Slashdot Mirror
Inflatable Private Space Station Launched
Anonymous_Space_Ranger writes "CNN is reporting that the first steps to have a private space station are underway in Russia. While today's launch is unmanned, it is designed to orbit the planet for 5 years while the durability of the design is tested and future flights are planned around it." From the article: "[Robert] Bigelow envisions building a private orbiting space complex by 2015 that would be made up of several expandable Genesis-like modules linked together and could be used as a hotel, or perhaps a science lab or college. He has committed $500 million toward the project."
I wonder how well a beer bong works in zero gravity...
Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
"While today's launch is unmanned, it is designed to orbit the planet for 5 years while the durability of the design is tested and future flights are planned around it."
t s/discoveryiss_single.jpg
Unfortunatly, the mission ended almost as fast as it started when they couldn't figure out how to get the air pump to work while in orbit.
In almost related news, here is a cool pic taken today of the ISS transiting the sun during today's EVA:
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/satcom_transi
It could be worse, it could be Monday.
Ahhhh, thank you!
Well, according to the TFA:
So, the idea is to determine exactly what the risks would be.
After all, to coin a phrase, "Space is big...". If you put it in the right place, made it able to heal from smaller bits hitting it, and limited your stay to a few weeks, your statistically greatest risk would be from getting up there and back. If you're 100x as likely to blow up on the way up or burn up on the way down than to have your space station smashed by space junk, it's not worth worrying about the space junk.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Look at the Zodiac boats used as landing craft by the Navy SEALS. They are inflatable, but they are anything but weak. They are designed to operate in enviroments that we can only dream of and they survive. I am interested in following how this test project survives over the next five years. I am not entirely convinved that it will work (nothing in space exploration or habitation is ever 100%) but I would not be so quick to write it off as a sure failure.
Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
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...
i s-1_launch.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/5173388.stm
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/060712_genes
http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigelow_Aerospace
At those speeds, debris punches holes in metal just as easily.
Platform advocacy is like choosing a favorite severely developmentally disabled child.
The Russians just launched my girlfriend into space!
I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
Your opinion makes sense to me, on account of:
/.er always trumps the opinion of people studying a problem as part of a business plan to profit from successfully solving the problem.
1) All inflatable structures are essentially thin-walled latex balloons that will pop under the slightest stress.
2) Rigid structures in orbit are constantly stricken by space junk, but do not fail because of their thick armor plating.
3) Nobody is tracking the larger space junk.
4) Nobody has ever conducted experiments to learn more about the specific risk posed by the smaller space junk, meteoroids, etc.
5) And, of course, because the opinion of a random
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
I can see the title now.. Robert Bigelow, Interplanetary Gigolo
If you're 100x as likely to blow up on the way up or burn up on the way down than to have your space station smashed by space junk, it's not worth worrying about the space junk.
The world is full up with fussbudgets. Perhaps we should take all the phone sanatizers and . . .
KFG
I doubt even the space shuttle would protect you from anything as small as a bolt hitting it. A number of years ago a single paint fleck hit the windshield of the Shuttle and took out a large pit in the glass. Something even as large as a bolt would be catastropic. There's a lot of space junk up their, but most of it is trackable and can be steered away from in plenty of time.
With something inflatable, thin walls might be an advantage for small untrackable space-junk. It'd likely pass right through the whole structure and impart little energy to it (doing little damage). There'd be holes of course, but with the proper material that wouldn't rip the holes would be small and repairable.
AccountKiller
the potential for abuse seems pretty severe.... ...because, you know, governments never abuse anything.
3) Nobody is tracking the larger space junk.
i ct_war/norad/
NORAD - from 1968. Yes, the space junk is still tracked today.
http://archives.cbc.ca/IDCC-1-71-1552-10481/confl
Or were you using the sarcasm tag? I could not tell.
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
Maybe passing through an occupant on the way through. That doesn't sound very safe to me.
Welcome to space. It's not safe. Neither is mountain climbing or skydiving, yet people do these activities all the time. Also you should probbably be comparing the risk of being hit by space junk with the risk of dying on re-entry or liftoff. I'd be willing to bet that the risks posed by space junk are a LOT smaller than liftoff/re-entry.
Also try to remeber that although there's a lot of junk, it's spread out over a VERY large area. The size of human being is relatively small, so it's not terribly likely that someone would be hit by space junk.
AccountKiller
a small bit of junk will go straight through the wall, this creates a hole, and a presure imbalance. The next layer in will be rapidly sucked towards the hole, but because the imact is unlikely to be exactly normal (90 degrees) to the surface the hole made in the inner layer won't line up with the hole in the outer layer, so it will make a seal. You could probably use the pressure imbalance to hold them together or have some magic glue on the inner walls. They can have lots of layers too. I imagine the walls could be a cellular foam like structure, maybe 10cm thick. Inflating the walls is also done by exploiting the pressure imbalance, each cell basically acting as a valve. The walls don't have to be inflated to a higher pressure than the internal pressure, from the inside they would feel spongy and soft, they would kind of self inflate like those camping mattresses.
You can find more technical details about the launch on the space fellowship: http://www.spacefellowship.com/News/?p=1614
We can expect video's and pictures, of the "living" annimals etc!
With ovre 4 million pounds of space junk flying around at speeds up to 17,500... I for one would NOT want to be in an inflatable structure. Wow!
Many people hear "inflatable structure" and think of some sort of balloon ready to pop at the smallest prick. Bigelow's structure are actually quite sturdy though, arguably more durable than the ISS's walls. From a BBC article on the launch:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/5173388.stm
It is built around a rigid central core and two solid bulkheads. The inflatable walls are composed of a range of materials including Kevlar, often used in bullet-proof vests, and a fibrous textile called Vectran.
The walls are designed to be airtight and tough, to withstand the impact of space debris and small meteorites.
On a full-scale module, each wall would be 40cm (16 inches) thick.
"It's extremely durable and resistant to any puncture or penetration," said Mr Bigelow.
"Wait a minute. Space debris! *slap* Guys, hold off on that idea - you have to read this slashdot post first!"
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
KHAAANNN!!!
Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net