Will ISS Become "Mir 2" and "Freedom"?
@fka_roscosmos doesn't plan to continue cooperation with the US on the ISS after 2020
— Dmitry Rogozin (@DRogozin) May 13, 2014
@fka_roscosmos doesn't plan to continue cooperation with the US on the ISS after 2020
— Dmitry Rogozin (@DRogozin) May 13, 2014
Almost 6 years. That is a long time, enough time for tempers to cool down (even in Russia), and a new President in the U.S. to be elected and re-elected.
I’d prefer a strategy that didn’t start with the assumption that the US and Russia will ‘kiss and make up’. The last time this cycle occurred, the estrangement lasted the better part of a century.
I agree. We should work with our historical allies, and never allow Russia to be apart of any “critical path” space projects again.
Res ipsa loquitur
Not sure how your statement is relevant. Res ipsa loquitor means “the thing itself speaks” Care to explain your point?
It’s a legal term that means something has been proved to be self-evident.
Good to know, thanks!
Divorces are messy. NASA needs to think carefully about what it wants to keep.
Time to start testing Bigelow modules and the Deep Space Habitat.
NASA’s lack is more on the infrastructure side. Service modules, not habs.
Proposing a COTS/CCDev style development program towards commercial space stations would allow an early focus on those areas, with “testing” at the ISS, without openly having a “Replace Russian modules on ISS” program to provoke further Vodka-fuelled international posturing.
And if it works and really does create multiple vendors with low-cost solutions, then not only are you immune to Russian posturing, you can replace ISS with a number of lower cost commercially-leased private space stations, plus have a vastly lower price-tag on any L1 station or modular BEO ship.
Estimating how long and how much a commercial program would take.
COTS: 2006 – 2013 (SpaceX finished may 2012), so 7 years
$500M + $288M = $788M
CCDev: 2010 – 2017?, so 7 years
$50M + $270M + $406M + $488M + three $more
That suggests a 7-8 year program that costs $3-$4 billion.
A possible name is CHAOS (Commercial Habitable Accommodation in Orbit and deep Space)
From greenlight to the first fully operational private station, perhaps. And 2021-2 would be good timing to allow NASA to retire ISS and lease time on a commercial station. (Ideally on multiple specialist stations.)
However, there are a number of companies already developing elements. (I’m thinking more Vasimr, and NASA’s recent hydrazine-replacement contracts, than Bigelow.) That should accelerate development of the earliest, critical components for ISS Russian service module replacements.
Oh please god kill all backronyms.
Why would you propose any funding for a commercial station? Bigelow has 2 prototypes flying and is happy to continue developing their stations. Taxpayer funds are not required.
If NASA wants services, it buys access. Why is that hard to understand?
Specifically, NASA may face the Russians withdrawing their modules from ISS before US is willing to kill it, so NASA needs to be able to quickly replace the Russian service modules. To buy that readiness in the most productive and cost effective way, while maintaining a non-confrontational fiction for Russia, I suggested a COTS-like program to develop commercial stations, starting with service modules which “can be tested (wink wink)” on ISS.
Note that accelerating the development of commercial stations is a pleasant side-effect, not the intent.
Ok but I still don’t understand why you would pay for something that is already being done by a commercial firm.
Also you do know that a Bigelow module is already slated to be tested attached to the ISS in the next year or so? That agreement has already be signed by NASA and Bigelow.
The BEAM unfortunately lacks full life support, a galley and toilet. The BA-330 is expected to have them but they have never been tested in space.
If NASA wants to actually test a BA-330 in space, rather than see a test report that says Pass, they it will have to pay for the experiment.
Yes that may well be a NASA requirement but perhaps not a commercial one. Another country or organisation may be happy to accept Bigelow testing and certifying as part of their agreement.
Do some research on Bigelow Gary. They’re way ahead of you.
See post above and below.
Cheers
Just like the Shuttle, there will probably be a “gap” between the ISS and the next US space station. Maybe NASA can buy “seats” on the Chinese space station? At least the Iranian space monkey rides into space on a rocket and capsule made by his own country.
Nope. Bigelow will fly as soon as reliable commercial crew transport is available.
Garbage. Bigelow doesn’t even have a design for a module capable of being launched on an existing, affordable launcher; let alone an entire station. Their smallest module would require a medium-heavy-lifter like Delta IVH, which they can’t afford, or will need to wait until FH.
When commercial crew is flying, Bigelow can start to look for clients, and then start to design and develop a micro-station capable of lofting on an affordable launcher.
This creates something of a commercial catch-22, of course. They won’t get clients without a destination in place and they’re clearly unwilling to launch without clients.
You are a dipstick however I will attempt to educate you.
1. Bigelow currently has 2 prototype modules named Genesis I and II respectively in leo NOW. They were launched by Russian Dnepr rockets in 2006 and 2007 respectively. I have a business card on the second one floating around as members of the public were invited to fly various items on it under the ‘Fly your stuff’. program.
Orbital life for these vehicles is estimated at around 12 years.
2. Bigelow is under NASA 16 month firm-fixed-price contract to provide BEAM (Bigelow Expandable Activity Module) to the ISS where it will be attached for a 2 year long mission during which astronauts ‘may’ enter it. This mission will test such things as structural integrity, leak rates, etc.
In 2015 the BEAM will be transported to the ISS aboard SpaceX CRS-8 mission.
3. Bigelow has signed MOUs with 6 or 7 countries regarding lease and use of the next modules which were originally going to be Sundance however that’s since evolved into the BA330.
Time to learn how to Google and find out more.
Cheers.
1. @ BeanCounterFromDownUnder Your first sentence – no need to use personnel insults. They do not help your argument.
2. The nasawatch forums randomly decides that postings need approval from a moderator. Until approved the post is hidden.
3. When posting from Australia it can be night in the USA so it can be several hours before a moderator logs on. I suggest you wait 24 hours before reposting.
4. (I have just had to wait 8 hours before being able to reply to one of your postings.)
Thanks Andrew, I’ll bear that in mind in future.
Wrt my less than polite post, I was just a touch grouchy when I posted it. Mainly since I’ve become somewhat disillusioned with NASA and the U.S. Congress and really dislike posters who won’t bother to do a little research before posting.
Guess Paul just touched off a nerve.
That said, my apologies to Paul451. I’ll ensure I behave better in future.
Cheers,
Neil
I thought I’d replied to this bs but maybe it got lost.
Bigelow currently has 2 modules flying in leo, Genesis I and II launched 2006 and 7 respectively.
Bigelow is under a firm-fixed-price contract to send a module BEAM (Bigelow Expandable Activity Module) to the ISS on SpaceX CRS-8 in 2015.
Bigelow has 6 or 7 MOUs signed from countries othe than the U.S. showing interest in leasing BA330 modules.
Do some research. It’s not hard.
Cheers.
PS. My previous response was longer.
I’ve tried to answer this question twice. What’s going on Keith? I’ll try again.
Bigelow is currently flying 2 prototypes Genisis I and 2 launched on a Russian rocket in 2006 and 2007 respectively. They’re still up there and I personally have a card flying on G2 under their ‘Fly your stuff’ program.
They have MOUs with 6 or 7 countries to lease their modules probably BA330s.
They have a contract with NASA to fly BEAM in 2015 on SpaceX CRS-8.
Go do some research Paul and then let’s talk about who exactly is posting garbage.
Cheers
I’m not sure which one you want me to reply to… but…
Empty shells do not a space station make.
Empty shells do not a space station make.
If you make a list of all the the systems and components you need in a space station, at the bottom is “in an air-tight shell”. That’s the only part of the list that Genesis or BEAM cover.
[Edit: To be fair, BEAM will have a (passive) docking adaptor. That’s a big step forward over Genesis. And if it only costs $17m, as suggested, that’s a cheap way to buy (inert) storage volume.]
Similar to that empty module the Chinese launched to practice in, but with even less power and life-support and docking systems…
I support Bigelow. I’ve often used Bigelow modules and space stations as part of my go-to quick-and-dirty pricing to show how wasteful SLS is. But Bigelow is not, as claimed, ready to launch as soon as Commercial Crew are flying. They are ready to start.
I said before and I’ll say it again, do some research before posting Gary and I retract my apology since you continue to post bs. If you knew anything about Bigelow then you wouldn’t post such errant rubbish. Oz is one of the countries who have signed an MOU with Bigelow. We haven’t done it without due process. Now perhaps that’s a hint for you of where I’m coming from?
My last word for you since unless I see some sort of change in your postings you enter the ‘troll’ category.
Cheers
A MOU is not a contract.
Bigelow has a rocket engine. Something that small will only be useful for station keeping and as a RCS.
https://www.youtube.com/wat…
The (non-financial) MOU was claimed by Bigelow in 2010. Bigelow also talked about upgrading to a financial agreement with Australia by 2012.
There’s been no mention of it since then, and there’s never been a confirmation from the Australian Space Agency (ASRP) that any MOU existed, let alone what it consisted of. There’s not a single mention on the space.gov.au website, not so much as a one-line press release. (Nor science.org.au, nor csiro.au, nor Ofice of Spatial Policy, not NSS-Australia…) And some Aussie space advocates have tried (and failed) to get any confirmation of its existence.
Yep couldn’t agree more except my source isn’t second hand and whether you like it or not, that’s all I’ll say.
Yep an MOU is not a contract but I didn’t say it was.
Bigelow doesn’t use RCS for attitude control. Altitude not sure.
Yes, you keep saying it, but it’s you that aren’t justifying your claims.
You think that Bigelow is capable of launching one of its space stations as soon as CC hits orbit? Great. Prove it.
If I’m wrong in saying that Genesis and the proposed BEAM didn’t have propulsion, lifesupport, GNC, comms, etc etc etc, then prove it. I’m happy to be corrected.
Great. So since you’ve obviously “done some research before posting”, you’ll be able to provide details about the agreement?
What agency on the Australian side signed it? And what was the “understanding”?
As I said to Andrew, there’s been no mention of it from Bigelow since 2010, and there’s never been a confirmation from the Australian Space Agency (ASRP) that any MOU even existed, let alone what it consisted of.
There’s not a single mention on the space.gov.au website, not so much as a one-line press release. Nor on science.org.au, nor on csiro.au, nor from Ofice of Spatial Policy, nor even from NSS-Australia…
And some Australian space advocates have tried (and failed) since 2010 to get any confirmation of its existence.
Here’s a payload for the SLS, turn an upper stage into Skylab II.
Why and where’s the funding?
If we invite the Chinese to join the crew, the Russians will not want to be left out and things will quickly get back to normal. OTOH if we throw out Russia and continue to exclude China they will have to work together and at least some of the European countries, probably inc. Germany, will join them. The would leave us with Japan, Canada, and part of Europe.
On what basis do you think that Germany would ‘probably’ work with Russia/China?
Bigelow finally has a berth and a purpose. SpaceX can deliver . Das svi dah niya, Zarya FGB…
SpaceX can’t deliver crew yet. Maybe at the earliest 2015 but more likely 2016. CC Program is due to deliver late 2017.
Zarya is also been on orbit for over 15 years at this point. Might not be a bad time to force an upgrade (assuming we don’t want to just Star Trek III the ISS into the Pacific).
First time I’ve seen Star Trek III used as a verb. HAH!
(Although given our recent issues with the Russians, we’re all pulling a Star Trek VI.)
Come to think of it, the whole Space Station Freedom / ISS program reminds me of Star Trek Phase II / Star Trek: The Motion Picture…
– Its high budget reflected inclusion of costs from previous abandoned effort with a different name.
– It looks kinda the same as previous abandoned version
– It’s pretty high tech in areas that don’t matter much.
– Not easily accessible.
– An excess of beauty shots
– Not sure of the purpose of the thing.