Whatever Happened to Bigelow’s Space Hotels?

Posted on by onespaceman2000
Image (Credit): Artist’s rending of Bigelow’s orbiting inflatable hotels. (Bigelow Space Operations)

Do you remember all of the talk about inflatable space hotels? Back in 2018, the U.S. space company Bigelow stated these expandable space station components would be launched by 2021:

With the two launches of B330-1 and B330-2 expected in 2021, the time is now in 2018 to begin BSO activity. These single structures that house humans on a permanent basis will be the largest, most complex structures ever known as stations for human use in space.

Created in 1998, Bigelow licensed the expandable component idea from NASA in 2000 and tried to make it commercially viable. Originally called the TransHab, NASA had developed the idea as a new component for the International Space Station (ISS).  Bigelow eventually sold the idea back to NASA as the Bigelow Expandable Activity Module (BEAM), which was successfully attached to the ISS in 2016. While NASA originally planned to jettison the BEAM from the ISS after two-years of testing and validation, it remained a part of the ISS.

Bigelow saw possibilities for a lunar depot or base, while NASA saw the BEAM as a model for cargo trips to Mars:

The journey to Mars is complex and filled with challenges that NASA and its partners are continuously working to solve. Before sending the first astronauts to the Red Planet, several rockets filled with cargo and supplies will be deployed to await the crews’ arrival. Expandable modules, which are lower-mass and lower-volume systems than metal habitats, can increase the efficiency of cargo shipments, possibly reducing the number of launches needed and overall mission costs.

So after this success with the ISS and ideas for the future, where is Bigelow today? In March 2020, as COVID hit, the company laid off all of its employees and has yet to return to business. That does not mean this idea of expandable components disappears with the company, but it may need a new champion if it is to be part of the future space program.

Maybe Mr. Musk is looking for something to buy as part of his future Martian mission.

Image (Credit): NASA astronaut Randy Bresnik looks through the hatch of the International Space Station’s Bigelow Expandable Aerospace Module (BEAM) on July 31, 2017. (NASA, Randy Bresnik)

Bernie Sanders Has Questions About Private Space Companies

Posted on by onespaceman2000
Image (Credit): Senator Bernie Sanders. (Rollcall)

In a recent The Guardian newspaper editorial, Bernie Sanders had some questions about the role of private companies, such as Blue Origin and SpaceX, in the future of space exploration or, as he sees it, space profiteering. In his editorial, “Jeff Bezos is worth $160bn – yet Congress might bail out his space company,” he noted the following:

At this moment, if you can believe it, Congress is considering legislation to provide a $10bn bailout to Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin space company for a contract to build a lunar lander. This legislation is taking place after Blue Origin lost a competitive bid to SpaceX, Musk’s company. Bezos is worth some $180bn.

He then cites the costs of Jeff Bezos’ yacht and homes while pointing out the plight of those living paycheck to paycheck. Of course, the same could be said about Elon Musk, rumored to be the wealthiest man in the world and now in the papers for buying another company unrelated to space (or the car industry).

First, this battle between Bernie and Bezos has been going on for some time, but the “bailout” in question was debunked by Verifythis.com last year, which stated:

Although NASA recently chose SpaceX over Blue Origin and one other company to receive funding for development of a human lunar lander, NASA stated in its decision that it wanted to fund two companies but lacked the budget to even fund one without negotiating the price down. The Senate bill is in response to that, allocating NASA enough funding to award a second contract. Blue Origin is the likely frontrunner for that contract, but it’s not guaranteed. Even if Blue Origin does win the contract, the allocated $10 billion to NASA isn’t just for this contract and therefore wouldn’t all go to Blue Origin.

Of course, the editorial is really a lead in to the real issue – who owes the minerals in space? Mr. Sanders highlights the worth of a single asteroid, stating “Just a single 3,000ft asteroid may contain platinum worth over $5tn.” It is a good point as we consider the next great race for minerals. Of course, maybe Uncle Sam can get some of it back via taxes, but it is not hard to believe space companies would incorporate in the Bahamas or somewhere similar to avoid such taxation.

Mr. Sanders is calling for a “rational space policy,” and wants Congress to be part of the process. Given the number of nations heading to the Moon and Mars, it is much bigger than the U.S. Congress. The United Nations will need to play a role here via the Outer Space Treaty, which NASA is attempting to update via the Artemis Accords. In addition, maybe Congress needs to update the rescind the 2015 U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, which states in § 51303:

A United States citizen engaged in commercial recovery of an asteroid resource or a space resource under this chapter shall be entitled to any asteroid resource or space resource obtained, including to possess, own, transport, use, and sell the asteroid resource or space resource obtained in accordance with applicable law, including the international obligations of the United States.

By the way, NASA has already issued a press release regarding more lunar lander opportunities. You can find the press release here.

Prepare for Thousands More LEO Satellites

Posted on by onespaceman2000
Image (Credit): Launch vehicles for Amazon’s Project Kuiper. (Amazon)

Watch out SpaceX, Amazon is getting into the Internet satellite business as well. More importantly, beware astronomers and orbiting spacecraft, because the skies are going to be really crazy, and China has not even started with its massive program.

This week, Amazon announced plans to more forward with Project Kuiper, which will involve about 83 rocket launches involving Arianespace, Blue Origin, and United Launch Alliance. The Project will place 3,236 satellites into low Earth orbit (LEO) over a five-year period.

This is how Amazon describes Project Kuiper:

Project Kuiper aims to provide high-speed, low-latency broadband to a wide range of customers, including individual households, schools, hospitals, businesses, government agencies, disaster relief operations, mobile operators, and other organizations working in places without reliable internet connectivity. Amazon is designing and developing the entire system in-house, combining a constellation of advanced LEO satellites with small, affordable customer terminals and a secure, resilient ground-based communications network. 

Of course, this is what SpaceX’s Starlink is already doing as it aims for 42,000 such satellites. In addition, Oneweb aims for about 600 such satellites (to be launched by SpaceX of all firms). And China is considering a similar system of 10,000 LEO satellites. This is just the list to date, which is quite a cluster of problems already.

So let me get this straight. We can get Dish TV cable services to every spot in the US using only 9 satellites, but we will need thousands and thousands of competing satellites crowding LEO and jeopardizing our space stations, weather and intelligence satellites, and astronomy efforts all for Internet services?

Why does it appear we are going backwards. I understand that the Dish satellites are about 22,000 miles away in geosynchronous orbits, but why can’t that be the model going forward rather than the billions of satellites that Mr. Musk thinks is possible? It strikes me as crazy to go down this path. All we need is one bad collision, and the cascading impact of that collision, to doom all of LEO.

We really need to think this through.

How Many Satellites Are Too Many?

Posted on by onespaceman2000

You may have remembered my earlier post showing all of the items already in orbit around the Earth. Well, it appears Elon Musk believes we can handle billions of satellites in low Earth orbit (LEO). And while the current number of orbiting satellites is only in the thousands, Mr. Musk’s SpaceX has already placed 1,700 Starlink satellites in LEO, with plans for a total of 42,000 such satellites under the program.

Not everyone agrees with unchecked growth. Josef Aschbacher, the European Space Agency’s (ESA) director-general, stated, “You have one person owning half of the active satellites in the world. That’s quite amazing. De facto, he is making the rules.” I agree with the ESA about the need for some rules in this area given the rapid growth. And we may need to look a little deeper into that “billions” number. Mr. Musk has been known to overstate things.

Mr. Musk is part of the move fast and break things club. Yet that can lead to problems when the things breaking up are expensive satellites leaving debris in their wake. We may need to find a better way.

Source: October 24, 2021 launch of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket carrying 60 Starlink satellites to orbit from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. See the SpaceX press release, which contains this image.

Whatever Happened to Mars-One?

Posted on by onespaceman2000
Source: Artist’s impression of a Mars One community on Mars from MIT

I remember the image above from Mars One and thinking that maybe the private sector could find an innovative way to beat governments to Mars. I also remember the profiles of individuals volunteering for a one-way trip to Mars to be part of the proposed Martian colony. So much for that idea. Mars One ran out of money and appears to be little more than a website at this point, where you can read the following:

In 2016 Mars One ran out of funds and was unable to continue the selection program and the technical studies. In the years after that, several attempts were made to raise additional funds, but they were unsuccessful. Despite that, Mars One has had an impact on Mars exploration by promoting the idea of permanent settlement. We, Mars One’s co-founders, are still convinced that the first crews that go to Mars should (or will have to) go there to stay. 

So Mars One still believes a one-way trip is the best approach. If so, it appears Mars One did not have the secret for a very long existence on Mars. An MIT study discussing the venture said the new martians would have survived a short time before expiring as they attempted to grow their food:

As the air inside the habitat continued to leak, the total atmospheric pressure would drop, creating an oppressive environment that would suffocate the first settler within an estimated 68 days.

I am not sure how that would have helped the drive to Mars if the first spot we established was a graveyard.

So give Mars Once credit for keeping the dream alive, and even being optimistic about the technology someday appearing to make it possible, though not in time for its scheduled mission. Fortunately, it went out of business before derailing our hopes for a successful manned mission to Mars.

Source: Mars One.