Update on Genesis-I

PRIVATE SPACE MODULE ORBITING IN "TIP-TOP SHAPE"

IEEE Spectrum Online -- February 12th, 2007

http://spectrum.ieee.org/feb07/comments/1709

By James Oberg





Seven months into its open-ended orbital shakedown cruise, Bigelow
Aerospace's inflatable test vehicle Genesis-I is performing smoothly, a
company official has advised IEEE Spectrum. As previously reported in this
month's issue, the mission was to test variations of spacecraft systems for
future vehicles leading to the development of an inhabitable orbital outpost
for a wide range of functions, potentially including tourism, in the next
decade.

"We have been monitoring all of the onboard systems many times a day,"
says Jay Ingham, deputy program manager at the Bigelow Aerospace plant, in
North Las Vegas, Nev. "We have been very pleased with both the initial
operational success, as well as the continued reliability of virtually all
of the onboard systems," he continued, in a press statement planned for
release on February 14.

Dibs on the bunk by the porthole.

/dps

nightbat wrote

snidely wrote:

Dibs on the bunk by the porthole.

/dps


nightbat

All Star Science Team Officers get respectful commissioned
status Sean Starship suites, three stacked enlisted bunks are reserved
for the auk coffeeboys. Join the ranks of the profound Officers, you'll
sleep better.

it's only natural,
the nightbat

"Jim Oberg" schreef in bericht
...
PRIVATE SPACE MODULE ORBITING IN "TIP-TOP SHAPE"

IEEE Spectrum Online -- February 12th, 2007

http://spectrum.ieee.org/feb07/comments/1709


I wouldn't be surprised if the people who invested in Bigelow are going to
strike it rich BIG TIME. If they can develop this technology then space
tourism will become a reality and Bigelow will be in the forefront. Worst
case they'll be bought by one of the giants and still get a hefty return on
their investment.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Jim Oberg" wrote in message


Seven months into its open-ended orbital shakedown cruise, Bigelow
Aerospace's inflatable test vehicle Genesis-I is performing smoothly, a
company official has advised IEEE Spectrum. As previously reported in this
month's issue, the mission was to test variations of spacecraft systems for
future vehicles leading to the development of an inhabitable orbital outpost
for a wide range of functions, potentially including tourism, in the next
decade.

That's terrific private sector and the sorts of pro-ET worthy news we
can all use, as I have need of employing many Venus L2 Bigelow POOFs.

There's another set of nifty and cool POOF applications once we've
relocated our moon into Earth's L1 halo pocket.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Guy Fawkes" wrote in message


I wouldn't be surprised if the people who invested in Bigelow are going to
strike it rich BIG TIME. If they can develop this technology then space
tourism will become a reality and Bigelow will be in the forefront. Worst
case they'll be bought by one of the giants and still get a hefty return on
their investment.

Wait until they plant one or many of those POOF suckers at Venus L2.
-
Brad Guth




--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Jim Oberg" wrote in message


When is team Bigelow going to spec out one of their Genesis POOF's for
Venus L2?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Jim Oberg" wrote in message


This one is ideal for the Bigelow POOF, because it's not a flyby.

Usenet topic: Manned Venus Flyby

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...ea67d6de4199a9
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manned_Venus_Flyby

Venus L2 need not be a flyby limited mission, but rather a 19 month
destination stop-over. However, you're not going to get yourself very
hot, much less roasted to death. All that's needed is a good cache of
TP plus lots of beer and pizza that'll last between those mostly robotic
resupply missions. The VL2 radiation environment that's potentially
lethal to our frail DNA isn't nearly as bad off as being with ISS, as it
manages to avoid the ever expanding SAA contour, and there's certainly
going to be less (nearly 50% less) of the cosmic influx trauma to deal
with, not to mention VL2 not having that gamma and hard-X-ray producing
moon to deal with.

By one analogy of our 1AU raw sunlight spectrum of UV to IR being worth
1390 w/m2:
However, if the earthshine/planetshine upon average IR radiance is worth
266 w/m2, adding half the other direct influx, as having been shuttle
instrument reported as 1354 w/m2 = 266 + 677 = 943 w/m2, as for
representing the external energy budget of what ISS or most any other
terrestrial orbiting platform has to externally contend with.

A correction for the following worth of moon's L1 IR = 2 w/m2 (not
hardly a big factor, but it's there to behold at least 50% of the time)

If it weren't for the nighttime portion of each ISS orbit, as such
they'd be summarily roasted to death long ago, and it's actually worse
off at the moon's L1 because of the same 1390 w/m2 potential plus a
moonshine surface radiance of IR that I believe has to be worth nearly
695 w/m2, thereby being at roughly 58,000 km away from that IR emitting
surface might suggest 1390 + 2 = 1392 w/m2 (not to forget about a little
something extra that's contributed from earthshine IR). With hardly any
amount of that time spent at the moon's L1 as for being shaded by way of
Earth or by the moon itself (in other words, you'll have to provide an
artificial shade 97.6% of the time according to Clarke Station analogy,
or else get yourself prepaired to sweat like a slow roasted pig in a
can).

As opposed to the solar radiance being less than 390 w/m2 at Venus L2,
whereas the VL2 halo station-keeping orbit is upon average receiving
perhaps as little as 41% of the ISS thermal trauma. Even if there's an
extra 1 w/m2 of IR planetshine to deal with (of which there isn't),
that's still only 391 w/m2, and if that's not Bigelow POOF or most any
other space depot certified, then perhaps nothing is. The better
argument could obviously be said for establishing Earth L2 (EL2) space
depot, but clearly we're not smart enough or otherwise having enough
rad-hard DNA as for pulling that one off any better than we could
accomplish the moon's L1. I guess we don't actually have "The Right
Stuff".

Therefore, once again I may have to agree entirely with the intelligent
mindset of Dr. Van Allen, that the vast majority of open space travels
(external to our protective magnetosphere) and of such other planetary
or moon expeditions needs to be given as much robotics as possible, that
is since our going terribly fast isn't an option and unless we can
affordably launch and sustain a sufficient physical shield against the
solar, moon and cosmic sorts of lethal radiation trauma that tends to
summarily nail our frail DNA (not to mention having to defend ourselves
from nearly all directions, as from those pesky fast moving debris
encounters of the potentially lethal kind), as such robotics are just
about exactly what the doctor ordered, the same as having been insisted
by Dr. Van Allen.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG