Slashdot Mirror
Orbital Resort to Launch by 2010
Neil Halelamien writes "Popular Science has a cover feature on self-made billionaire and space enthusiast Robert Bigelow (who's been mentioned before on Slashdot). The article has new info on Bigelow's plans to launch a 'CSS Skywalker' orbital resort by 2010 and sell space habitats to others, such as scientists, manufacturers, Hollywood producers, and countries. The habitats will be made of inflatable modules with multilayered kevlar-like walls. A prototype habitat will be launching on a SpaceX Falcon V next year. To help ensure cost-effective access to the station, Bigelow is also running the $50 million America's Space Prize. In the long run, he plans to use the modules as the basis for space yachts and moon cruisers."
Given that this structure has been receiving more support and interest lately, why has no government (especially NASA) looked at it for building a space station? I would think it would be a good deal cheaper than the method they are using now. Would it be cheaper to finish the ISS or to build one of these new structures of comparable price? I, for one, feel that this merits some more detail, and at least a cursory examination from international space agencies.
Even if some of his plans are a bit crazy, he at least has the guts to try to innovate!
And since this is a private enterprise, it should come out much cheaper then anything NASA can dream of(probablly not as safe though, but NASA's stuff is very safe so its kinda hard to compete with them on that front.)
I'll believe it when I see it....
Not to say it cant be done.. but 2010 ? Gotta love the marketing departments.. oh wait, no.. they put impossible demands on us...
Does the idea of inflatable modules make anyone else nervous ?
I dunno about you, but I'd really like the walls around me that contain my breathing air and keep me warm and from exploding into the void of space made of something nice and hard... like reinforced steel. Maby it's some sort of expandable material over a hard superstructure, but then there are some other issues:
The article mentions:
"lightweight but extremely strong and long-lived inflatable "soft goods" to form modules made of proprietary advanced aerospace materials"
Maby i'm just a traditionalist holding back the frontier, but man, that sounds like a bubble just waiting to be punctured by one of those little paint chips zipping around the earth at a million miles an hour (from old missions, etc). Support structure or no, if you puncture that balloon it vents, and I'm inside, and i will NOT be a happy camper.
Also, I'm wondering what kind of radiation protection these things provide. These materials sound "thin and lightweight" which is what they want for good launch weight, but thin often means poor radiation blocking ability.
My opinion ? Keep the crew in something nice and solid.. keep supplies in these inflato-things, and make sure they can be quickly locked down from the rest of the ship/station/whatever.
My grandmother, who is about 80 or so, will have seen it all I figure by the time she takes an infitie space yacht cruise. I mean when she was born, her idea of high tech was the radio. She probably heard about the mysteries of radar and soon saw TV and was definitly blown away. Cars became more and more "modern" and soon computers came out and even people, gasp!, in space! Not to mention the countless things I haven't mentioned, like the Internet, and now she has a chance to take a space cruise before she dies. That is considering this happens.
There is no way if she had to write a paper back in her school days, about the future, that if she mentioned this, se would be told she has such a creative mind but not realistic.
Obviously I am not the first person to say we;ve come a long ways in X years (and in some ways we haven't moved!), but this is insane.
It makes the future more exciting for those of us younger because we cannot even imagine how quickly we are going to see new technology become realities.
At this rate I say why stop at the moon? I'm saving my cash for a trip to Mars!
"If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer
What about gravity? Granted, I just had a quick glance over the article, but I don't see any mention of gravity. Zero Gravity might be fun for several hours, a day, maybe. But I wouldn't want to spend a vacation completly without gravity. With the space-yacht ideas, it looks almost like a cruise in space. But that pesky no-gravity thing is really gonna come up and bite em.
I'd be impressed if he was successful, but he doesn't need to succeed. He just needs to get closer than anyone else ever has. The first person who can demonstrate the possibility of commercial gains in space will be doing us all an enormous favor.
I've always felt that the non-exploitation pact--that international agreement that says it's a Bad Thing to stripmine on Mars--was a really bad idea. Taking the possibility of commercial gain out of space travel is an excellent way to ensure that all space travel is done by governments and universities. I don't trust governments to do the job efficiently, and I doubt many universities could pull it off without strings-attached grants and funding.
The best way to ensure, over the long run, maximized efficiency and high-level accountability is to leave the job to private enterprise. Companies competing for a profit will find ways to do things cheaper, faster and safer. The trade-off is that there are more likely to be some really bad ideas getting launched, and in space, no one can hear you scream... but that's another detail. Private enterprise might be more willing to take the risks that a post-Challenger United States (for example) is not.
But private enterprise won't even bother if there's not a bottom line. So I say, encourage the strip-mining of Mars (hell, better Mars than one's hometown, don't you think?). Encourage orbiting vacation spots for the wealthy. Encourage claim-staking and competition.
Once we're already up there and comfortable, then we can let the galactic treehuggers cry foul. But let's get up there first.
What he wants is more important that what I want. What he wants is also more important that what you want.
Being off-world, will they legally be able to host space gigolos?
You can't take the sky from me...
$5 per ticket/chance, one number drawn per year, he'll have all the funds he needs to bridge the gap between the wealthy-only model and making space-flight as common-place as air travel is today.
I'd buy a few tickets for that drawing...
(a royalty check for the idea would not be refused, hint, hint)
Take the 90-Day Challenge! http://rwmurker.bodybyvi.com/
Without gravity, their muscle mass will be significantly less.
wtf are you talking about?
Chemical rockets for spacecraft combine fuel (liquid hydrogen, hydrazine, kerosene, etc.) and oxidizer (liquid oxygen, n204, etc) to combust and produce thrust. These are not fossil fuels. they have nothing to do with petroleum.
It sounds like you are talking about cars. Why the hell would we have cars in orbit?
I just found the box to change my sig. Um.... [timeless witticism].
read the damn article. the skin is made of 18" thick woven materials like kevlar. micrometerorites will not penetrate it. and don't say "wouldn't a nice piece of metal work etc". look at bullet proof vests. are they made of slabs of steel?
I just found the box to change my sig. Um.... [timeless witticism].
In many respects, NASA already laid a lot of the ground work for his idea.
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
just so you don't doubt me: "Ground-testing of Bigelow's MMOD has shown that it can stop impacts by 5/8-inch-diameter aluminum pellets fired at it at 6.4 kilometers a second, several times as fast as a rifle bullet. No rigid spacecraft design can match this performance, and it's one of the reasons Nautilus has an expected life span of at least 15 years."
I just found the box to change my sig. Um.... [timeless witticism].
Popular Science is the comic book of science magazines. Even their most realistic articles have only a very minimal amount of reality in them.
... to grab the attention of whatever dumbass will stop to stare at the dead puppies inside.
Generally each story is written like a typical fox news sound bite
The fact that its a lead story in this magazine pretty much gaurantees it wont be happening anywhere near as soon as what was written.
George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
The actual inflatable aspect of the habitat won't have any effect unless the incident object is travelling very slowly. It's only going to have 'bounce' if the walls have time to react during the collision, which is unlikely for most meteorite impacts - it's like that saying that water can be as hard as concrete if you hit it fast enough, there's no time for it to flow/deform away.
On the other hand, the composite foam/graphite shield will provide a significant degree of protection - the kinetic energy of incident objects will be absorbed as those layers of foam and graphite are torn away from each other.
I'm not worried about the strength of inflatable modules: any space station is basically an inflated balloon and if it gets a puncture bad enough to effect rigidity you've got bigger problems than wobbly walls ... like learning to breathe vacuum in a hurry.
No, I'm worried about this sudden indtroduction of inflatable technology from the future. Doctor Schlock from Sluggy Freelance isn't involved, is he?
I will never understand the mindset of someone who thinks that brainstorming is the hard part, and DOING something is "simple".
I - like most other smart people I know - have dozens of ideas a day, and a really good one every week or month.
The Devil is in the details.
I am not at all impressed by someone who "comes up with a great idea".
I bow down before the person who IMPLEMENTS and DELIVERS.
Tone down the "simply moving to production" ivory tower attitude.
I would say it has a lot to do with the adventure of it. How many people who aren't professionals climb mountains and go kayaking down dangerous rivers? The sense of adventure and pioneering as you put it is alive and well in a great many people and I for one would love to simply have the chance to experience the beauty of seeing earth from space. A picture or an IMAX movie simple do not capture the grandeur and raw beauty.
Some people never leave the town that they were born in; others barely stay long enough in one place to become familiar with it. There are all types on this ball of rock we call home and as soon as it's realistically possible people will want to leave here for space and beyond. It's not surprising that entrepreneurs are trying to make this a reality to make some money.
That is of course ignoring the physiological benefits to extending life and ensuring the survival of the species by spreading to more than one planet.
1: Bush is pushing for expanded funding for NASA, even as he cuts all other domestic spending.
2: Bush is claiming there is a Social Security crises because we'll soon have too many old people collecting and not enough young people paying.
BUSH WANTS TO JETTISON ALL OUR OLD PEOPLE INTO SPACE!