Bigelow Aerospace Launch!

[PB666]

7 hours ago, Nibb31 said:

The material used for inflatables is actually heavier than conventional modules. The only advantage of inflatable modules is more volume, but the downside is that you need to fill that volume, which requires additional cargo launches and lots of outfitting work on orbit. Then there's the cost factor.

No prob, 90 M for 50 kT. 

Does this mean we will be building stations that look like balloon kitty cats. Does that now mean the hideous looking spacexships we saw in spore will become real life?

 

[Wjolcz]

On 30.05.2016 at 4:36 PM, PB666 said:

No prob, 90 M for 50 kT. 

Does this mean we will be building stations that look like balloon kitty cats. Does that now mean the hideous looking spacexships we saw in spore will become real life?

 

Looks pretty cool if you ask me.

Edited May 31, 2016 by Veeltch

[PB666]

2 hours ago, Veeltch said:

Looks pretty cool if you ask me.

Believing it until I saw the mirrors and the space plane in the back ground. Then realized its a marketing thing.

 

[kerbiloid]

7 hours ago, PB666 said:

Believing it until

Never believed it just because if someone is discouraged by unused inner space  of a traditional "hard" module, it can be farced with any trash to be injected into orbit, with no free space left.
(Space beggars living in a trash can? Why not — Skylab was a dyogened  fuel barrel.)
Of course in fact I mean different lightweight stuff for a space station.

The only purpose of such expandable things is: to make a depot/habitat/briefing room of a very large diameter,
- much wider than a space rocket;
- much greater than its envelope thickness.
I.e. a zeppelin sized module.

[tater]

Unsure if there is another Bigelow thread:

 

[MinimumSky5]

I'm more interested in seeing where the landing engines are for that thing... 

[Scotius]

5 minutes ago, MinimumSky5 said:

I'm more interested in seeing where the landing engines are for that thing... 

Skycrane, obviously

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

53 minutes ago, MinimumSky5 said:

I'm more interested in seeing where the landing engines are for that thing... 

Looks almost more awesome than that idea, actually...

[tater]

Looks like they have to assemble that in space, then send it. Wow.

[sh1pman]

Does it only have solar power? On the Moon, where nights are 2 weeks long?

[tater]

1 hour ago, sh1pman said:

Does it only have solar power? On the Moon, where nights are 2 weeks long?

One, I suppose that they can leave it and only occupy it during day.

Two (combined with one), the current plan is a polar region with far longer daylight, though the panel arrangement might have to change to take advantage of near constant sun, lower on the horizon.

Three, any nuclear power would necessarily be connected via a cable, and put in a nearby crater (using the crater rim as radiation shielding).

Edited June 4, 2019 by tater

[kerbiloid]

Imho, they need more rigid structures and engines to land this balloon than if it just was rigid itself.

P.S.
Btw, where are the windows?
When I was supposing that a Martian base needs no windows, just cameras and on-wall screens, they told me that windows are must-have even if nothing is happening outside.

Edited June 5, 2019 by kerbiloid

[Canopus]

@kerbiloid the B330 has a rigid core.

[kerbiloid]

6 minutes ago, Canopus said:

the B330 has a rigid core.

But isn't it inflatable? Can they nail trusses to it?

Quote

The B330 (previously known as the Nautilus space complex module and BA 330) is an inflatable space habitat 

 

Spoiler

 

[tater]

Expandable around a structural core.

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

4 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Imho, they need more rigid structures and engines to land this balloon than if it just was rigid itself.

P.S.
Btw, where are the windows?
When I was supposing that a Martian base needs no windows, just cameras and on-wall screens, they told me that windows are must-have even if nothing is happening outside.

Good point actually, windows are important for a crew's psychological health. If they're going to be stuck on the moon for a couple months or so at minimum, they should at least be able to see the beautiful view that comes with it.

[kerbiloid]

Spoiler

9 minutes ago, ThatGuyWithALongUsername said:

they should at least be able to see the beautiful view that comes with it.

On the Moon they even don't need a window for this. Just such gadget on the wall.

(A rotating glass frame with sand and liquid, can't find it in English. ~10 USD)

Unlike the real static landscape, same forever, they can have a new Moon landscape any time they want, while their habitat is covered with 2 m thick protective layer of regolith.

 

Edited June 5, 2019 by kerbiloid

[Stone Blue]

I wonder if the plan would be to inflate in space, outfit the module, *then* land it...
or land it, *then* inflate and outfit?

I would guess the second.... vOv

[tater]

Yeah, I was assuming they'd land, then deploy.

[Stone Blue]

Actually, that also begs the question,of where/when they would assemble it, and what they would use as transfer stage(s)... vOv

I'm sure the astronauts would appreciate assembly, inflating, and outfitting before transfer... I'm sure it would make for a lees claustrophibic/enjoyable transfer... lol

[kerbiloid]

Imho the plan is to ride the lunar hypewave having an inflatable orbital hotel project getting out of scope.

The construction looks as flimsy as possible, and eliminates any sense of an inflatable module even if it was in orbit.

Six rigid modules per the only inflatable one, and the H-shaped lander... Any rigid module with legs and engines below would make more sense.

Edited June 5, 2019 by kerbiloid

[Stone Blue]

well, the idea of the inflatable, is moar useable/habitable space, above maximum that an LV can launch... vOv

[tater]

Expandable habs make a lot of sense for crew volumes. The crowded nature of ISS modules is even worse on the surface where there is a real up and down. A little elbow room is nice.

[kerbiloid]

1 hour ago, tater said:

Expandable habs make a lot of sense for crew volumes.

If they could be expandable like a balloon, and this was not at the cost of "nothing to be attached to the wall".

Also, the size of this unlikely can gain something from the inner module inflatability, and it looks very non-rigid and overcomplicated comparing to a, say, Skylab on legs.

Spoiler

 

[Brotoro]

Eh. I'd prefer a habitat that I could mostly cover in moon dirt.