[mojo2]

With all the war news it seems we missed this BIG DEVELOPMENT!


This artist's rendering, released by Bigelow Aerospace, shows the Genesis 1 spacecraft in orbit. The craft is designed to inflate from a diameter of about 4 feet to twice that size.

July 12, 2006 Launch
These are actual photos of the Russian Dnepr rocket carrying the Bigelow Aerospace pathfinder mission Genesis I from the ISC Kosmotras space and missile complex in the Orenburg region of Russia.

MSNBC.com
Russians launch inflatable spacecraft
Genesis 1 could pave the way for space hotels by 2015
By Alan Boyle
Science editor
MSNBC

Updated: 7:07 p.m. CT July 13, 2006
A Russian military base has launched the first prototype for what could eventually become a private-sector space station built up from inflatable modules, the company funding the project said Wednesday.

The Genesis 1 inflatable spacecraft, developed by Las Vegas-based Bigelow Aerospace, could take a significant step toward an era of privately funded hotels, labs and even sports complexes in space.

The company's founder, real-estate magnate Robert Bigelow, has reportedly committed $500 million to the inflatable-module project, with about $75 million spent so far. In an initial statement, Bigelow said Genesis 1 was successfully launched from Russia's Dombarovsky missile base at 10:53 a.m. ET, atop a Soviet-era intercontinental ballistic missile that was converted to commercial use.

In later statements, Bigelow said his mission control center in Las Vegas was receiving data indicating that Genesis 1 was in its 342-mile-high (550-kilometer-high) target orbit, that its solar arrays were working as planned and that the craft's inflatable skin "has successfully expanded."

The module's internal temperature was 79 degrees Fahrenheit (26 degrees Celsius), and the GPS-based tracking system was working, he said.

Years of work
The launch represents the culmination of years of work by Bigelow and his team, using a concept that was first suggested by NASA for the international space station or Mars-bound spacecraft. NASA scrapped the idea in 2001, but Bigelow licensed the concept for commercial use.

The basic concept calls for launching soft-sided spacecraft that could be inflated once they're in orbit. The walls are made from multiple layers of graphite-fiber composite materials, tough enough to stand up to micrometeoroids and orbital debris. Such modules would be cheaper to send into space, and allow for larger pressurized volumes once they were inflated.

Genesis 1 measures about 14 feet (4 meters) in length and 4 feet (1.2 meters) in diameter, and was designed to inflate in orbit to twice that diameter. The module is equipped with 13 cameras inside and out, and could transmit views of Earth as well as items floating inside the enclosed space for years to come.

Bigelow's time line calls for testing larger and larger prototypes, with roughly two launches per year, leading up to the launch of full-scale Nautilus-class modules each enclosing about 11,650 cubic feet (330 cubic meters), or roughly the volume of a three-bedroom home.

In comparison, the international space station has cost on the order of $100 billion so far, and encloses about 15,000 cubic feet (425 cubic meters) of habitable space.

Under the current plan, the first full-scale Nautilus module would be launched in 2012, and a commercial complex could be available for use by 2015.

Bigelow has already floated ideas for using the test modules as commercial opportunities: The Genesis 2 launch, which could take place in the September-October time frame, could fly photos and mementos into space for less than $300 each. As part of the deal, pictures of the items floating in zero-G — as well as views from outside — would be beamed back down to Earth. Bigelow Aerospace's Web site suggests that a space-based bingo game has been under consideration, as well as space art and orbital billboard messages.

Hotels and zero-G sports
Eventually, space tourism ventures could offer budget accommodations in a Nautilus hotel complex, for far less than the current $20 million going rate for trips to the international space station. One company, Toronto-based IPX Entertainment, has said the inflatable module could be used as a venue for zero-G athletics.

NBC News space analyst James Oberg said the key shortcoming for Bigelow's plan has always been the question of how to provide affordable access to any private facility built in orbit.

"But two recent trends — the NASA support for commercial space transportation to support the future of the existing space station, and the French-Russian construction of a Soyuz spacecraft launch capability from the equatorial space base at Kourou in French Guiana — promise a potential solution to this shortcoming in the next six to eight years," Oberg said in an e-mail.

In the short term, Bigelow is going with low-cost Russian launches - and in the longer term, he's planning to use SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket. A 2008 flight is already listed on SpaceX's launch manifest. Bigelow is also trying to kick-start the orbital options by sponsoring a $50 million America's Space Prize for private-sector orbital spaceships.

Praise and doubt
Business consultant Jeffrey Manber, former president of the Mircorp space venture, said a successful Genesis 1 launch would be a "wonderful step forward" in space commercialization. But he still had doubts about Bigelow's ability to secure affordable, reliable transportation to orbital space modules.

Under Manber, Mircorp made a deal with the Russians in 2001 for the creation of a standalone space station called Mini Station 1. The venture never got off the ground — due to the technical challenges as well as lack of funds and active opposition from NASA. Manber said that NASA now seems much more supportive of private space ventures, but that Bigelow still faced the "huge challenge" of getting humans safely into orbit.

"In principle, Bigelow has made enormous strides and needs to be complimented. I love people like him," Manber told MSNBC.com. "We're all trying to do it, yet the technological hurdles remain the chief problem. ... How do you get your customers, your hotel visitors, into space on a reliable basis?"

© 2006 MSNBC Interactive
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13828908/

[mojo2]

Genesis 1's first picture
Posted: Friday, July 14, 2006 9:30 PM by Alan Boyle
Categories: Images, Space

Bigelow Aerospace has released the first image taken by cameras aboard its Genesis 1 orbital spacecraft, showing the exterior of the inflatable module itself in flight. Future snapshots may be prettier, but there's nothing like that first baby picture - especially when the baby is "happy and healthy."


Bigelow Aerospace
Genesis 1 sent back this self-portrait.

Genesis 1 was launched on Wednesday from Russia's Dombarovsky missile base, and imagery is coming back to Earth from at least some of the 13 cameras mounted on the interior and exterior of the spacecraft. Some of the thumbnail images showed up in the background of a video piece aired by KLAS-TV in Las Vegas, where Bigelow Aerospace is based - but the company held back on publicizing the pictures because of the relatively low quality.

Today, the billionaire backer of the private space effort, Robert Bigelow, decided to go ahead and provide an initial, somewhat overexposed image.

"We have extracted from early quick look data a low-resolution thumbnail image of the Genesis 1 vehicle, which verifies the success of vehicle inflation and solar array deployment," Bigelow said in a statement. "At this point in time, the vehicle is happy and healthy."

The image shows the spacecraft with its walls of layered composite material fully inflated to a diameter of about 8 feet. The perspective is distorted because the picture was taken from one end of the spacecraft. Solar arrays hang down from the top of the image, and another set of the yellowish solar arrays can be seen peeking out from the far end of the craft.

If you look at the right spot in the sky at the right time, you just might be able to see Genesis 1 yourself. Follow the instructions at the end of this earlier item to get coordinates and sky maps.

Update for 2:15 a.m. July 15: Bigelow Aerospace's Steve Pellegrino and Chris Reed provide this behind-the-scenes perspective on the Genesis 1 launch. Tip o' the Log to Clark Lindsey at RLV and Space Transport News.

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archi...7/14/1128.aspx

[mojo2]

Released 07/25/2006
The pictured box contains Mexican jumping beans and a magnetic experiment. This small experiment consists of two electromagnets surrounded by small metal objects of varying sizes and colors. As the electromagnets are alternately activated and deactivated, the metal shapes in between form a new "sculpture" each time.

http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/out_there/index.php

[mojo2]

Video from Genesis I
At this time, the video is in the "WMV" format.

End Exterior Camera, added 7/17/06, 896KB
Interior Camera, added 7/17/06, 524KB

http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/out_there/video.php

[mojo2]

Do you think Airbus wants to build a spaceship, too?

[glideslope]

Originally Posted by mojo2

Do you think Airbus wants to build a spaceship, too?

Be tough keeping the weight to spec.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by glideslope

Be tough keeping the weight to spec.

Hey, Airbus is a competent aeronautical designer and builder. If there was a profit to be made why shouldn't they be interested or capable?

[C.A.T.S. CEO]

Its pretty simple to make a craft that will go into space now a days.
but you have to have the $$$

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by C.A.T.S. CEO

Its pretty simple to make a craft that will go into space now a days.
but you have to have the $$$

How cool is it that a hotel developer has actually taken the step of putting a test vehicle in orbit? Now that he has demonstrated the viability of his concept (the moths and cockroach 'passengers' are alive up there as we speak) the next step might be to begin designing a man sized hotel to begin human testing.

Would you pay $100,000 to go up for a few days?

There are people who pay to go see the ocean gravesite where the Titanic rests. I'd consider going into space to check out the International Space Station from the outside and look down at the Earth and up at the moon and out at the stars without the atmospheric interference of Earth.

If I had an extra $100K, sure!

And it looks like this guy is REALLY going to make it a reality!

[Landos Mustache]

I think it is a great idea and technology. It is a shame NASA decided not to continue with the idea.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

I think it is a great idea and technology. It is a shame NASA decided not to continue with the idea.

I agree.

But, on the other hand, this guy is doing it cheaper than NASA would do it. So, that's a good thing.

[hickey]

Looks like what Hawking said about humans needing to go into space might be coming true quite soon. I really hope this idea "takes off" and gets some more investors into it.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by hickey

Looks like what Hawking said about humans needing to go into space might be coming true quite soon. I really hope this idea "takes off" and gets some more investors into it.

Would you go if the price were right?

[hickey]

hell yeah I would go! Even if I could set up a payment plan Id go, that way I could paying off student loans AND a trip to the moon.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by hickey

hell yeah I would go! Even if I could set up a payment plan Id go, that way I could paying off student loans AND a trip to the moon.

Write a book about your experiences and pay it ALL off! I'd buy it.

[hickey]

alright then, one copy down, a hell of a lot more to go.

[Landos Mustache]

Originally Posted by mojo2

I agree.

But, on the other hand, this guy is doing it cheaper than NASA would do it. So, that's a good thing.

The strange part is they dumped it because they said it was too expensive.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

The strange part is they dumped it because they said it was too expensive.

They have more overhead?

[Landos Mustache]

Originally Posted by mojo2

They have more overhead?

I dunno. Perhaps because Nasa can charge and arm and a leg to a company to launch something into space and they don't want it to be cheaper and easier for others to do that.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

I dunno. Perhaps because Nasa can charge and arm and a leg to a company to launch something into space and they don't want it to be cheaper and easier for others to do that.

Hmmm, from what I've read that MAY have been true in the past but there is now a special NASA program which encourages private space ventures.

IIRC, for about four years there will be NO NASA manned space flights after the Space Shuttle is retired and before the next U.S. manned space vehicle program is put on line. That's partly the reason they are encouraging privately run and funded space flights.

[Landos Mustache]

Originally Posted by mojo2

Hmmm, from what I've read that MAY have been true in the past but there is now a special NASA program which encourages private space ventures.

IIRC, for about four years there will be NO NASA manned space flights after the Space Shuttle is retired and before the next U.S. manned space vehicle program is put on line. That's partly the reason they are encouraging privately run and funded space flights.

Have they shows any solid concepts for the next shuttle design?

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

Have they shows any solid concepts for the next shuttle design?

I dunno for sure. Although I've heard it described as the 'Apollo capsule on steroids.'

EDIT: Ok, here we are.


Under NASA's lunar exploration plan, Moon mission crews would launch separately from cargo in a capsule atop a shuttle-derived booster and rendezvous with a lander and Earth Departure Stage already in orbit. Credit: NASA/John Frassanito and Associates.


Concept illustration of Crew Exploration Vehicle attached to a shuttle solid rocket booster. Image Credit: Alliant Techsystems Inc.

[Landos Mustache]

Yuck. Feels like a big step backwards.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by mojo2

Now that he has demonstrated the viability of his concept (the moths and cockroach 'passengers' are alive up there as we speak) the next step might be to begin designing a man sized hotel to begin human testing.

The next set of passengers are drug addicts and prostitutes.

[mojo2]

NASA's New Moon Plans: 'Apollo on Steroids'
By Tariq Malik
Staff Writer
posted: 19 September 2005
ET
This story was updated at 8:27 p.m. EDT.

Despite a stalled space shuttle program, NASA is confident it can launch and sustain human exploration of the Moon by 2018, the space agency's top official said Monday.

The $104-billion plan calls for an Apollo-like vehicle to carry crews of up to four astronauts to the Moon for seven-day stays on the lunar surface. The spacecraft, NASA's Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), could even carry six-astronaut crews to the International Space Station (ISS) or fly automated resupply shipments as needed, NASA chief Michael Griffin said.

"Think of it as Apollo on steroids," Griffin said as he unveiled the agency's lunar exploration plan during a much-anticipated press conference at its Washington, D.C.-based headquarters. "Unless the U.S. wants to get out of manned spaceflight completely, this is the vehicle we need to be building."

Katrina aftermath

The announcement came as NASA works to resume operations at vital shuttle facilities affected by Hurricane Katrina, as well as solve external tank foam shedding problems to increase launch safety. But those problems are short-term compared to NASA's exploration plan, Griffin said.

Hurricanes and Spaceflight
NASA Administrator Michael Griffin, in unveiling the new lunar exploration plan, said he is not seeking extra money and stressed that the space agency will live within its future budgets to achieve this goal.
He dismissed suggestions that reconstruction of the Gulf Coast in the wake of Hurricane Katrina might derail the program first outlined by President Bush in 2004.

"We're talking about returning to the Moon in 2018. There will be a lot more hurricanes and a lot more other natural disasters to befall the United States and the world in that time, I hope none worse than Katrina."

-- Associated Press

"We must deal with our short-term problems while not sacrificing our long-term investments," Griffin said. "The space program is a long-term investment in our future."

NASA's space shuttle program is set to retire in 2010, with the first CEV launch targeted for no later than 2014, though an internal deadline is tentatively set for 2012, Griffin said. The 2012 launch and 2018 Moon landing targets should allow NASA to achieve the space vision laid out by President George W. Bush in 2004, which called for a return of humans to the Moon by no later than 2020, Griffin added.

The vision set by Bush also called for NASA to refocus its sights on future manned missions to Mars. Griffin said that the fundamental technologies planned for lunar exploration may also be repurposed for future Mars missions.

"We started with the requirement to see what we had to do for Mars, and worked backward," he said.

A Moon plan unveiled

NASA's lunar exploration plan entails the development of reusable 18-foot (5.5-meter) diameter capsule capable of seating six astronauts in all, or a four-person Moon expedition.

Capped with an escape tower, the capsule would launch atop an in-line booster and rendezvous with an Earth Departure Stage and lunar lander in Earth orbit, which themselves would launch atop a separate, heavy-lift rocket. Both launchers will be derived from external tank, shuttle engine and solid rocket booster technology developed for the orbiter program, with power for the CEV to be provided via solar arrays.

"What we're really developing is the shuttle's successor," Griffin said. "The CEV is designed to go to low-Earth orbit."

Once in orbit, the spacecraft could link up with other, mission-specific vehicles and push on toward the Moon, Mars or service the Hubble Space Telescope, Griffin said.

"You can do anything," he added.

VIDEO: A New Era of Space Exploration
Video animation of how NASA plans to get back to the Moon by 2018.

The crew capsule's location and escape tower should make the spacecraft about 10 times safer than NASA's space shuttle launch system, with a projected failure rate of 1 in 2,000 instead of the 1 in 220 rate set for the shuttle. With the 1986 loss of the space shuttle Challenger and the 2003 Columbia accident, NASA has lost two orbiters and 14 astronauts on 114 flights.

Like the Apollo missions, the CEV capsule would jettison its service module and return to Earth under parachutes, but will also use airbag cushions, retrorockets or other means to land on the ground at a West Coast location. Apollo astronauts landed at sea.

"It needs to land on the west coast of some country because we want the service module to land in the ocean," Griffin said, adding that while touchdowns at California's Edwards Air Force Base are under review, a water landing is also possible.

At least two Moon missions per year are projected once the program gets started, Griffin said.

Extended stays possible

While the initial lunar journeys under the new program would place astronauts on the lunar surface for a maximum of seven days, future expeditions could last up to six months, akin to flights now conducted by space station astronauts, Griffin said.

NASA's Apollo program landed two astronauts on the lunar surface while a third orbited the Moon. Under the space agency's new plan, all four astronauts would make the lunar descent and explore the surface.

"So we get at least double the amount of time [on the Moon] with seven-day missions and four times the amount of lunar surface crew hours," Griffin said, comparing the planned lunar missions to their Apollo predecessors.

Also unlike the Apollo flights, which were largely confined to the Moon's equatorial regions, CEV missions could reach any point on the Moon that promised interesting science, Griffin said.

"This architecture allows us global lunar access," Griffin said. "Many of the most interesting places [on the Moon] are situated well off the equator."

Researchers have identified locations of possible water ice near the lunar poles. The ice could provide drinking water and fuel for return trips.

Getting to work

The architecture unveiled Monday will be forwarded to two competing aerospace teams vying for NASA's CEV contract - Lockheed Martin and the team-up of Northrop Grumman and Boeing -- to and allow them to further refine their proposals, Griffin said.

"That really helps us to get started working on the details," Keith Reiley, CEV deputy program manager for the Northrop Grumman-Boeing team, told SPACE.com after the announcement. "It's very similar to all the things we've been working on."

Lockheed Martin's Michael Coats, vice president and deputy for space exploration, told SPACE.com that before today's announcement, Griffin made it clear that NASA will be looking for the competing contractors to show innovation in subsystems and in ways to reduce costs.

"It's clear, from what we saw today, what [NASA is] asking for," Coats added.

Reiley added that while his team had an idea of what NASA was looking for in the shuttle replacement, some of the functionality requirements between the CEV and its accompanying spacecraft -- such as the lunar lander -- are now clearer.

NASA culled the field of potential CEV contractors down to the two teams in June 2005, and will make a call for improvements from Lockheed Martin and the Northrop Grumman-Boeing team later this year, NASA officials said.

"We've got a lot of work ahead," Reiley said.
=====================================
Moon-to-Mars Plans Emerge: New Agenda or Apollo Retread?
NASA to Unveil Plans to Send 4 Astronauts to Moon in 2018
Mars Backers Say Action on Human Missions Must Start Now
FAQ: Bush's New Space Vision

http://www.space.com/news/050919_nasa_moon.html

[baw]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

Yuck. Feels like a big step backwards.

Not really. NASA finally realized that a space vehicle that resembles a plane is a failed experiment. It is far cheaper and safer to go back the space capsule design.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_Exploration_Vehicle

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

Yuck. Feels like a big step backwards.

Yeah. I know what you mean. It has none of the thrill and excitement of, let's say, the race to the moon in the 1960's.

But maybe that has something to do with funding. I think the article points out how they looked at Man on Mars as the ultimate goal and then worked backwards to see what has to be done first, then next and so on to arrive at the goal.

Not very sexy, but when poor people start complaining about all the money going into space travel you want to know you didn't splurge on it at the expense of the disadvantaged.

EDIT:
"If we design our hardware for Mars and do the Moon as a subset of that hardware, then that lunar exercise will take us three-quarters of the way to Mars. And we, indeed, can have the Moon by 2012, Mars by 2016," he said. "The Moon is a place to visit. Mars is a place we can settle." http://www.space.com/missionlaunches...moon_mars.html

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

The next set of passengers are drug addicts and prostitutes.

Hahahaha!

[Landos Mustache]

Originally Posted by mojo2

Yeah. I know what you mean. It has none of the thrill and excitement of, let's say, the race to the moon in the 1960's.

I watched the video walkthrough and it looked like a re-creation of the moon mission in the 60's.

Really disappointing.

I remember the next gen shuttle they showed in the 90's. Pretty amazing.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

I watched the video walkthrough and it looked like a re-creation of the moon mission in the 60's.

Really disappointing.

I remember the next gen shuttle they showed in the 90's. Pretty amazing.

Yes. This is a more G.O.P. style approach. Not so exciting but functional and responsible.

[mojo2]

Bob Bigelow, the developer of this whole venture is on c2c right now.

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by mojo2

Would you pay $100,000 to go up for a few days?

One of my late grandfather's desires was to go up into space. In his honor, I would do it. I'd be scared to death (I hate flying), and I'd be a bit hesitant at throwing down $100K for the journey... but I'd go.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

One of my late grandfather's desires was to go up into space. In his honor, I would do it. I'd be scared to death (I hate flying), and I'd be a bit hesitant at throwing down $100K for the journey... but I'd go.

Good for you!