Slashdot Mirror

It's been done already with Bigelow Aerospace - http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/fly_stuff/

You can see the crap floating about in Genesis I in this link to pics :
http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/out_there/view_pho tos.php

Because not two months ago, he wanted to shut down the ISS missions because they were estimated to cost $200M.

They are inflated with air. http://bigelowaerospace.com/out_there/view_photos. php

> I wonder how they plan to shield inflatable modules
> from radiation outside the atmosphere. "Inflatable"
> conjures up images of centimeter-thin latex in my
> mind, like a giant beach ball.

1. If you had bothered to read http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/ you would have found that this is an 11" thick kevlar structure. Think of 11 inches of bullet proof vest material.

2. Some say that it is impractical, but there is a module flying. Anyone who doesn't know that is not a nerd, and does not need to be on /. Please go away.

3. The radiation shielding is done with a trash compactor. You drop your trash into a bag, it's compacted, and that's placed in either bags or delapidated modules, which are placed on the sun side of the module. NASA considered this on the ISS, but decided that the knowledge from failed equipment would be extremely valuable, early on. They were right, at first. They learned amazing things about what fails and why. Now, 99% of equipment failures are predictable, and they just bring home the trash as a matter of habit - a stupid habit. They use the shuttle to bring home 3,000 pounds of trash, then add 3,000 pounds of shielding to modules - unbelievably stupid.

Andy Out!

It doesn't take much to get the pertinent information, seeing as how they publish it on their website.

"This picture shows some of the fun items..."

They included in their already launched, literal, not figurative "toy box", a car with wheels on it for rolling on the ground .

IDIOTS!

Since you can apparently see Genesis I when it does a fly by, is it really to crazy to think that there could be a giant glowing sign attached to these modules? http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/fly_stuff/corporat e.php is already looking at some marketing angles (but on a much smaller scale...$300 for logo in space/on their site).

While I think it could be cool to be able to send contained personal stuff into space, I'm not so wild about the "big sign" possibility. Maybe I should be more worried about the ISS, since it is closer and if we are unlucky, only the Russian program will have a way to get there. The Russian program is already making a buck off space (they fly the tourists!).

And check this out.... They'll fly your picture up into space..... http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/fly_stuff/photos/i ndex.php

In fact everyone can now see for themselves what the Bigelow station looks like. Surprisingly, it looks a lot like just another space station. Seeing it deployed like that, it looks a heck of a lot sturdier than Slashdot impressions would lead you to believe. :)

http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/out_there/seen_gen esis1.php

You do not have to use lead for all gamma. Just the high energy. IIRC, similar material is used on the genesis module to lower the amount of radiation that will be affecting it.

So that's where all that non-free and restricted software comes from! It's in orbit!

:wq

Compare their Mission Control center, http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/out_there/mission_ control.php

Errr... is it just me, or do these images look rendered? wtf?

A number of the images are renderings from various articles on Bigelow Aerospace. For whatever reason, I guess they wanted to make the screen look flashier (or protect proprietary information) and just put up stock images and splash screens when the photo was taken.

According to this article in Alan Boyle's Cosmic Log, you can actually spot the Genesis-1 spacecraft for yourself in the night sky. From the article:

Bigelow wasn't just being metaphorical about seeing that Genesis spacecraft in the sky. Satellite experts have already worked out a schedule of viewing opportunities - some of which should be bright enough for the naked eye. Go to the Heavens-Above Web site, plug in your coordinates, then go to the satellite database and search for "Genesis-1." You can also go directly to this page to see Genesis' current location, but you won't be able to find out when and where you can see it from the ground.

This Real Time Satellite Tracking page can also show you the orbital location of Genesis 1 and lots of other spacecraft, including the space shuttle Discovery, which was launched last week ... by that other space program.

There's also supposedly more photos which have recently been released on the Bigelow Aerospace website, but it doesn't seem to be responsive right now.

Compare their Mission Control center, http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/out_there/mission_ control.php

Errr... is it just me, or do these images look rendered? wtf?

They spent their money on the wallpaper backgrounds for their mission control hence no backup power source. Compare their Mission Control center,
http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/out_there/mission_ control.php

to one of NASA's,
http://www.nasa.gov/audience/formedia/presskits/ff s_gallery_mcc_image3.html

and you'll notice that NASA's people actually have *stuff* on their screens instead of wallpapers and miscalenous windows backgrounds.

When you send something into space you want to have a return on the investment. This means communication with the satellite! And after a few days, they can only say "At this point in time, the vehicle is happy and healthy" and produce a grainy image. At least to myself, they do sound like a joke.

Here is the blog where they post news about the mission:

http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/multiverse/news.ph p

so far, so good, it is operating as planned

• The Genesis I craft they launched contains "Living Systems", they hope to broadcast. Insects? Plants? Golden Retrievers?
• For the follow-up Genesis II, you can pay them $295 to launch some crap of yours up there, and you "might" be able to see in on camera while in orbit.

• The Genesis I craft they launched contains "Living Systems", they hope to broadcast. Insects? Plants? Golden Retrievers?
• For the follow-up Genesis II, you can pay them $295 to launch some crap of yours up there, and you "might" be able to see in on camera while in orbit.

• The Genesis I craft they launched contains "Living Systems", they hope to broadcast. Insects? Plants? Golden Retrievers?
• For the follow-up Genesis II, you can pay them $295 to launch some crap of yours up there, and you "might" be able to see in on camera while in orbit.

About 2.5 hours from now, the module will phone home and we will get a better sense of how the module is doing. Here are some additional resources...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/5173388.stm
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/060712_genesi s-1_launch.html
http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigelow_Aerospace

Coincidentally, this news about the USAF's secret vehicle comes out on the same day as news that SpaceX has spent some of their money during the past few years secretly developing the first private manned orbital spacecraft. There's coverage on both SpaceRef and Space.com. The capsule will be reusable and is targetted at NASA's recently-announced COTS program for commercial deliveries of crew and cargo to the International Space Station. It's also likely that they'll be using the capsule to compete for Bigelow Aerospace's prize for a privately-built manned vehicle capable of docking with their private space station modules.

A quote from the Space.com article:

Musk said he thinks Dragon can be ready to enter service in 2009 - a full year before the shuttle is expected to conduct its last flight.

"I feel very confident about being able to offer NASA an ISS-servicing capability by 2009 and am prepared to back that up with my own funding," Musk said.

Dragon's initial test flights would be conducted from SpaceX's island launch facility in the Kwajalein Atoll, Musk said, with operational flights to be conducted from Cape Canaveral, Fla.

Musk said SpaceX proposed several different configurations of Dragon in order to meet NASA's needs to deliver both pressurized and unpressurized cargo loads to the station and bring some materials back. He also proposed a crewed version capable of carrying up to seven astronauts to and from the station.


From the SpaceRef article:

Visitors to SpaceX's El Segundo facility over the past several years have noticed an area which is roped off - one they cannot get close to - with some large hardware covered up. Underneath those covers are a variety of Dragon protoypes and developmental items produced over the past several years.

Initial designs for Dragon were somewhat similar to a blunt nose version of the DC-X - complete with landing legs. Driven by additional thinking - and the emerging demands of a cargo and human transport business for the ISS - the design of Dragon has been modified and the crew capsule portion of the spacecraft now sports a more conventional blunt conical, capsule-like design with a 15-degree slope angle.

A number of private spaceflight firms mentioned in the article are looking for people to hire. These companies are looking for folks with expertise in a variety of areas, from web design, to aerospace/mechanical engineering, to programming. Here's a few links (courtesy of RLV News, listed roughly in order of available resources), with descriptions of what the company does:
 
* Bigelow Aerospace: Inflatable space station modules for orbital research and tourism. Despite being inflatable, their modules are better at withstanding space debris than the ISS, as they're made of a material twice as strong as kevlar. Out of all the private spaceflight firms, they probably have the most resources.
* SpaceX: Orbital rockets which are drastically cheaper than the competition, with plans for building manned orbital rockets. They should be launching their first rocket next month.
* Scaled Composites: Burt Rutan's company and winner of the X Prize. They're currently working on building SpaceShipTwo for Virgin Galactic.
* SpaceDev: They build microsatellites and propulsion systems.
* Blue Origin: Suborbital vehicle company started by Amazon.com's CEO, Jeff Bezos. Author Neal Stephenson also works for them, hoping for the "once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to become a minor character in a Robert Heinlein novel."
* Rocketplane Limited: Suborbital spaceplanes
* Masten Space Systems: Suborbital launch vehicles.
* TGV Rockets: Suborbital launch

A number of private spaceflight firms which are periodically posted about on slashdot are looking for students to hire as summer interns, as well as full-time jobs. These companies are looking for folks with expertise in a variety of areas, from web design, to aerospace/mechanical engineering, to programming. Here's a few links (courtesy of RLV News), with descriptions of what the company does:

* SpaceX: Orbital rockets which are drastically cheaper than the competition, with plans for building manned orbital rockets. They should be launching their first rocket next month.
* Blue Origin: Suborbital vehicle company started by Amazon.com's CEO, Jeff Bezos.
* Masten Space Systems: Suborbital launch vehicles.
* Rocketplane Limited: Suborbital spaceplanes

Also, a few more hiring only for full-time jobs:
* Bigelow Aerospace: Inflatable space station modules for orbital research and tourism. Out of all the private spaceflight firms, they probably have the most resources.
* Scaled Composites: Burt Rutan's company and winner of the X Prize. They're currently working on building SpaceShipTwo for Virgin Galactic.
* SpaceDev: They build microsatellites and propulsion systems.
* TGV Rockets: Suborbital launch

How about platinum? It's a lot closer too. Might be a good target once something like America's Space Prize has been won.

Your point being? The shell of the craft would still approach -200 degrees eventually.

Anyhoo, plastic spacecraft is 'almost' old hat. http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/

I'd give very, very serious thoughts to trading both nuts to work in his shop.

In case you were serious, both Scaled and Virgin Galactic are hiring, as are Blue Origin, Bigelow Aerospace, and SpaceX:

http://www.scaled.com/careers/
http://www.virgingalactic.com/jobs.asp
http://www.blueorigin.com/jobs.htm
http://www.spacex.com/index.html?section=careers&c ontent=http%3A//www.spacex.com/careers.php
http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/employment.html

Hasn't the space shuttle program done enough damage to the pioneering heritage of the US already?

First, NASA delivers a space transportation system with a cost per lb to leo that is an order of magnitude higher than it promised.

Then, NASA stomps out private investment in launch service companies because it would dilute the monopoly value of the bad technology NASA produced.

Then when grassroots space enthusiasts try to get NASA to stop stomping out privately financed space transportation companies, and passed legislation requiring NASA to follow the Reagan policy of purchasing commercial launch services whenever possible, NASA thumbs its nose at the taxpayers most interested in space and launches the Advanced Communications Technology Satellite via the Shuttle.

Then when grassroots space enthusiasts, totally fed up with NASA's lawlessness and detemination to destroy the pioneering spirit of the US, start offering their own launch technology prizes, NASA waits until one of them embarrasses it before providing even lip-service to the prize award concept.

Finally, a private entrepreneur is offering $50 million of his own money as an incentive for other private investors to create a de facto replacement for the Space Shuttle* and NASA responds by trying to pump taxpayer money into the same good old boy network that has so effectively destroyed hope among pioneering peoples that they can embark on a new age of exploration to escape the burgeoning bureaucracies that proclaim themselves the hope of mankind while destroying its spirit.

Kill NASA before it kills the human spirit.

*An exploding myth.

...and Robert Bigelow's Bigelow Aerospace working on inflatable space structures. Robert Bigelow is also the owner of the Budget Suites of America Hotel Chain.

Bigelow has recently announced the logical follow-up to the X-Prize: America's Space Prize, a $50 million prize to build a vehicle capable of taking 7 people to an orbiting space habitat and back before the end of the decade.

Bigelow actually denies any plans for an orbital hotel, but with his background everyone keeps assuming that's his intention anyway.

• 3 Space Shuttles
  
• 1 half-compleated space station (but in operating condition at the moment).
  
• One very cool orbiting satellite, but near the end of its expected lifetime.
  
• 3 Space Lanuching Bases (Edwards, KSC, and Vandenburg...now mainly USAF)
  
• Several major research institutions (JPL, Ames, etc.) each capable of performing considerable aerospace research projects and widely acknowledged as the top of their field in the world.
  
• Several robots on Mars
  
• A couple of probes on Venus (not really intended to land on the surface, but a couple did anyway)
  
• A few spaces probes in deep interstellar space (Voyager and Pioneer)
  
• Several other minor astronomical and Earth Observing satellites still providing new data.
  
• 6 plaques on the Moon.
  
• 500 kg of lunar soil available for Earth-based research laboratories.
  
• And about 1 Petabyte of raw data collected regarding everything in the Universe above 100 km altitude above the Earth, and some interesting data about the Earth itself as well.

But does putting the mass of 3 humans in suborbital flight really make a difference? This is akin to the Space Shuttle in the 1970s: It's designed to go somewhere, but there's nothing up there to go to.

There may not be today, but there will be

I recently attended a talk by a NASA education guy on the subject of living in space - on the shuttle and ISS. For the most part, it's really not that different from what you might expect; the main problem is not so much things intrinsic to zero gravity (though there's some of that with liquids, crumbs, etc.) but that NASA generally skimps on the sort of amenities you might think the astronauts could use. For example, there was no "table" on ISS, until the crew up there built one out of some surplus supplies. And, similarly, no refrigerator or freezer. Things will be quite different once the first space hotel goes up.

There are a lot of scientific reasons to go back to the Moon - first a lot of questions about the Moon itself, and the early history of the solar system that can be learned from lunar cratering. Of most interest in this is the South Pole - Aitken basin, which is mostly on the far side; the south polar regions of this very deep basin have craters that may hold water ice and other cometary debris. But the basin material is itself of some geological interest, and a sample-return mission to this area was listed as one of the highest priorities in planetary science in the recent NRC decadal survey.

Second, for science, is the potential of the Moon as a platform for observation of the rest of the universe. A lunar telescope has the same lack-of-atmosphere advantages of Hubble, but could be constructed much larger than is possible for a free-space telescope (with current technology) with use of in-situ materials. This is particularly important for infrared and ultraviolet/x-ray astronomy, for which much of the spectrum is almost completely attenuated in the Earth's atmosphere and space is the only real option. It makes a lot of sense to base the next generation of space telescopes on the Moon, though I have not seen much movement in this direction, other than some early-stage proposals.

Space solar power is considered by many to be the only long-term solution to Earth's energy needs that meets both global energy and environmental requirements over the next 50 years. Making use of lunar materials, possibly even generating the power on the Moon, is the only realistic option for building these things on the scale needed. If this globe could ever manage to get its act together and move beyond carbon-based fuels to invest in the future, the Moon has a major role to play.

Finally, space tourism has been in the news, and private companies are starting to look at orbiting hotels and lunar excursions - for those who can pay of course. With the right price, demand can be expected to be huge :-) Retirement to the Moon's low gravity might become a major draw as well.

So the Moon has a bright future - if we could just pay it a bit of attention with all the other distractions the world has to offer these days!

• Assuming the graphic here is the proposed hotel, and assuming the modules are ISS sized, I figure six to eight launches.

• If the money he mentions is for developing launchers, that won't leave much over for the station. I doubt the money is for launcher development, because his statement is for the money to be spread over the next 15 years. Launcher development alone for ones in the class he'll need will be well in excess of $150 mill. (And there is little call commercially for launchers in that class.)

• If he plans to buy the launches, then his budget is going to be eaten pretty rapidly by the associated costs.

• When does it reach man tended capability? (Or does he plan on autonomous operations unless tourists are at the station? Not a bad idea, but there are some practical problems to be overcome.)

• Given that none of the modules appear lie 'in line' with each other, automated docking is going to be difficult.

• How do construction, maintenance and operational personel reach the station?

• How do the passengers reach the station?

• How are supplies and waste handled?

Another essay by Allen Tough, lists five promising strategies for How to Achieve Contact with other civilizations.

We stopped posting business models on the public web about four years ago, when the business side of the Artemis Project became a serious concern. A lot of the technical development has been moved into private forums for the same reasons.

The FAQ files about business things are currently sitting in my author stage in the WebSite Director system, waiting to be rewritten and updated. Sorry about that; there just aren't enough hours in a day and this isn't a high priority until we have something to offer. This is a very complex business venture. We're putting a lot more resources into doing it than just talking about it.

I know of one fellow who's willing to put his money where is mouth is when it comes to commercial space ventures: my boss, Robert T. Bigelow. He has set aside $500 million as seed money for the development of a business venture that leads to commercial space cruise ships that will take you on a tour around the moon. See the FAQ at the Bigelow Aerospace web site. You'll find articles about Bigelow Aerospace in the Dallas Morning News, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, several other newspapers, and all over the web.

Like Bigelow Aerospace, none of the Artemis Project program participants intends to do a public offering until there's something to offer. We're very serious about this project, so we don't want to come out with premature stock offerings or lunar real estate deals.

The best place to ask questions about the Artemis Project is the open artemis-list mailing list. See the first item on the description of mailing lists operated by Artemis Society Interntional.

Greg Bennett
President, Artemis Society International.