NASA Contemplating Blowing Up International Space Station

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/new...lating-Blowing-Up-International-Space-Station

A new idea for expanding the International Space Station could result in it being called the "Inflatable Space Station" instead.

Adding expansions to the International Space Station isn't exactly cheap, which means that NASA is considering alternative, less expensive construction methods. One possible technique would include inflating an addition, similar to "blowing up a tire", provided that NASA and Bigelow Airspace manage to reach a deal.


Nevada-based Bigelow is working to create alternative manufacturing methods for spacecraft and space modules based on its "expandable habitats". The technology has actually been tested and demonstrated via the launch of Genesis I in 2006 and Genesis II in 2007. As a result, NASA is currently weighting a proposal to use one a Bigelow Expandable Activity Module for the ISS.


If the deal goes through, the module used for the space station would be a slightly larger version of the type used for both Genesis I and II (which are currently in orbit). Theoretically, the module would be flown up to the ISS via a commercial rocket and then attached via robot.


As previously stated, the deal between NASA and Bigelow has yet to be finalized. That said, this is a really neat idea: the new technology could allow NASA to construct/place new portions of the station at a fraction of previous costs, and this is also a big step in the direction of commercial involvement with space exploration (something the Obama Administration has been touting since last year).

Of course, if they really did want to "blow it up" they could just turn the space shuttles into nuclear weapons and luanch them into space, right?

Moron... That's what submarines on conveyor belts are for.

Oh christ, they want to send up glorified balloons up now?

Pitching a tent in space just doesn't seem be the brightest idea.

It's pretty bad when NASA is hamstrung to the point of actually considering this lunacy.

all this talk about pitching tents and blow-ups in space ---- makes me wonder if y'all are trying to lure JohnM back here

If there were any kids on the space station, Ray would go up there and molest them just to keep this thread in the Red Room.

Dr. Irving Schlock agrees!!!

The Bigelow modules are actually pretty damn good.

You have to remember, these aren't like your standard party balloon, they are extremely strong.

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

Right now Bigelow Aerospace and SpaceX are the most exciting companies around. In a few years there will be private companies that could, if they wished, launch their own space stations with significantly more internal volume than the entire ISS.

I know they aren't as weak as regular balloons, but I also know that they aren't anywhere near as strong as aluminum and titanium.

Lunacy? Tents? Glorified balloons?

Do you people even read the provided links?

We should have been using these things from the beginning. I've been reading up on this before this thread and you all, like me, should be pissed that Congress forced NASA who invented this stuff, to stop working on it and throw it away. Thankfully this company came in and took over the ideas.

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

On top of that the stuff this thing is made out of is just as tough, if not tougher because of the materials it is made of, as anything else put into space. It's not going to pop like a balloon. It's not a oversized metallic soda can like what is up there right now that could shatter upon being hit.

They've already got two of these things in orbit to verify the tech works (no humans yet). The third, yet bigger one, launches in 2014 and can hold people.

I think some of you think space is like an ocean or something. It's not. It's a vacuum. Just want to remind you of that. You're biggest problems are dealing with radiation and hits from foreign objects. In that regards these things are no different the current space station modules up in orbit right now.

This company is talking about setting up a space station at the Lagrange point L1 point and using these things on the moon as a base. (uninflated they would be easier to transport to the moon)

We should be cheering the company on....at least one American company is working towards getting us out there...

According to Wiki:

"Bigelow Aerospace anticipates that its inflatable modules will be more durable than rigid modules.[11] This is partially due to the company's use of several layers of vectran, a material twice as strong as kevlar, and also because, in theory, flexible walls should be able to sustain micrometeorite impacts better than rigid walls. In ground-based testing, micrometeoroids capable of puncturing standard ISS module materials penetrated only about half-way through the Bigelow skin. Operations director Mike Gold commented that Bigelow modules also wouldn't suffer from the same local shattering problems likely with metallic modules. This could provide as much as 24 hours to remedy punctures in comparison to the more serious results of standard ISS skin micrometeoroid damage.[8]"

"While the details about how Bigelow has evolved the purchased Transhab technology have not been published, NASA states the following about the structure of the module that Bigelow adopted as a starting point:

With almost two dozen layers, TransHab's foot-thick inflatable shell is a marvel of innovative design. The layers are fashioned to break up particles of space debris and tiny meteorites that may hit the shell with a speed seven times as fast as a bullet. The outer layers protect multiple inner bladders, made of a material that holds in the module's air. The shell also provides insulation from temperatures in space that can range from +121°C (+250°F) in sunlight to -128°C (-200°F) in the shade.

The key to the debris protection is successive layers of Nextel, a material commonly used as insulation under the hoods of many cars, spaced between several-inches-thick layers of open cell foam, similar to foam used for chair cushions on Earth. The Nextel and foam layers cause a particle to shatter as it hits, losing more and more of its energy as it penetrates deeper.

Many layers into the shell is a layer of super-strong woven Kevlar that holds the module's shape. The air is held inside by three bladders of Combitherm,[7] material commonly used in the food-packing industry. The innermost layer, forming the inside wall of the module, is Nomex cloth, a fireproof material that also protects the bladder from scuffs and scratches.
—NASA TransHab Concept, [3]

Bigelow has described their technology to news media[8] and have indicated that their proprietary technology inflatable shell, now in validation test in low-earth orbit in two subscale spacecraft, incorporates a layer of Vectran, along with the Kevlar etc. of the NASA technology.[9]"

Here is a awesome space website I found. It really goes into details about how everything in the movies, books and TV is wrong and how things will be really like once we get into space.

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/

It's a good jumping off point for those who want to write sci-fi.

Here is the section on the Transhab: http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/advdesign.php

It's towards the bottom.

IOW, "We're the only ones who got anything right. Heinlein, Asimov, Clarke and all those other scientists who wrote books were wrong about everything."

Sorry, can't take that seriously.

The expert they'll send up to consult...

That's not what they say and since when have you gotten a stick up your ass about everything?

"This website is dedicated to Robert A. Heinlein and Sir Arthur C. Clarke."

"This site was mainly intended for science fiction authors who wanted a little scientific accuracy so they can write SF "the way God and Heinlein intended"

And all three authors you mentioned stretched the limits of science in their works.

This site backs up its work and you'd be hard pressed to find anything that isn't right.

Better launch the Submarine space ship.

You forgot one big problem as well: Dissipating heat.

Yeah forgot that one too.....

Since you seem to have missed the point, I will spell it out clearly for you:

I was sarcastically pointing out that your characterization of the site, and what the site is actually about, are totally different. Nowhere does the site say or imply "Everything in the movies, books and TV is wrong."

Space debris is irrelevant. Given the velocities involved in orbital collisions... anything big enough to do serious damage... say for example an old nut or bolt from some defunct spacecraft, if it hits the space station, is going to pass through it whether the hull is made of paper mache or 2 inch thick steel plate.

Another idiot who can't read.

This idea has been around for decades, and it's a sound one. Frankly, I don't know what's been keeping them.

The whole site pretty much implies it since the every single page of the site shows how the books, movies, and TV got it wrong and what the correct way would be.

Actually, no. The site implies (and even states clearly) that a lot of very sloppy "science" is out there in science fiction. That is absolutely correct. But every single valid principle I saw on the site, I have also seen in careful science fiction. Nowhere does the site claim or imply that "everything" in science-fiction is wrong. In fact, in many places, the site explicitly mentions some science-fiction that got it right.

There is a huge difference between "lots" and "everything."

:whatever:

I'll believe it when I see the test data for myself. As far as I know, there's nothing that can resist the impact of orbital debris simply because of the speeds involved. And if they make the bloody thing out of Kevlar, I'd like to know how it's going to be any cheaper than a typical space module.

Yeah I'm sure NASA, the people who initially invented this thing, is filled with people who are less intelligent then you. For sure you know how orbital debris will react when it makes contact with a vehicle.

The first Transhab was launched in 2006 and the second in 2007. Both are still in orbit and orbiting just fine.

Yeah, it's not like NASA has ever done something stupid before. But, oh, wait, so now that a private company has started using it, that suddenly makes it the most awesomest thing evar? Yeah, whatever.

Yeah, it's not like I'm earning a degree in Mechanical Engineering in the next couple of weeks or anything. I obviously know nothing at all about engineering.

So is the ISS and countless other satellites that aren't inflatables.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SpaceDoesNotWorkThatWay