On 26 Jan 2004 13:53:25 GMT, "Jorge R. Frank"
wrote:

Cardman wrote in
:

Not too sure about their inflatable ideas, when it would pose a
serious temperature problem being so thin.

Where did you hear that inflatables must be thin?

They usually are, where Boeing's diagrams do not indicate thick walls.

Transhab, the proposed
inflatable hab for ISS, would have been a foot thick. I see no reason to
believe a lunar inflatable would be any thinner than Transhab.

Then why bother with inflation if the walls are so thick? As in that
case you could just use solid metal or some plastics.

Sure inflatable makes the launch size easier, but I doubt that it
would help the mass much.

The best idea for an inflatable is for an easy up greenhouse for your
space crops, where sure there is hope for making you own virtual
bouncy castle living area in space.

Not of course to forget the
remote possibility of a puncture, even by the crew.

In hypervelocity impact tests at JSC, Transhab proved to be more impact
resistant than the aluminum hab it would have replaced. I don't think you
need to worry about crew punctures.

Then I won't, but metal is never that good concerning impacts compared
to a layered textile approach.

So how these things do in terms of mass?

Cardman
http://www.cardman.com
http://www.cardman.co.uk