View Single Post
  #16  
Old December 8th 17, 09:18 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default Tourist flights

Jeff Findley wrote:

In article ,
says...

"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
...

"Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote:

"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
. ..

All that being said, Bigelow may have gone to the Dark Side, having
made a partnership agreement with ULA.


I hadn't heard that. Interesting.


I think they did it because right now Atlas is the only booster that
can put up a B330 module and Bigelow views a partnership as cheaper
than buying launches.

http://www.ulalaunch.com/bigelow-aer...in-forces.aspx



Hmm, had to look it up but yeah apparently the B330 is more massive than I
thought.
That said, does look like Falcon FT (expendable) could handle it now (the
older Falcons definitely couldn't.)

Hmm, this is unfortunate. I'll have to push back my prediction of a fully
private space hotel mission then, if simply because of the cost of the Atlas
V.


Falcon Heavy test flight ought to happen early next year (hopefully
January). Couldn't Falcon Heavy put a B330 into orbit? That may not
help the first B330, but could lower the (delivered) cost of subsequent
modules.


I don't understand why, if an Atlas V can loft it, it couldn't go up
on Delta IV Heavy or Falcon 9 FT. Both of those vehicles can lift
more than Atlas V. Payload fairing?


--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw