330 mockup (mid-deck & core)

 

[Boris_Badenov]

IIRC without the water blankets the central core is the radiation shelter & with them the entire module is a radiation shelter. The water blankets increase the mass but will be worth it's weight in gold on a months long voyage.

 

[Couerl]

I love it, all it's missing are the Krell shaped doors and maybe one of those 26 inch thick anti- id monster door thingies. :lol:

You never know about space zombies etc and I want a door that when I lock it, i know ain't nothin coming through period. :geek:

 

[StarRider1701]

Stuff like this does my heart good to see. Worst part is NASA could have been building this stuff in orbit all along if they weren't so idiotically mindlocked onto Exploration.

 

[pathfinder_01]

Stuff like this does my heart good to see. Worst part is NASA could have been building this stuff in orbit all along if they weren't so idiotically mindlocked onto Exploration.

I agree although for once this isn’t one that constellation caused. It was due to cost runs on the ISS itself that caused the reaction finish it with as little additional money/modules as possible. I think NASA muddies the water between R/D and operations. From an operational standpoint, if I were planning to build a station that many years ago aluminum is best (known risk no R/D needed). However they used funds to do some R/D on this idea during the time the station was bieng designed driving up the price.

The ISS became the Cadillac of space stations with many gadgets that are useful, but not the cheapest possible. That drove up the price and yielded the political reaction of cutting things like mad.

As great and needed as this technology is, the ISS itself could not use it due to that political reaction. Sort of like the ISS’s life boat craft. A capsule would have been cheaper and easier to build, but they went for advanced possible shuttle replacement over simple lifeboat.

 

[bushwhacker]

man i cant wait to see a ba-330 on orbit.