PDA

View Full Version : Space Hotel technology to be tested



Lord Jubjub
2006-Jul-12, 01:56 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060712/ap_on_sc/private_space_station

Genesis 1 will launch an inflatable balloon, about 1/3rd full size of the real thing, to test the concept in space. Robert Bigelow hopes that it is not a complete failure. The date of the launch has not been revealed.

lord bytor
2006-Jul-12, 03:49 AM
Robert Bigelow hopes that it is not a complete failure.

Not exactly an 'aim for the stars' attitude ;)

Van Rijn
2006-Jul-12, 06:18 AM
Here's a related article on MS-NBC:

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2006/07/10/998.aspx

I've been following this for some time. This is another piece in the space puzzle, I just hope it all fits together to open up space for the rest of us.

Mellow
2006-Jul-12, 10:57 AM
So, Robert is not related to Deuce right?

Just kidding, I think this is exactly how private enterprise must move towards work in space. Bigelow work on an orbiting structure and invite others to build launch systems that can interact with said structure.... win win

We just now require the ISO to create a standard for docking systems and everyone is happy.

Sonichog
2006-Jul-12, 05:21 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/07/12/private.space.station.ap/

Trantor
2006-Jul-12, 05:52 PM
This is a great idea, I hope that the inflatable material proves to be durable.

Blob
2006-Jul-13, 12:24 AM
The Genesis Pathfinder 1 inflatable spacecraft was launched aboard a Soviet-era intercontinental ballistic missile from the ISC Kosmotras space and missile complex (Dombarovsky missile base) in the Orenburg region of Russia, at 14:53 GMT on Wednesday.

Bigelow reported that the craft was successfully deployed in its designated orbit, about 500 kilometres above the Earth.
The mission controllers should received the first data about the spacecraft's health around 20:00 GMT.

TLE Data

GENESIS-1
1 29252U 06029A 06193.94428533 .00001168 00000-0 10000-3 0 29
2 29252 064.5108 176.6120 0004518 160.9931 199.1360 15.02715979 56

Blob
2006-Jul-13, 02:19 AM
This launch was the first space launch from the new Yasnyy space complex, on the Dombarovsky ICBM base.
The Dombarovsky ICBM base is still operational and currently has 40 R-36M2/SS-18 missiles deployed there.

Latitude 50° 786 N, Longitude 059° 517 E

Mellow
2006-Jul-13, 09:41 AM
I don't normally copy and paste post.... but....

From Bigelow Aerospace.
"5:20 PST
Bigelow Aerospace has received confirmation from the Genesis I spacecraft that it has successfully expanded.

We have also confirmed that all of the solar arrays have been deployed.

4:15 PST
Bigelow Aerospace mission control has begun to acquire information from the Genesis I spacecraft. The ISC Kosmotras Dnepr rocket has flawlessly delivered the Genesis I into the target orbit of 550km altitude at 64 degrees inclination. The internal battery is reporting a full charge of 26 volts, which leads us to believe that the solar arrays have deployed.

The internal temperature of the spacecraft is reported to be 26 degrees Celsius and we have acquired the spacecraft's Global Positioning System (GPS) signal that will enable us to track the ship in flight.

We have initiated communication with the ship's onboard computers and expect to download more information over the next few hours."

Well.... I for one am excited and hope everything goes better than they expect.

ToSeek
2006-Jul-14, 02:53 PM
From the Space Frontier Foundation:

CONGRATULATIONS BIGELOW AEROSPACE!
Foundation Applauds Launch of First Commercial Inflatable Habitat (http://www.space-frontier.org/PressReleases/2006/20060713bigelow.html)


The Space Frontier Foundation congratulated Bigelow Aerospace on the successful launch of its Genesis 1 inflatable space module Wednesday. Placed in orbit aboard a Russian Dnepr rocket, the 8 foot diameter (when inflated) test module presages ever larger components of what will eventually become the world's first commercially built and operated space station.

"Small steps and giant leaps. That is what the opening of a frontier is all about," said the Foundation's Rick Tumlinson. "This small step towards the creation of an orbital station is actually part of a giant leap forward in the opening of space."

publiusr
2006-Jul-14, 07:21 PM
This is the first REAL private spaceship--not SS1.

It's in orbit.

I think it is rather amusing that the gnords at the Planetary Society failed where Dnepr and Bigelow worked like a dream.

Doodler
2006-Jul-14, 08:00 PM
This is the first REAL private spaceship--not SS1.

It's in orbit.

I think it is rather amusing that the gnords at the Planetary Society failed where Dnepr and Bigelow worked like a dream.

Yeah, but remember that Dnepr is a stand in, and Genesis 1 isn't even close to full size yet.

Falcon's got a LONG way to go yet before they're ready for this one. When Genesis 2's series is done, and Bigelow's got an operational Nautilus on deck to launch, then we'll be a proper spaceship.

Its an awesome working model, probably the best of show for the real civilian candidates, but its no manned spacecraft yet.

ToSeek
2006-Jul-14, 09:14 PM
Inflatable spacecraft beams back images (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060714/ap_on_sc/private_space_station;_ylt=ApA0P2zvH9mlvX5C2H_DVdB vieAA;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--)


An unmanned, inflatable spacecraft launched by a Las Vegas real estate mogul has beamed back the first images since it slipped into orbit and expanded itself.

Genesis I sent back several photos Thursday taken by its dozen cameras showing sections of the craft, according to its builder Bigelow Aerospace. The company declined to publicly release the images.

ToSeek
2006-Jul-15, 10:23 PM
First Images From Space Of Genesis 1 Vehicle (http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.rss.html?pid=21381)


We have extracted from early quick look data a low resolution thumbnail image of the Genesis I vehicle which verifies the success of vehicle inflation and solar array deployment.

At this point in time, the vehicle is happy and healthy.

mickal555
2006-Jul-17, 12:31 PM
Last week Bigelow Aerospace launched its first prototype of an
inflatable space habitat. Taylor Dinerman sees this as a critical
milestone in the eventual development of a space hotel that will
truly open the door to orbital space tourism.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/660/1

Blob
2006-Jul-17, 12:47 PM
See related thread (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=44112)

ToSeek
2006-Jul-17, 01:29 PM
Threads merged.

ToSeek
2006-Jul-17, 04:45 PM
Today's Spaceweather (http://spaceweather3.com/) has an image of the satellite track from the ground.

ToSeek
2006-Jul-17, 10:57 PM
New Images from Bigelow Aerospace's Genesis I (http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.rss.html?pid=21394)

Blob
2006-Jul-18, 10:39 PM
Hum,
you've read the papers , visited the website, and seen the pictures ,
now watch the movie...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13921683/

NEOWatcher
2006-Jul-19, 12:22 PM
Hum,
you've read the papers , visited the website, and seen the pictures ,
now watch the movie...
The article is only 15 hours old and clicking on the video gives me "The video you are looking for is no longer available". :mad:

ToSeek
2006-Jul-19, 04:56 PM
SpaceWeather reports that Genesis should be visible from the ground as a second or third magnitude object.

Swift
2006-Jul-19, 05:14 PM
SpaceWeather reports that Genesis should be visible from the ground as a second or third magnitude object.
Heavens-above.com (http://www.heavens-above.com/) has it on their tracking. For my location it varies between 2.8 and 5.3 over the next week

ToSeek
2006-Jul-21, 04:21 PM
Bigelow Aerospace's Genesis-1 Performing Well (http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/060721_bigelow_genesis-1.html)


It’s a new form of “high stakes” from this gambling city—a privately-funded and designed expandable space module now circles the Earth.

Bigelow Aerospace here is the odds-on-favorite to create a low-cost, low Earth orbit space complex that is accessible to the commercial sector. That goal has been bolstered by the success of their Genesis-1 expandable module, lofted into space July 12 courtesy of a converted Cold War rocket—the Ukrainian-built Dnepr booster provided by ISC Kosmotras.

Even as Genesis-1 circles the Earth, work is already underway for a Genesis-2 launch before year’s end. That flight is expected to lead six months later to lofting a larger, more sophisticated module called Galaxy.

Twice the size of the Genesis-1 now in space, Galaxy will offer 23 cubic meters of interior volume, carry higher-fidelity systems, and is more in a direct path to Bigelow’s full-scale kind of thinking in terms of ever-larger modules.

ToSeek
2006-Jul-24, 07:05 PM
Bigelow's Big Gamble: Building a Space Station (http://www.space.com/news/060721_genesis-1_impact.html)


The Genesis-1 module orbiting the Earth not only transmits its temperature, integrity, power levels and overall health—it also signals entrepreneurial zeal and private sector spunk.

As a pathfinder demonstrator spacecraft, the Genesis-1 mission marks the birth of a long-term vision to build and orbit space structures for commercial and public use. Footing the bill on this business venture—now gauged at upwards of a $75 million outlay—is Robert Bigelow. He is owner of the Budget Suites of America Hotel Chain among other endeavors and is the module mogul of Bigelow Aerospace in North Las Vegas, Nevada.

Last week’s launch of the Genesis-1 atop a Russian and Ukrainian booster is a step “to transform the dream of a robust human presence in space into a reality,” Bigelow has said. Still, there’s also need for a reality check on that promissory note.

Swift
2006-Jul-25, 01:59 PM
I have a question. I looked through Bigelow's website and could not find information on how they are going to get people to their space hotel. If you build it, they will come, but only if they have a way to get there. Anyone have any information?

Doodler
2006-Jul-25, 02:13 PM
I have a question. I looked through Bigelow's website and could not find information on how they are going to get people to their space hotel. If you build it, they will come, but only if they have a way to get there. Anyone have any information?

Nope, and its one they've acknowledged previously (nothing I can link to on short notice). Bigelow was strictly developing the destination, leaving the mode of transportation to someone else with expertise in that area.

I suppose he's playing it with the mentality of a ground real estate developer. You build the resort, let the airlines and bus services figure out how to get people there. I think he's counting on someone getting into the orbital launch game by the time Nautilus is ready to go.

Swift
2006-Jul-25, 02:44 PM
Nope, and its one they've acknowledged previously (nothing I can link to on short notice). Bigelow was strictly developing the destination, leaving the mode of transportation to someone else with expertise in that area.

I suppose he's playing it with the mentality of a ground real estate developer. You build the resort, let the airlines and bus services figure out how to get people there. I think he's counting on someone getting into the orbital launch game by the time Nautilus is ready to go.
Thanks. That seems like a very big gamble, the space equivalent of the cart way in front of the horse.

ToSeek
2006-Jul-25, 02:51 PM
If you build it, they will fly there?

Doodler
2006-Jul-25, 03:22 PM
If you build it, they will fly there?


One casino in a dusty little town in the middle of nowhere has become one of the wealthiest cities in the country. Now someone who's built a substantial fortune in the real estate business of that city wants to open up a casino in the desert of the 21st century.

Whether Bigelow's space stations result in a new Las Vegas in orbit, or another Roanoake, remains to be seen. I, for one, am absolutely thrilled by the possibilities.

NEOWatcher
2006-Jul-25, 04:55 PM
One casino in a dusty little town in the middle of nowhere has become one of the wealthiest cities in the country. Now someone who's built a substantial fortune in the real estate business of that city wants to open up a casino in the desert of the 21st century.

Whether Bigelow's space stations result in a new Las Vegas in orbit, or another Roanoake, remains to be seen. I, for one, am absolutely thrilled by the possibilities.
Like comparing apples and orangutans. That dusty little town already had normal everyday people travelling through it, and the rest of society had travel in a desert at hand. Although gruelling for some, it was still achievable by just about everyone.

Although I do applaud Bigelow, there's a much larger issue to be considered.

ToSeek
2006-Jul-25, 05:04 PM
One giant leap for space ads (http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2006/07/24/1441.aspx)


The latest batch of photos from inside Bigelow Aerospace's orbiting Genesis 1 spacecraft may look like merely sharper versions of previous snapshots, with cards and trinkets floating around in zero-G. But a few added features stand out: the corporate logos for Bigelow Aerospace itself and another of billionaire Robert Bigelow's ventures, Budget Suites of America, plus a veritable outbreak of pixellated spots on the image.

Those logos hint at another small step toward a giant leap in space commercialization: the first ads to be beamed down from a privately developed spacecraft in orbit.

Doodler
2006-Jul-25, 05:41 PM
Although I do applaud Bigelow, there's a much larger issue to be considered.

The larger issue is a matter of perception. Ships, aircraft, even cars have gone through periods where they were considered dangerous, experimental, and unreliable. Even now, accidents, failures and other acts of the deity make them still less than 100% reliable.

I think a huge hurdle that has to be overcome is the fear factor of these vehicles being outside the atmosphere.

We have been through this with vehicles that have worked in environments just as hostile to human life before. We fly airplanes through parts of the atmosphere no human can breath in, we've taken submarines to the bottom of the ocean. We know how to make vehicles that can go places that will kill us, its no mystery.

This is why the CEV and the next generation of spacecraft need to get back to Apollo level basics. Nuts and bolts, function over form. Stop trying to build the Millenium Falcon and build me a Buick Century. Give us a spacecraft we can go up, and be absolutely sure that if there is anything that may go wrong and kill us will have absolutely nothing to do with the basic design of the vehicle.

We can't stop some things from being dangerous. Cars are assembled with flaws that cause fatal accidents, improper maintenance on an aircraft can cause malfunctions that bring them down, and even submarine captains aren't immune to the danger of fenderbender collisions. But for all these accidents, the one inescapeable conclusion is that while the care and operation of the vehicles caused them to fail, when used properly, they worked perfectly.

We have to get it out of our minds that there's something different about spaceflight, in terms of the risks involved in doing it, than there are in flying on an aircraft, or sailing in a submarine. Yes, each has different risks, but the risks are all understood, its a matter of getting the vehicles that will do the job, and getting ourselves to the point where we're comfortable doing the job.

I think the biggest issue facing spaceflight is the eventual task of demystifying it.

Sonichog
2006-Jul-25, 07:42 PM
Doodler: Yeah, but remember that Dnepr is a stand in, and Genesis 1 isn't even close to full size yet.


Keep in mind. though, that even though its a third-scale model of the final product, Genesis 1 still has more interior volume than most of the modules on the ISS, save for the Destiny lab.

NEOWatcher
2006-Jul-25, 07:46 PM
The larger issue is a matter of perception. Ships, aircraft, even cars have gone through periods where they were considered dangerous, experimental, and unreliable. Even now, accidents, failures and other acts of the deity make them still less than 100% reliable.

I think a huge hurdle that has to be overcome is the fear factor of these vehicles being outside the atmosphere.
I agree that is a hurdle, but I'm not sure if I would agree that it is the larger hurdle (only because I view it as "somewhat" safe for what it is). I just think that no matter how much safety is set aside, it will still be far out of reach for the normal person to be able to afford. Even if you can build a 100 occupant craft that costs $10mil to fly, you're still talking about a $100K flight.

Ilya
2006-Jul-25, 08:05 PM
I agree that is a hurdle, but I'm not sure if I would agree that it is the larger hurdle (only because I view it as "somewhat" safe for what it is). I just think that no matter how much safety is set aside, it will still be far out of reach for the normal person to be able to afford. Even if you can build a 100 occupant craft that costs $10mil to fly, you're still talking about a $100K flight.
Bigelow never claimed his hotel will be within reach of "what the normal person can afford" - at least not in this generation. And $100K would be a huge improvement over $20M it costs now.

NEOWatcher
2006-Jul-25, 08:17 PM
Bigelow never claimed his hotel will be within reach of "what the normal person can afford" - at least not in this generation. And $100K would be a huge improvement over $20M it costs now.
I'm just saying this because hearing everyone talk about how great of an achievement this is, and how much closer we are to tourism is getting a little irritating to me. I aint goin, no-ones i knows is goin, and that aint changin any time soon. So how is this going to be good to anyone but those with money anyway? I don't see a great leap in technology, just a change in where the money comes from.

Ilya
2006-Jul-25, 08:33 PM
I don't see a great leap in technology, just a change in where the money comes from.
See this post of mine: http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?p=784586#post784586

A 100 passenger, $10 million per launch spacecraft would enable all sorts of space activities which are impossible today. Among other things, it would make SPS practical. And (related to the post I linked to) think what JPL could do with that kind of lift capacity.

Yet other than tourism, there is NO commercial incentive to develop that kind of spacecraft. Bigelow is creating the incentive.

Doodler
2006-Jul-25, 10:02 PM
I'm just saying this because hearing everyone talk about how great of an achievement this is, and how much closer we are to tourism is getting a little irritating to me. I aint goin, no-ones i knows is goin, and that aint changin any time soon. So how is this going to be good to anyone but those with money anyway? I don't see a great leap in technology, just a change in where the money comes from.

How long was it from Kitty Hawk to the first affordable commercial flights? Bet those first flyers were pretty flippin' wealthy to afford the privilege.

What was the key requirement of building larger airliners that made them practical? Airports to accomodate them.

Same philosophy here. Small stations need only small crews, so larger passenger spacecraft aren't needed. Bigelow starts the ball rolling with the ability to build inexpensive and expansive space stations in orbit, providing larger destinations, making higher volume flights more desirable, and give the aerospace industry a market to begin conceiving of means to transport people in larger craft.

People will find their own reasons to travel, all that the industry needs to do is provide a scaleable means of accomodating their wishes.

The first people going up will be the more wealthy adventuring types, as the demand grows and the price comes down, then you have the more average players who maybe hit the lottery, or save up for the once in a lifetime deal. It might well be that it never comes down to where its no different than heading to an airport and purchasing a ticket, if you have the means to do so, but that doesn't mean that its beyond the effort of an average person to put themselves in a position where its possible with some effort.

But consider OTHER alternatives. An LEO Space Telescope with on site operators. Imagine what Hubble could have been if it were connected to a Nautilus module with a staff to maintain it. The ability to store parts on the station with service missions via Progress style unmanned ships.

Housing for zero-g research. Rather than going through NASA and facing their rules on public disclosure of research data, you can now opt for something more private and secure. NEVER underestimate the value of privacy to a corporation, particularly something as cutting edge as zero-g manufacturing.

Corporate getaway property. The guys and gals in the boardroom make tens of millions a year, this could be the ultimate perk. Even better if its tied to something the company does in relation to zero-g research.

As far as this being an everyman technology, that likely is still decades down the pike, if ever. Even today, not everyone will ever fly in their lifetime, certainly intercontinental travel is still pretty rare overall. I'd be surprised if the number of people who ever travel across a border in their life ever breaches the 50% mark for a nation. Nevertheless, at any given time, there are two million people in the air in commercial aircraft.

How many people have ever been on a submarine in operation? Bet those numbers pale in comparison to even flying, yet the technology is still readily available for those that have need of it and have the money to invest in it. That's certainly not "everyman" technology, but its well beyond experimental.

I personally feel spaceflight will eventually achieve a status somewhere between that of a submarine and an airplane under the aegis of current rocket technology. Probably closer to that of a submarine moreso than an airplane, given the costs involved. While it means that civilian use will remain limited to those who are a part of an orbital industrial complex or are extremely wealthy, the fact is that the human presence in space will well exceed the 10 or so that are up there at the most in the current space age.

Its not Star Trek, but its an impressive and very logical step two in terms of human spaceflight. I think once that second step is more firmly planted and there does become a sizeable orbital presence that allows for longer term stays in space by larger numbers of people without constant resupply from Earth, then you'll see the trickle of permanent inhabitants into orbit. It'll become more like airline travel when we resolve long term life support issues and can actually go up and not immediately come back, or even, go up, and have no intention of ever returning.

NEOWatcher
2006-Jul-26, 01:42 PM
Ouch; it sounds like I'm vastly outvoted here.

Commercial and private ventures? I think that's great. It's the tourism references that I have trouble with. I guess I draw the line a little farther. Rich people taking trips is not tourism in my mind.

That 100 man craft...bad example on my part. That's going to be one heck of a long time for that.

Compare to Kitty Hawk? I can play the devil's advocate here.
Let's see now... about 25 years from first manned flight to commercial flight. But we are at the Barnstormer taking up a passenger stage. So, assuming things are linear:
5 years to the Barnstormer stage. 45 Years to a space passenger. Which means a commercial space flight will be about 225 years?
I know that's not realistic, but I'm only shooting down the comparison, not the object of the comparison.

I do like the submarine comparison though. There has been more advances in underwater reasearch than if only the government did it.

Doodler
2006-Jul-26, 03:30 PM
Actually, unless there is some major leap forward in launch and re-entry technology made, 225 years to high volume commercial flight doesn't feel completely unrealistic.

And just a minor hairsplit, rich people taking vacations to places out of reach of the everyman is tourism. Its a very very very profitable, and very niche level of tourism that some islands in the Pacific, certain venues in Las Vegas, and some other odd spots around the world cater too. The premium on these kinds of getaways tends to easily offset the limited number of people that can take them. They're not your "summer holidays" either, these are what the extremely wealthy would consider to be once in a lifetime, or once in a decade kinds of thing. Its a world VERY few people ever get into, but it is there.

ToSeek
2006-Jul-26, 04:28 PM
Genesis-1: Reaching Escape Velocity From Red Tape (http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/o60726_itar_genesis-1.html)


The orbiting of the privately-bankrolled Genesis-1 expandable spacecraft by Bigelow Aerospace is a step forward in the company’s vision to provide a low-cost, low Earth orbit human-rated space complex that is accessible to the commercial sector.

The general concept for "inflatable" space habitats was initially developed by NASA for use in a proposed mission to Mars, hence the name, "Transit Habitat" or "TransHab" as it was commonly referred to. That work was curtailed in 2000, falling victim to NASA budget cuts.

Since that time, Bigelow Aerospace took the basic concept, redefined it, moved the technology generations ahead and in many different directions, and ultimately brought the idea to fruition in the form of the Genesis-1 Pathfinder vessel.

Launched earlier this month, the Bigelow Aerospace Genesis-1 has taken the deflated NASA idea and puffed new life into the use of what Bigelow Aerospace refers to as ‘expandable’ space-based structures—spending some $75 million in the process, so far.

Still, obtaining U.S. permission to shoot Genesis-1 into orbit atop the Dnepr booster—a converted Cold War, silo-launched SS-18 intercontinental ballistic missile from Russia—was no trouble-free task.

Van Rijn
2006-Jul-27, 12:11 AM
Nope, and its one they've acknowledged previously (nothing I can link to on short notice). Bigelow was strictly developing the destination, leaving the mode of transportation to someone else with expertise in that area.

I suppose he's playing it with the mentality of a ground real estate developer. You build the resort, let the airlines and bus services figure out how to get people there. I think he's counting on someone getting into the orbital launch game by the time Nautilus is ready to go.

They have offered a prize, however:

http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/multiverse/space_prize.php

I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned it in this thread, but the other short term market for a "low cost" space station are nations that would like to have their own, but can't plunk down the kind of money that ISS (or even MIR) costs.

I suspect that a large part of the market for early commercial earth-to-orbit crewed spacecraft and "low cost" space stations will be countries that would like the prestige of getting into space, but can't afford to develop their own.

NEOWatcher
2006-Jul-27, 12:47 PM
They have offered a prize, however:
http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/multiverse/space_prize.php

Let's hope it generates some interest. I just think that the 6th restriction might be a little to restrictive.
No more than twenty percent (20%) of the Spacecraft may be composed of expendable hardware

I suspect that a large part of the market for early commercial earth-to-orbit crewed spacecraft and "low cost" space stations will be countries that would like the prestige of getting into space, but can't afford to develop their own.
I see that situation the same as a contractor working for a space agency with one difference though. The design is before the agency gets their hands into it (could be a big difference though)

Doodler
2006-Jul-27, 03:21 PM
I see that situation the same as a contractor working for a space agency with one difference though. The design is before the agency gets their hands into it (could be a big difference though)

Think of Bigelow space stations like modular office buildings. Low cost, generic layout, basic services installed (plumbing, electrical panels, HVAC). The customer can outfit them and upfit them as their budget dictates.

Swift
2006-Jul-27, 08:57 PM
The larger issue is a matter of perception. Ships, aircraft, even cars have gone through periods where they were considered dangerous, experimental, and unreliable. Even now, accidents, failures and other acts of the deity make them still less than 100% reliable.

I think a huge hurdle that has to be overcome is the fear factor of these vehicles being outside the atmosphere.

To me, this isn't like building a casino in pre-gambling Las Vegas and all we have are Model-Ts to get there, this is closer to we only have oxen or our feet to get there (no NEOWatcher, you are not alone). Or maybe like building a casino in Hawaii and all we have are dug-out canoes.

I am completely in favor of space tourism, even if only millionaires can go, as a way of making it so I can go in the future. But in my mind, if there is a way for people (even rich people) to go to Earth orbit or even NEO, they will go, even if there isn't a hotel to visit when you get there. But the converse (hotel but no transport) just doesn't work. It's like creating a really great website and not connecting it to the rest of the internet.

NEOWatcher
2006-Jul-28, 12:15 PM
(no NEOWatcher, you are not alone)
Thank you, I was starting to feel that way.
I just feel that if a government can spend the money to contract a company to build space vehicles, then why not rich people?
Yes; advantages because it's a different goal, but I don't feel it's a great leap or worth the amount of hype.

Doodler
2006-Jul-28, 02:11 PM
Thank you, I was starting to feel that way.
I just feel that if a government can spend the money to contract a company to build space vehicles, then why not rich people?
Yes; advantages because it's a different goal, but I don't feel it's a great leap or worth the amount of hype.

What revolutionary about it is that one, governments are even allowing it for manned programs, and two, private citizens and corporations are finally interested in doing it.

While its been possible for a while, its finally happening. That's the change that's gotten people excited.

NEOWatcher
2006-Jul-28, 04:05 PM
What revolutionary about it is that one, governments are even allowing it for manned programs, and two, private citizens and corporations are finally interested in doing it.

While its been possible for a while, its finally happening. That's the change that's gotten people excited.
I do agree that those points are important, but if the government denies it (without GOOD reason) then a portion of the constituency would be all over the officials. So the incentive to approve it is already there.
And people finally interested? I think they already were. I view it more as the feasibility curve has finally met the interest curve, not like people were suddenly interested. Don't get me wrong, I do think it's great. But it's like a real good movie that doesn't live up to the hype.

Glom
2006-Jul-28, 05:53 PM
It's like creating a really great website and not connecting it to the rest of the internet.

Like mine for the first year.

The good news is that they said it is built of graphite fibre, which means if you want to build a fission reactor, you already have the moderator. Innovation in action.

Now what about getting there? Where's that at?

ToSeek
2006-Aug-02, 03:03 PM
New Image of Genesis I (http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.rss.html?pid=21586)

Mellow
2006-Aug-08, 08:55 AM
I guess my take is that Bigelow won't be in a position to create a "Space hotel" for some years, by which time I would suggest that someone like Scaled Composites would have been under consultation in order to produce a crew vehicle.

Thus I think the similies mentioned here might be a little fanciful, just don't think Bigelow is that close to creating a location to go to yet.

Sonichog
2006-Aug-08, 07:47 PM
http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/out_there/images/outside_gen/8-1-06.jpg

publiusr
2006-Aug-17, 09:26 PM
He is building payloads--not LVs. Smart.

One Ares V could lob a huge inflate to orbit.