Talk:Bigelow Commercial Space Station

2007 media
Here is the link to an old Wired magazine article on Bigelow space stations from 2007: Castles in the Air, 2007-10-23. Might be useful for historical info sometime for the article. And the graphic is one I had not seen previously. N2e (talk) 16:26, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Article needs a photo or other graphic image
This article could really use an image of what this proposed space station might look like. Both Bigelow and Boeing (re CST-100 crew capsule) have put out images in recent weeks. It would be helpful if someone who knows how to navigate the Wikirules on images would try to locate one or two images that would have a license appropriate to use on Wikipedia. I've added a reqimage tag. N2e (talk) 04:30, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The first image at this Boeing link, offered as "These images are available for editorial use by news media." by Boeing, may be a good one. Not sure if Wikipedia allows use of images with this sort of license/release.


 * You could claim fair-use, but it could not be uploaded to Commons as a free image because no mention is made regarding derivative rights. Basically, they're just saying "this is a commercial, copyrighted image, but we don't care if it is reused, since that's free publicity." If you want to use the first one on this article, I'll upload it with all the necessary bits. :) We were lucky that Bigelow Aerospace wanted to work with Wikipedia, and Chris uploaded those promo images of the modules with explicit permission for use on the site. — Huntster (t @ c) 04:54, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, thanks Hunster, by all means do upload what you can since you have good facility with the whole Wikipedia image game.


 * As to the second part of your comment, I'm not sure what you are talking about. Which images did Bigelow want to work with Wikipedia?  Who is Chris?  N2e (talk) 10:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Just about to get some sleep, so I'll take care of the image tomorrow. Oh, I just was referring to how Bigelow PR provided images for most of the BA modules through User:Spitwater. Even when the images remain non-free, having official blessing from the company is always good. — Huntster (t @ c) 10:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Huntster: You are da man.  I knew that you knew your way around WP image policy and practice.  And thanks for the explanation on Chris/User:Spitwater; that helps explain it.  N2e (talk) 16:42, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅. — Huntster (t @ c) 03:28, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Technical section
I stubbed out the start of a section on the Technical aspects of the NGCSS. I would very much appreciate others adding subsections as appropriate.

Secondly, there has been some doubt as to whether the Constellation-driven NASA LIDS (low impact docking system) would be available if and when needed by "private space" — e.g., see here, from 2009. I would also appreciate it if other editors would review the stub I put in on docking systems. It may very well be that Bigelow no longer plans the dual-ended Sundancers and BA-330s; if that is the case, my text will have at least provided an historical context for the docking system that is eventually in place on the NGCSS. N2e (talk) 19:43, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

October 2010 Bigelow announcements
I have not yet had time to digest all the news coming out, but there are now a number of mainline news organization stories about Robert Bigelow's recent trip to Alabama, the heart of some of the largest facilities of the United Launch Alliance (ULA), producer of Delta IV and Atlas V spacecraft, which may be used to launch and support the new space stations.

Yes, the announcements include plans Bigelow has for two new space stations, the first of "690 cubic meters" in volume, "operational in 2015" after seven rocket launches, and the second of "1,320 cubic meters, making it larger than the 1,160-cubic-meter ISS. It would launch and be assembled in 2016 and be operational in 2017." These are significant new plans, and are clearly encyclopedia-worthy for some of it to be synopsized in this article.

Two of the articles I found in a quick search are: I suspect other articles will be forthcoming in Aviation Week and other aerospace press in the next few days. The WP article has yet to be updated. Cheers. N2e (talk) 04:20, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Decatur may launch Bigelow’s big dream: Entrepreneur’s plans could double ULA work force, Decatur Daily, Decatur, Alabama, 2010-10-07, and
 * Manned commercial space flight could mean jobs for North Alabama, Huntsville Times, Huntsville, Alabama, 2010-10-06.

Lease pricing
We are beginning to see more news stories with snippets of Bigelow's pricing for various lease options. Let's start a list here of news sources that contain pricing-related information. We can create a pricing section in the article when we have sufficient snippets to start to outline a position. (If anyone has access to a source with the entire price list, please include that too!) N2e (talk) 02:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * "an option of $28,750,000 for a 30-day astronaut visit"   N2e (talk) 02:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Request to move
Since he's not planning on building just one maybe we should move the article to "Bigelow Commercial Space Stations".--Craigboy (talk) 04:26, 21 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Hmmm. I see your point.  Bigelow has definitely announced (I've seen it in at least one source) plans (hopes?) to build a second station, Bravo.  But since there are so many "plans" from many companies, and so few that push forward with funding, I could be quite happy leaving it singular for now, since he has the funding (on his own) to do only the first part of one station.  Bigelow, like many others in the space business, is dependent on signing commercial or government contracts to get the funding to support even the full Alpha station and the annual launches it would take to support that.  So on the whole, I'm thinking singular is better for now; going to plural when the second one is actually more than Powerpoint slides and exhibit posters.  On the other hand, the first station (Alpha) seems quite real and is, for now, the Bigelow Commercial Space Station.  N2e (talk) 18:46, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Minus the Sundancer modules, Bravo would use the same components as Alpha. Even though I'm also hesitant on how fast a second station would get off the ground but since there's stations planned besides Alpha a singular title seems to make information concerning them feel out of place.--Craigboy (talk) 21:44, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I hear you; there does seem a bit of cognitive disonance. What if we retitled the section from "Other Space Complexes" to something like "Future concepts" and then placed that as a subsection within the "Long-term plans" section?  For me, that would remove the cognitive disonance.  (And maybe "Long-term plans" should be retitled a bit too -- in all meaningful way,, they are "hopes" or "concepts" more than plans.  They may become something else over time, but they aren't much more than that right now.  Cheers.  N2e (talk) 22:11, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Seeing no objection, I have gone ahead and renamed the section to "Future space station concepts" for now. If a better section heading suggests itself, propose it.  But I do think this removes some of the cognitive dissonance that previously existed, as discussed above.  N2e (talk) 05:54, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Sundancer cancelled
The Sundancer module has been cancelled. This will result in major changes to the proposed space station. Consequently this article will also need significant changes to bring it up to date. Andrew Swallow (talk) 05:09, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Yep. Once reliable sources are available regarding the design changes, it'll be updated :) — Huntster (t @ c) 05:19, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Updating needed
This article needs some updating, it talks about events in 2014 as if they haven't happened yet. Quadrplax (talk) 20:54, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Bigelow Commercial Space Station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090414160626/http://spacex.com/launch_manifest.php to http://www.spacex.com/launch_manifest.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 06:41, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bigelow Commercial Space Station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100710092025/http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/orbital-complex-construction.php to http://bigelowaerospace.com/orbital-complex-construction.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:23, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Repeat of B330 issues
There is a B330 article. As it seems first B330 will be complete space station, do we want to keep both articles saying the same things, reduce to one article, or make this a historic article on when the commercial space station was supposed to be made of different modules, or some other plan? crandles (talk) 22:48, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bigelow Commercial Space Station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090505082817/http://www.astronautix.com/craft/cssalker.htm to http://www.astronautix.com/craft/cssalker.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927012816/http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news%2Faw040907p2.xml to http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news%2Faw040907p2.xml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:15, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Outdated and untended
Most in this article is a decade old or older and outdated, but still presented as actual. Just say sundancer! No discussion here as well for the last 5 years, issues were not adressed. If you can't keep it up to date, better delete it. 47.69.97.190 (talk) 09:47, 3 November 2022 (UTC)