NASA Awards $17.8 Million For An Inflatable Addition To The ISS

Never mind that pesky thing called radiation.....

Not a smart robot... not smart at all.

ISS orbilts 230 miles up in the area of the Van Allen Belts.

Balloons do not shield against radiation for sensitive electronics or humans.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_radiation_belt

Well, apparently you can operate a computer, in which case, you need to put your computer to use and actually research the Bigelow technology... Oh, and calling a Bigelow habitat "a balloon" really isn't an accurate description of what it is.

Kahvan,
Having doubts is not a bad thing. A lot of waste happens daily in the world.

Nothing is hindering you from providing links to your point.

I'm at work, and don't feel the need, nor do I have the time, to do basic research for you... but FYI; Bigelow has two placed two of these habitats in orbit at their own expense. The two habitats have been in orbit since around 2008... No radiation problems.

No radiation problems for the balloon or humans in the balloon?

And your comments and mine are for other readers too. If you make good points, I and other readers benefit, so don't suddenly act high and mighty to be so shy.

I still see no link in support of your vague replies.

..............................................

Yes this balloon "might" create a pressurize space to work in space, but my question is it safe for sensitive electronics and humans to stay in for a length of time and for how long?

I see no reason to research your vague criticisms. And in fact, in scientific inquiry, it's the one making a charge who must substantiate the charge. You charge these are merely balloons that couldn't protect people inside, even though 2 of these "balloons" have been in orbit and operational for over 4 years.

Oh, and I see NO LINKS to support your notions about safety... So, you're going to receive what you give... NOTHING.

NASA originally came up with inflatable habitats but abandoned the idea and Bigelow bought the patents and began improving the idea. They have had 2 in orbit for several years now and they are still going strong. According to the company website they are very good at shielding radiation and they inflatable habitats also are much better at taking an impact from space debris. The radiation is shielded by a skin on the habitat I believe.

http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/ba330.php

There's only one way to deal with people like Kehvan:

U mad bro?

Huh. An aerospace company with unmanned prototypes in orbit already thought about radiation before someone who posts the first comment on nearly every PopSci article brought it up. Who would've thought?

@Kehvan nice work showing that stupid user a thing or two. I am among many users who think he is a freaking moron.

@robot "Balloons do not shield against radiation for sensitive electronics or humans"...I love such a dumb statement from a truly dumb kid. I guess they couldn't make inflatable material out of different materials eh? Nice wiki link too. I enjoyed reading you bitch about how you wanted Kehvan to post links when your only link was wiki...only a child in high school would do that so clearly you are either a child or just stupid (I tend to think both).

I also enjoyed your statment "Having doubts is not a bad thing" You are right, but having moronic doubts is a bad thing which clearly you have had. Keep up the good work proving how stupid you are ;)

OH one last thing to Cookies...the one way to deal with people like Kehvan (smart people who clearly can think logically) is to act like a dumbass? Nice work! Glad to know Robot isn't the only child on this site who can't think worth a damn.

JRS ONE,
HA HA, I like you. I do enjoy commenting, happy..... sigh.

Maybe these balloon devices will be develop so well we can actually go to the moon, shielded from the deadly cosmic radiation. However, until then, we will just have to live with the staged broadcast NASA provide us.

Yes, just staying below the cosmic radiation close the Earth is a good place to test Bigelow's Inflatable Space Modules. It certainly should work. ;)

And to the rest of you, I will report to the Annunaki police, so there, pltzzzzzz!

It's about time.

I randomly saw an episode of Martha Stewart where she took a tour of NASA and they were testing these inflatable habitats. The show had something to do with fabric and new technologies. This had to be in the early/mid 90's because the ISS wasn't even in orbit and she hadn't been to jail yet....

Bigelow's Inflatable Space Modules decorate by Martha Stewart approved by NASA, yea, that a work, sure. ;)

I dont thin Nasa would approve a ballon that wasnt humanly safe. When doing research you should use scholorly websites only, with good credentials, anything with a .gov, .org, .net etc.

So about 10 minutes of research turns up that, in addition to the advantages of expandable volume and lighter weight, NASA is interested in inflatables SPECIFICALLY FOR their ability to protect from radiation. Though the aluminum skin of the ISS stops radiation fairly well, one problem is that in doing so it generates secondary radiation that is also dangerous. It's been estimated that for missions outside the Earth's protective magnetosphere, secondary radiation coming from a thin aluminum skin would be more dangerous than the radiation that it's stopping. Because of this, lightweight non-aluminum skins are probably essential for any long duration missions to the Moon, L2, Mars, etc.

I for one am happy to see that Bigalow is getting some business for his modules. He has put alot of money and effort into developing this concept. I am looking forward to reading the press release tomorrow.

@Robot

The Van Allen belt doesn't extend to the altitudes that the ISS orbits at... as you might notice from reading the first paragraph, second sentence in the wikipedia article you provided...

iambronco,
I hope you enjoy your stay at the Bigelow's Inflatable Space Modules decorate by Martha Stewart, ta ta!

Awww what is the matter robot nothing logical to say in your defense? Two additional people just called you out including one that mocked the only link you provided (wiki pfft) and you don't have a single decent response. It is a shame this site is flooded with morons such as yourself. Such a waste of human intelligence...or lack thereof in this case.

Perhaps you believe everything that said to you.
Perhaps you believe these people have power or authority of you.

LoL. Take care. ;)

This technology looks interesting. I wasn't too convinced the first time I heard about it. I think there could be many hurdles to overcome though but it seems like a reasonable idea to connect a module to the ISS for further testing. Perhaps our future is not full of balloon structures but it will at least be a temporary solution until something better comes along (just like a tent).

@RobotSux
I'd rather read Robot's comments any day over yours. Don't comment if you don't have anything to say about the article. Your comments and choice of name suggests that it is you that is the child.

Robot made an initial comment about the article and Kehvan, rather than adding his insight, decided to insult Robot several times. Your usefulness was limited to approval of Kehvan's insults. Oh and by the way, Wikipedia is an excellent resource and for example, Robot's link has many references for you to look over (got a problem with any of those?). Doing one's own research with Wikipedia is far better than swallowing the company line. "We believe our space station will offer greater radiation and ballistic protection." Sounds like part optimism and part sales pitch.

Robot and those supporting robots rediculous original comment just astonish me.... Kehvan and jrs one have been spot on...

1. If you have an question/concern or epiphany about an emerging product or concept sitting in front of your computer 20 years after the concept was originally discussed, odds are it has been discussed between the degreed engineers and physicists working on the product...

2. Like stated above...doing 5 min of upfront research would have answered most if not all of your questions

Robot and those like him just reinforce one of my favorite quotes on a daily basis

"only two things are infinite. The universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former" - Einstein

IIS is in LEO (low earth orbit) and does NOT!!! come close to touching the Van Allen belts!!!

I don't know where you get your information to where you seem so certain and willing to assert so confidently such a false notion!

If ISS touched the belts, those astronauts would either all be dead, dying, sick or limited to missions lasting days or weeks.

There is nothing more annoying and harmful to society than someone who's picked up a few loose facts from random sources and now thinks they know it all.

Wrong ... and the fact that I have to point it out to you is quite telling. This site is for folks who don't do research and Kehvan should have corrected Robot rather than insult him. What part don't you get?

Far out,

First off, Robots first comment was insulting in itself to those designing this (and engineers everywhere like myself) by inferring that they would not think of such a basic design parameter as radiation...

Second, if you don't like to research things that's fine....but don't expect to get friendly answers to questions or statements helping those who choose not to do a bit of digging first before asking questions or making uneducated comments

I am not surprised you would rather read the rants of a moron than someone who is among the many who are tired of his crap...I expect that from someone who clearly isn't logical in his arguments either. My choice of name isn't really that childish considering I am tired of his crap but feel free to keep thinking that if that makes you happy. As for his "initial comment" it was pure nonsense and an insult to people with a pulse and IQ. Wikipedia is not an excellent source and any educator from basic high school to high levels of learning will tell you that. "Robot's link has many references for you to look over (got a problem with any of those?)" No I have a problem with people posting wiki and not even bothering to read their own crap (as Kehvan clearly pointed out but you clearly didn't bother to acknowledge. Oh and as for swallowing the companies tag line...as I told robot doubts are expected and should be encouraged and analyzed (It is the lack of doing so that has resulted in devastating consequences such as say the challenger explosion) but doubts without any basis that are flung out wildly for attention are useless. However, keep supporting mediocre comments that lack any intellect; It is expected from someone who actually thinks wiki is a reliable source for research.

On a final note: "This site is for folks who don't do research" Actually, and I think many would agree, this sight itself doesn't even do a good job at doing research. They often put up poorly edited and poorly written reports that lack description and clarity. So you multiply that with the number of people who can't even use logic (Robot) and people who think wiki is a good source...even if they don't read what they post (Robot and Far Out) you have a nice recipe for perfect mediocrity.

To all those who are tired of people like Robot and Far Out I have always appreciated your thoughtful responses and the facts you present that aren't from a shoddy website. Cheers!

Seems to me that anything we can put up there that has low mass and gives ANY degree of improvement is better than what we have up there now.
I've been waiting for years now, for Bigelow to get up there, and being the case that inflatables do have a currently unknown top end value on top of known benefits; they certainly deserve partnership funding after all their work during these decades of prep. This is what NASA was created for.

I wonder about a ramscoop, picking up escaping near-Earth gases which are then discharged after becoming irradiated. Seems like the near-Earth environment should be made to work for us in every way possible, and if an actual flow system could be designed for it, it could even extend the safe-use lifetime of some of our other irradiated equipment. Even a year or two of use over what we get now would be significant, with current mass-lifting costs. If a flow system were robust enough, it could even give some emergency thrust, but a passive system that continually increases overall livable conditions on orbit is worthwhile in itself.

I am so loved. What a nice day! ;)

PopSci is now just another pointless, roudy blog like Gizmodo. A TMZ-like steam of nonsense masquerading as a science blog.

@goblue8522
okay, so someone makes a casual comment about an article here and you feel personally insulted despite having nothing to do with it? More so, you decide to speak for engineers everywhere. Try not to be so sensitive. You can go to any other article and see the same thing so it must be really hard on you. Also you seem to misunderstand the name of this site. Say it to yourself quietly. Like a few posters in the past, you seem to suggest that the comments section is only for folks to praise and give thanks (since we are all unqualified to question the inventors).

@RobotSux
another fellow that was insulted by a simple comment about the article. Do you know goblue8522? You continue to spew useless comments which seems to be what you were ranting about in the first place. You've attacked Robot (who made a valid comment on topic), Wikipedia (an excellent resource for anyone but your type), then me (for standing up for Robot) and finally PopSci (why are you here?). If you have nothing to say about the article, don't say anything (thankfully your last comment was indeed a "final note") ... and change your name if you want to be taken seriously. That's something a 12-year old would do.

Getting back to the article, there is no question that radiation is an issue. They will be testing the module to see if it performs "potentially" better than metal structures. One should then assume it could also be potentially worse. It will be quite a while yet even after the test (2015 - 2017) before we see if NASA certifies it as safe for the ISS inhabitants. Sounds like they won't be taking too many chances with the folks up there during this first test. Hopefully it passes though, and moves the ball forward and towards a Mars mission.

@Robot
there was nothing wrong with your original comment which makes the following comments quite sad and pathetic. Those folks would have you believe they know more than you when in fact, they know nothing about it at all!

Far Out Man, yes, Robot's first comment WAS flawed. He made the assumption that Bigelow engineers had not considered radiation issues in its design. Radiation abatement was not mentioned which is NOT the same as it being ignored as Robot implied.

I find it so cute how you defend the little child :) Just FYI, most people here aren't insulted by a simple comment but by the slew of useless crap that he writes constantly on this sight without any thought at all. I did attack him..and no he didn't make a valid comment...at all....as many people have already pointed out but you (clearly failing to lack the basic human capacity to think) haven't picked up on. Change my name? NAh, I think I like it as it is. I have other names I post on (which I won't be filling you in on). Now if YOU want to be taken seriously, maybe not defend the brainless on this site. Do you work for PopSCi? You should as half their writers seem as brain dead and useless as those you defend. I think you would fit right in! Good luck with the application.

@nkfro
making a casual comment wondering about radiation is not "wrong". He simply voiced what almost anyone would have upon hearing about this technology the first time (anyone else want to admit that?). Anyone can claim that the inventors have already addressed such issues but the real answer is that they don't know yet. Industry constantly pushes technology that can have great benefits but which could also potentially have safety concerns. Often there is a trade off of which we, the public are unaware. There are many examples in our daily lives so it is natural to wonder about such things here. If you are going to call such a comment wrong, no one will ever want to make a comment (i.e. they are all wrong)!

@RobotSux
you must ask yourself why Robot's comments bother you so much. Most people that come to this site probably don't have a technical background. This site is so popular because of it's writers and format ... perhaps the best site on the net for bringing science to the masses. There are plenty of technical sites on which perhaps you and I would feel silly making any useful comment, but here we should feel comfortable making casual comments based on little knowledge. A more knowledgeable poster can offer a correction in a respectful way, even though they probably don't know the real answer either. As for your multiple accounts, I certainly hope you are not using them to support each other! That would be a silly childish game. As for myself, I certainly don't work for PopSci. I couldn't write myself out of a wet paper bag. The staff are all skilled writers and I'm sure you would not offer up your own work in their place.

Actually, no I don't have to ask myself that. In fact, you don't have to ask that because I have made it very clear why his comments bother myself and many others on here. Also, there is a clear line between people who don't have a technical background and ignorant people or those who write crap just to hear themselves speak. Oh and this is the best site for bringing science to the masses? Jesus that is a scary, scary thought. I know many Americans are stupid, but try not to encourage it will you?

No I don't use my multiple accounts to support myself...I need only to rely on those folks on here who have common sense and don't enjoy reading bullshit from Robot and those that support his crap.

The staff here are skilled writers? Wow...are you that blind or are you just that ignorant yourself? I've read countless posts from people who mock them for their lack of proper editing, proper use of real research or even their constant lack of in depth analysis. Seriously the fact you called them skilled is scary. I've read works from high school students with more writing capabilities than half the crap that gets posted here. It is people like you that look at sites like this and go "WOW this is good!" that keeps pushing this country further into the void. Congrats on that...Oh and I wouldn't offer my work up because unlike those that run this site...I know my limitations and wouldn't want my half-assed work to get published even if ignorant folks as yourself would praise it. It is called standards something you seem not to be familiar with. If you need proof open your eyes.

Here is a huge example of how this site fails: Sandy hook massacre happened and the DAY it happened this site had the nerve to post a quick article on gun control. It wasn't even scientific in nature and was poorly written (make a note of how many political articles this site posts that has absolutely nothing to do with science).

If you need more get your head out of your ass, open your eyes and maybe go educate yourself a little before giving unearned praise.

Farout,

First, you are truly a great example of the ignorance a frighteningly large percentage of Americans exhibit. Please, read a book, even if it one with lots of pictures. (popsci is not the place to become educated in scientific matters)

Back to his radiation comment, it was plain out an ignorant comment.

Lets see if I can help you understand why (not likely)... Think about if this was a story about someone designing a New boat.... His original comment would be equivalent to one saying...

"Never mind that pesky thing called buoyancy"

It is such a basic and inherent design parameter that it should be assumed those designing it considered its effects

You obviously can't accept the more likely scenario ... that Robot simply likes to comment on the articles he reads here. Your attempts to stifle him are wrong and sad. Now I will enjoy those comments even more knowing how much they bother you. Also, I hope you hold yourself up to the same high standard you would like to impose on everyone else. Please let us know your other account names so that we can judge your comments too. Hiding behind multiple aliases makes you look scared.

@goblue8522/RobotSux
LOL ... if you are going to make a claim that you don't use aliases to support each other, at least try very hard to make each of them sound like different people! There are at least four indicators that suggest you are the same person. How about coughing up the other names too ... just make additional comments here so you don't have to admit to anything.

How did you know!?

Quite the swing and a miss

And yes, as a lead engineer that designs a very critical safety feature in your car....*hint* it rhymes with cakes..... I do hold a very high standard for myself and for the lives in my hands

I find it funny how other people have called you out and you simply cannot accept how stupid you sound. No, they aren't me and no I won't be coughing up the names because clearly you have some stalker tendencies which are a little disturbing. Are you going to imply I am all the above people going against you? Do it, sound ever worse than you do. All those indicators are coincidences and I will simply not let you stalk my other account.

I do hold my self up to those high standards as it keeps me fresh and helps me feel like I am doing something good for this nation when there are so many stupid people living here acting like they know something when clearly that is not the case.

P.S My other aliases have all been banned due to posting crap about PopSCi so I will give you the banned ones since you can't stalk those: Apoca-Risk, Transprecious, and Foomypoo. All those were my older account I simply am not the above people as you are trying to imply. Why would I call myself out for having multiple accounts, post to support myself and then deny that? The fact that I am the one who admitted to having some other accounts (no more than 2 at a time ever) would show that...but once again that would require thinking intelligently and not assuming as you seem to love to do. Have fun with that.

However, I am done arguing with you as this is like arguing with a child. I wouldn't argue with my 4 year old nephew, or my 12 year old niece so why would I argue with someone with the intelligence that matches them? You can enjoy knowing myself and others get pissed off at Robot and the like's ignorant comments but on behalf on those in popsci who are tired of it I know we don't care. Do those who are famous care when white trash people post stupid shit on youtube, twitter or facebook? No...so why would we care when trash gets enjoyment out of us? On a final note have you ever read to Kill a Mocking Bird? The one lesson (of many) I will always remember is the poor white trash family put down the African Americans because even the bottom wishes to think they aren't the bottom. So your attempts to make intelligent people feel less than you without any actual evidence is hilarious. See you around!

Omg GoBlue you posted 3 minutes before me you MUST be me! ...Even though I am the one who admitted I have multiple accounts and clearly put the idea in the idiot's head which is all part of some conspiracy to win an argument against an idiot!

Hahaha I hope you have had as much fun listening to the dribble of the mindless as I have. I weep for America's future I really do...

@goblue8522/RobotSux
you created your accounts a day apart. Your paragraph structures are almost identical. You know, not that many folks use ellipsis in their comments, especially at the end of a paragraph. Oh, and for two apparently intelligent people, you both strangely assumed I was American. Should I go on? Also, why would you have to pretend to hide that you design brakes! Wow, you got banned repeatedly by a site you dislike and you keep coming back. Nice! Anyhow, I'm not trying to pick on you. Just trying to figure out where you are coming from. Are ill-informed comments annoying? Sure, sometimes they are. Still, I think it is better to answer someone respectfully if their comment was on topic (open season on trolls). In some cases, it may actually be a young person that is commenting and what purpose is served by slamming them for their interest?

He says only noticing any similarities after I told him I had other accounts...I don't design breaks...in fact I suck at mathematics which is a key part of engineering...I would LOVE to be that intelligent but sadly I don't think I ever will be. You believe in conspiracy theories don't you?

Go read above Kehvan, Robot (your lover), Kaysea81 (used ellipsis at the end of a sentence), and YOURSELF all used ellipsis. Should I go on? They aren't uncommon to use you just CHOOSE to see what you want to see. If I never said anything you wouldn't be saying anything now would you? There I go again...arguing with the idiot. Hey you know gullible isn't in the dictionary?

Thanks for mentioning kaysea81! By the way, that was a strange comment from that account that seems artificial/contrived. I hadn't noticed that account too was created at the same time as yours. Three accounts created for one short article! Yes, I noticed the odd abundance of ellipse usage ... especially those three account's usage at the end of paragraphs (not sentences). By the way, they are of questionable use (I like them though) but especially so if you continue on after using one as a "trailing off into silence".

Would you also be behind the Robot38, Robot39 accounts? Whatever the case, why spend so much time with pointless exercises. You seem smart enough although not very good at deception. Knocking your own intelligence in the last post was an over-the-top attempt to separate your accounts. It is too unusual a tactic.

Anyhow, looks like no one is discussing the article anymore. I'll just check back for your response.

HAHAHAHA Wow...this is very pathetic. Oh yea you caught me...next time I wonder how morons fall for conspiracy theories I will remember this conversation. I really am not any of those people but have fun thinking I am. Hey, whatever floats your boat right?

ROFL.... snort.... tanx! Ha Ha!

You all use parenthetical expressions often in your writing. You're all clearly the same person (as I must be as well).

Ahh Bronco you have had your account for over a year...you then, but logical analysis, must be my other account I speak of that I wanted to keep hidden. You are the tenth me I have found on this website congratulations on being me! :-D Hey the good news is if all ten people are me there are a lot more intellectual people on this site then eh? BAM!

On a non-goofy note I agree. I made mention of another account and the dummy got it into his head that any other account that uses similar language usage and sentence structure, and anyone that recently made an account must therefore be me. It is hilarious if you think because he never would have even noticed the similarities unless I POINTED them out...sad really. Enjoy being me now! Don't ruin my name ;) haha.

In cases like this, it is difficult to prove something conclusively. However, one can use circumstantial evidence if there is enough to form some type of conclusion.

The two accounts I mentioned were created at the same time for this article. Not to comment about the article itself but to respond to Robot.

The paragraph structures of both are quite similar including the use of ellipses at the end of paragraphs.

Both suggested I was American without any hint or mention of nationality on my part.

RobotSux, not only admitted to having many accounts but also gave away that he had other current accounts while also suggesting that all his other accounts had been banned.

Both posters suggested that they were insulted by Robot's comments and elsewhere also claim to "hold high standards".

Both posters refer to me as Far Out rather than Far Out Man.

When challenged about the similarities, RobotSux claims not to be intelligent enough to be an engineer (yet freely calls others stupid and even calls himself intellectual in his lastest post).

That's good enough for me. Decide for yourself. It will remind me to be cautious when reading comments as there are probably lots of posters that have multiple accounts. Why get friends and/or others to agree with you when you can just agree with yourself!

Once again you ONLY noticed this things when I MENTIONED them myself...why would I mention them and then defend against your accusations so much? I have nothing to hide but my long-term account which I use to post more mature postings on this site. When I need to be more radical, such as when I am telling PopSCi to fuck off for posting certain articles (i.e posting gun control the DAY OF the sandy hook massacre) then I use a secondary account. I never have more than two accounts at one time (my long-term one and one for radical posting which is Robotsux at this current point in time)

I have no need to defend myself with multiple accounts when people step up and do that on their own. You think other's don't make accounts quickly for a quick bashing or posting? I guarantee you I am not alone in my thinking with this one. As I said before your conclusions are purely coincidence and I PROMISE you these other people are not me. In fact, I would admit to it at this point simply to get you to shut the fuck up because I'd rather argue with an idiot then listen to one rant about thinking something about me when he is so far off the mark its scary. When I get this account banned (as I am sure will happen when I piss off PopSci again) You will be the first to know my newest account. Sound good? Other than that I cannot tell you more as there is simply nothing left to say. I give you my word you are wrong but the rest is up to you.

On a side note I have posted on at least 5 different articles (some you have posted on) pointing out how so many others use ellipses, space their paragraphs the same and speak the same and many of them are recent users. So unless you are ready to suggest I post randomly on ten plus accounts (ten different e-mails) then I have nothing else to say. Enjoy.

@RobotSux
I will take your word for it. It seems to be important to you. As to the other thing, I would like to point out that you inferred that I was a "stalker" earlier simply because of my comments. That description seems better suited to describe your behaviour. Finally about the idiot thing ... that too is illogical as you've already admitted to not having my intellectual capacity. Most enjoyable.

The word 'baloney' is mightily close in form to the word 'balloon'.

FaroutMan said:

"nkfro,making a casual comment wondering about radiation is not "wrong". He simply voiced what almost anyone would have upon hearing"

The key statement is 'what almost anyone would have'. When common sense is ignored, incorrect statements are made. An opinion is wrong if it is inaccurate. Robot's statement implies that either no effort or insufficent effort has been applied to radiation abatement. The fact that inflatable modules are being considered for use to expand the ISS make sense ONLY if the inflatable modules are capable of protecting the ISS crew from dangerous types and levels of radiation commonly found at the ISS.
My point stands.