This was announced in Seattle in June, but in San Diego this week, Michael Suffredini repeated his plan to attach a module to ISS that could be later detached as a free flyer. I wonder where he is in terms of finding customers?
11 thoughts on “A New Space Company”
Comments are closed.
The details I’m interested are somehow always not part of the story.
Which type of docking ring is it that NASA is “opening to private enterprise” that is currently filled will a Bigelow test module?
Why is “I intend to send up a tube with the newest docking port discussed a couple of days ago on the far end” not the immediate plan? NASA could make that one requirement 90% of the ‘price’ of docking anything.
Why is there no discussion in the article whatsoever of amenities provided by the pictured module (other than: not power/life, that’s from ISS), specifically discussing the bloody obvious docking port-like-thing in the darn mockup?
Even visiting Bigelow and poking around, there’s no clear comment vaguely like “We use the newest IDA adapter on both ends”. Or “We’re flexible and can use (list of docking ports) to suit the needs of the particualr lift.”
Where the BEAM test article is currently berthed. When Beam is finished in 2018 that port will be opened up for a commercial module.
Mike Suffredini started a new company that is going to build a space station module and Robert Bigelow .. I believe it will be between those two.
So does the IDA replace the CBM entirely? Is it usable for ‘berthing’ as well as ‘docking’? Or it it only designed for short-term visits?
No, the IDA is used for soft docking. The CBM will continue to be used for berthing because it has a larger diameter.
Wikipedia claims the IDA can do both berthing and docking and there’s supposed to be IDA-1 and IDA-2 (I think I read on parabolic arc that they are manufacturing another IDA to replace the one that burned up on the Falcon 9):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docking_and_berthing_of_spacecraft
They did build another one, and it’s going up early Monday morning, but the CBM will still be useful for transferring larger-diameter cargo.
Yeah sure on both accounts. But I read, on the article you linked to, on parabolic arc sometime ago that they are manufacturing another IDA (let’s call it IDA-3) so they can still have two up there:
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2016/07/14/spacex-crs9-carrying-crucial-port-station/
NASA astronauts currently living aboard the station will perform a spacewalk later this summer to make the final connection of the IDA to the Harmony module.
This adapter will be one of two at the station. Another already being assembled at Kennedy will be carried into orbit during a future SpaceX cargo resupply mission and attached to another open port on the station, giving the station two docking areas for the new generation of human-rated spacecraft. Both of the IDAs are identical.
http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/ida.htm
Satellite Date Launch Vehicle
IDA 1 - 28.06.2015 Falcon-9 v1.1 CRS-7
IDA 2 - 2016 Falcon-9 v1.2 CRS-9
IDA 3 - 2017 Falcon-9 v1.2 CRS-12
Where CRS-7 was a launch failure.
YMMV. Wouldn’t be the first time I’ve seen this site having schedules changed or just plain wrong data.
Thanks. That’s a good link for the summary/overview of connections.
I think I swapped ID and OD somewhere when thinking about the IDA.
And yeah looking at Wikipedia there should still be several CBMs left even with two IDAs.
The ISS orbital inclination is really not ideal for launches from the Cape, if the intention is to eventually transition to a stand alone facility maybe it would be preferable to launch to a lower inclination and get more up mass from the US. Also would lower the total radiation dose since there would be fewer SAA transits for a lower inclination orbit.