Meet Starlab: Private Space Station Planned To Fly In 2027 (space.com) 38
Nanoracks, Voyager Space and Lockheed Martin announced today (Oct. 21) that they plan to get a free-flying private space station up and running in low Earth orbit (LEO) by 2027. Space.com reports: The outpost, called Starlab, is envisioned to be a tourist destination as well as a research and manufacturing hub that helps foster the growth of an off-Earth economy. "To meet U.S. government, international space agency and commercial needs in space, these industry leaders will develop Starlab specifically to enable the growing space economy and meet pent-up customer demand for space services such as materials research, plant growth and astronaut activity," the three companies said in a press release.
The four-person Starlab station will be lofted in a single launch, which is expected to take place in 2027. The outpost will feature a habitat module with 12,000 cubic feet (340 cubic meters) of internal volume, a power and propulsion element, a laboratory setup and a large external robotic arm to service payloads and cargo, according to Nanoracks' Starlab page. For comparison, the International Space Station (ISS) has 32,333 cubic feet (916 cubic meters) of internal volume, which is equivalent to that of a Boeing 747 jet.
The four-person Starlab station will be lofted in a single launch, which is expected to take place in 2027. The outpost will feature a habitat module with 12,000 cubic feet (340 cubic meters) of internal volume, a power and propulsion element, a laboratory setup and a large external robotic arm to service payloads and cargo, according to Nanoracks' Starlab page. For comparison, the International Space Station (ISS) has 32,333 cubic feet (916 cubic meters) of internal volume, which is equivalent to that of a Boeing 747 jet.
The Future? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is this the future of space stations? I hope so. I would not want space stations to be dominated by the Chinese which seems to be the direction things are heading. The miserly spending on space research by the US government is a national embarrassment.
Re: The Future? (Score:5, Insightful)
Privatizing is probably best. I agree it's been a national embarrassment with China but I suspect for us it's more efficient to privatize these cost. NASA contracts are an absurd racket.
I am most interested about long term plans to build out the facility. No doubt a privatized space station should be much larger and more compartmentalized. NASA operations, private research, and space tourism facilities will all need to be different. I wouldn't even be surprised if the station required a securities officer. If not, we can easily imagine a scenario where a tourist is either a government or corporate spy. Likewise potential sabotage.
Re: (Score:3)
This seems more to be funded by AirBnB fees. I wonder how much they charge for a romantic weekend? Nevermind, at my age, with my infraility, I'd just spend the entire weekend with a headache anyway.
Huh? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ain't no gulches in space, though.
Dream on major Tom (Score:2)
When the SLS Super Heavy Lift is so heavy that it still has to leave this earth once, talking about your own space station sounds like a joke.
Party like it's 1999.
Re:Dream on major Tom (Score:4, Informative)
Who really cares about the SLS Super Heavy Lift in the context of building a space station? A Falcon-9 Heavy can loft 50T+ to LEO - design your space station in 50T sections, and loft the sections on Falcon-9 Heavies. Nine such launches, and you're about the size of the ISS, which took 20+ years to reach current size. And I expect that nine Falcon-9 Heavies could be launched in three years with no trouble at all.
Re: (Score:1)
The fairing is too small. Design it to be lofted with Starship (terrible name as it ISN'T a Starship).
Alternately buy a Starship and pay SpaceX to put it in orbit. Allow them to remove the engines and remodel the propellant tanks into rooms for your station. A 50 meter x 9 meter station. You'll still need to mount solar panels and such but you will have a huge station that can be expanded by joining more Starships to it. Alternately get SpaceX to sell you a super heavy booster and launch it without a
Impressed (Score:2)
Assuming the actually do it.
Re:Impressed (Score:4, Informative)
It's inflatable. From the press release [prnewswire.com]:
The basic elements of the Starlab space station include a large inflatable habitat, designed and built by Lockheed Martin, a metallic docking node, a power and propulsion element, a large robotic arm for servicing cargo and payloads, and a state-of-the-art laboratory system to host a comprehensive research, science, and manufacturing capability.
I'm surprised inflatable space station modules aren't more widely used. It seems an easy way to get more, um, space.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm surprised inflatable space station modules aren't more widely used. It seems an easy way to get more, um, space.
Posting AC to avoid burning mod points. It has been tested: https://www.fishersci.com/us/e... [fishersci.com]
Re: (Score:1)
I'm surprised inflatable space station modules aren't more widely used. It seems an easy way to get more, um, space.
The main if not only company making them was Bigelow and they have shut down. Whether Bigelow plans to be reactivated once cheaper launchers (Starship) become available I can't say but hope it is. Either that or for SpaceX to buy them and make modules that will fit inside a Starship.
Re: (Score:1)
I'd like to know if they can 3d print in a vacuum. Then print your station like some are trying to print rocket fuel tanks. Once you have a core you could have multiple printers on various parts of the outside printing expansions.
I'd like to see the solar panels separate from the station so the station isn't constrained in expansion by the panels getting in the say.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, there's been one attached to the ISS for the last 5 1/2 years, with astronauts going in periodically to make sure it's holding up:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
It was originally due to stay on-station for 2 years starting in 2016, but was expanded to something like 4+ years. AFAIK, it's actually still up there and attached.
Everything I've heard is that it's performing to spec.
Re: (Score:3)
I’m most impressed that they figure they can launch a station 1/3rd the volume of the ISS in one go.
Sure, but the volume to mass ratio of the ISS is pretty dismal. Skylab was 360 cubic meters and it was launched in one go. The ISS was limited by the dimensions of the space shuttle cargo bay, which meant a lot of cylindrical modules about twice as long as they were wide. That's not efficient for interior volume. In theory, things were supposed to get more advanced over time. It was expected that they would experiment with welding and fabrication in space, for example, so that modules could be shipped up in
When do we get our space donuts? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are some plans for just that. Here's just one of them. [cnn.com]
I'm so happy commercial interests in space are picking up. I can't believe it's taken this long to start happening.
Re: (Score:2)
Looking at the concept art on that link, I have some pretty serious doubts. It shows what appear to be some sort of spaceplane docked on the ring, facing nose outward with the engine side docked on the ring. Maybe if those are lifeboats that makes some sense, but not if they're supposed to be regular traffic. Even then, no vehicle like that currently exists. If it were a bunch of spaceX dragons or Soyuz modules or something like that, I could maybe, sort of buy it. Obviously actual traffic would come in and
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine the concept art was put together by some graphic designer that didn't know how to read engineering specs. Of course, now that there are news stories out about it I can't find the original site that did have the technical details. If I manage to dig that up in the next day or so I'll pop the link in here.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is fine at first, when it's completely pie in the sky. If they're actually pitching dates by which it will be operational, then you would generally hope that they've done some extensive planning, which would include a lot of CAD/CAM and simulation work, which would mean actual physical plans for the station as well as plans for how to actually build it and perform repairs, etc. Take those escape pod spaceplanes, for example. We'll ignore that they're a completely new design rather than an existing and
Re: (Score:2)
Looks more like a Starship to me. Though it does look like it's attached at the wrong place - should be right on the axis of rotation....
Re: (Score:2)
Way too small to be Starship (compare to the ship docked in the hub in the picture), and way too many of them. Not to mention that they look more like downsized space-shuttles than Starship Apparently they're some kind of escape pods I didn't recognize the exact design, so I thought it was meant to be novel. It looks a bit like the front section of Astroclipper or one of the early space shuttle concept designs though. Then I realized that they actually look a lot like Dream Chaser. So, maybe the choice of e
The logical progression (Score:5, Insightful)
Many people think that the new Chinese space station shows that the CCP is leading the space race, but this is a mistake. The Chinese are merely aping what has been done by other governments, without realizing that the next stage has already begun.
Is Barry (Score:2)
Expandability? (Score:2)
I wonder how expandable it will be. If they can get the whole thing into orbit in one launch, would they be able to further expand it by launching expansion modules (of course dependent upon customer demand)? Or maybe it would be more effective to have multiple small stations rather than one larger one.
Also, I know volume is what's most important in these specs, but what is the internal surface area? You could have different surface area-to-volume ratios that would impact how useful the volume (or area) i
Re: (Score:2)
Given that they're using a modular system with inflatable tech? at only 3000 lbs per room?
I suspect starlab is just the beginning. Trump Orbital, will be there within 20 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, with modules that are closer to round rather than being skinny cylinders, you can have an internal space that you can subdivide with lightweight partitions that you can mount things to, so you don't have to rely on just the exterior walls. I looked for specs on the actual interior dimensions of that main inflatable spheroid, but I can't find anything. If the 340 cubic meters is all inside that, then we're talking about close to 26 feet across, which you could subdivide into three levels, for example.
Wrong name (Score:2)
The correct name for the facility is - or should be - the "Arthur C. Clarke Astronomical Observatory".
With Lockheed hardware development times???? (Score:2)
"meet pent-up customer demand for space services" (Score:2)
Pent-up means "closely confined or held back." When a 30 minute "ride" to "space" costs as much as a house, I'm not interested and there's nothing "pent-up" about it. Hey, I'm a huge Trek, SG-whatever, Galactica, and even Star Wars fan (original trilogy only) but I am also not gonna spend $100K+ for a short joyride into weightless orbit. Although, I'd spend that much for a permanent move to another M-class planet somewhere else in the galaxy that's got fewer stupid people around.
YES! (Score:1)
Small detail (Score:2)