Have to admit that being able to help build something like the ISS, and then decades later, get to build your own space station using the ISS as it's base, and then leave, like a child leaving home, would be all kinds of awesome.
@@dixonhill1108 NASA did all the initial research, development, and testing. They discovered how humans can live and work in space, They developed materials, technology and procedures for things that had never been done before. Of course this would be more expensive than what would be required decades later by the private companies who would build something based all that existing science and technology.
As an old guy, seeing the new guys making the same mistakes over and over again was not that great. Old doesn't mean you have less passion, in fact most of the new guys seen to think it was just another job. I would rather have a team that really wanted to be there.
@@RS-ls7mm experienced dudes vs new dudes that need experience , but i dont think we should risk this for some new dudes to get some experience. so the execs should be more experienced
Yes experience in making things 10 times more expensive than they need to be. 1 module a year says it all, these units are gonna be incredibly expensive and come in over budget. I'm now know why Elon is trying to get Trump elected.
Axiom is not the first nor the only commercial module docked to the ISS. The Bigelow Expandable Activity Module (BEAM) has been docked to the ISS since 2016...
NASA has to plan with what actually exists. All this tech is pretty much proven and available NOW. These guys have actually BUILT and operated a station before. All these new guys are brilliant and driven, but like Elon, they rarely see the problems that only experience reveals. Down the road, Starship will revolutionize trips to orbit and give an order of magnitude of extra payload and space, but it is still in development. And Elon Time is Elon Time. NASA has to be more hardheaded. If they don't get something up now, they may find their funding drying up. No bucks, no Buck Rogers.
@@i-love-space390 Axiom should hope to work with SpaceX, not for some crazy terraforming or "civillian mars base" project, (both are horrible ideas and not worth it.) For the reliable launch vehicles. Also, I appreciate your view on the current state of the project.
What, are you saying he didn't watch the movie? 😂😂 Technically, all of that was part of the same space race, although Eisenhower and Kennedy were both more worried about orbital weapons. Don't tell my brainwave physics teacher that though. He thinks he knows everything.
You forget the inflatable Bigelow Expandable Activity Module, still docked to the ISS and serving as an additional storage space. Sadly, Bigelow suspended operations two years ago, but this _was_ the first module by a private company to be docked to the ISS.
@@kirishima638 Expandabilty. It would stretch and hold more crew for later deployments. It would be very strong beyond Kevlar and bounce micro-meteoroids off or trap them in the baffles. Self-healing to reduce unnecessary EVAs. Bigger objects might require a course alteration to the orbit. I’m sure someone from Bigelow could explain it better. Not aluminum. It would just bounce radiation all around the cramped crew compartment and killing them. We lucked out during Apollo missions that there weren’t any CMEs from the sun during the moon landings or the astronauts wouldn’t be dying of old age like they have been. Charlie Duke and Harrison Schmidt I think are still around.
Great info. On one hand I'm glad they are utilizing the wisdom and experience of people who are exceptionally qualified. On the other hand I worry that this was a no bid attempt to create a clique where they take care of their friends and expect to be taken care of themselves in the future.
They need to step away from the Congress model . You really need the best of who SpaceX have left available … Axiom and BO are just not efficient or excellent enough for the job …
I'd rather accountable entities push forward in space than unaccountable private entities. Do you really trust billionaires with our space future, given their track record of thoroughly trashing the Earth with no regard for anything but $$$.
@@JackoNorm So... people that run businesses are greedy and evil but people that work in government don't care about money and are angels. Interesting world view you have there.
What I didn't see you talk about was the orbital maneuvering section and the refueling system. Without periodic boosting, the new Station will decay. It also needs a system to orient the station in orbit, either with powerful gyros or an RCS system (or both, since gyros eventually develop too much spin.) The RCS needs refueling. If there is no thrust and control module, which spacecraft in the US inventory will be re-boosting the Station? Dragon 2 has the OMS facing the wrong direction. I think the Starliner may have the re-boost capability. Not sure if Dream Chaser has any nose thruster that can re-boost, since it docks the Service Module to the station.
Every Axiom module will have navigation and propulsion/reboost capability. They have to, because Axiom doesn't own a Space Shuttle! ;) Whatever launch vehicle they use, the module itself will still need to be responsible for final rendezvous and approach to ISS.
I'm all for hosting scientific experiments in LEO, however, what we really need is a true manufacturing plant up there in LEO which can manufacture the parts needed for a much larger manufacturing plant in L1 or L2. That plant would basically build out larger spacecraft that wouldn't need to go back and forth out of Earth's gravity well. It's like building a shipyard.. you wouldn't build one out in the middle of nowhere without access to the actual ocean; nor are you expected to haul a cruise ship (or other large oceanic craft) back to being land-bound.
That idea is impractical at this point. Just the difficulty of fashioning metal in space would be multiplied not to mention miles of wiring having to be done by a weightless person.
@@macc240038 It isn't as impractical as you might think. There are some private companies out there developing and testing large scale manufacturing robotics. The "first ship" and facility would be a pain to get going, sure.. but where do you think all of the future metals would come from? Not Earth, for sure =)
That test stand had a long time to cure. These additions are going to seal the deal for quite a few launches. Great job SpaceX and all of you fighting the good fight on the ground and being our eyes and ears for this journey! ❤🎉
All who works in NASA, also knows, EARTH IS A CLOSED SYSTEM, NOBODY CANNOT LEAVE EARTH, THERE IS NOWHERE TO GO. They all know it, yet willingly deceive. + they are in the masonry club - that says it all. NASA deals with CGI and Hollywood basements, making “SPACE”, to deceive mankind.
I like the idea of the transparent bubble at the bottom of the station. I would rather see one big enough to have a lounge kind of seating area for people to sit and socialize. I would be like a getaway from the closed in feeling the Space station may create. It might be a way for people to relax and destress. I think that once Space X solves all of their problems with Star Ship and make it a complete success, they should start focusing on ways to create much larger space stations with all of the capabilities that humans need to spend years in orbit around other planets and moons in our solar system. These capabilities must include these top features: 1) Gravitational spin. 2) Complete protection from solar radiation. 3) Recycling systems. 4) Several dock ports (that might just be mainly for small shuttles) 5) A second smaller space station in orbit near the main space station that would act as a parking lot for other ships that wish to visit the main station. The second station would not need Gravitational Spin, or as much radiation shielding. Visitors would only be staying at the smaller station for a few days at a time. The smaller station would also act as an emergency place to go if there was a major catastraphy on the main station. 6) There would need to be greenhouses for growing on the station. 6) There would need to be a medical bay. 7) There would need to be accomodations for hundreds of people at the very least.
At that point it’d be easier to just build a hotel on the moon Also, you could just have the parking lot attached to the non-rotating middle of the gravity ring, with a bearing or whatever
@@oberonpanopticon I was thinking that the shuttles and emergency escape pods could be mounted on that area that has no spin. Perhaps 1 or 2 larger ships could be docked there as well.
The most important thing is the decades of experience that the people at AXIOM and at NASA have with the ISS. The solar panels specifically are very outdated and inefficient, and I imagine that's the case for the majority of the technology on-board, but the experience in operating and constructing it is invaluable
@@ivonniebaby The panels on the ISS have only just this year been updated (& another update is coming), so while the old ones are probably well past use-by, the new ones should still be quite serviceable.
Assuming that the Axiom leadership is dedicated to the mission and not "take the money and run" as ppl in executive positions of other companies have done in the past (golden parachutes), then the company goals of building the new station are admirable and obtainable. 😎
Nh, you don't hit and run at that level. You take the money and build a revolving door for all current and future bureaucrats to continue sucking taxpayer sweat and blood after retirement.
@ThisNoName hadn't thought of it that way 🤔. Truth be told, they do that too, and ppls buddies enter and exit that revolving door. It's a fraternity, if you're "in the club." 🫣
@@Tinman_56 Guess it's up to SpaceX and how much and how soon Elon can deliver his sub 10 million starship launch promise. Rumor says it might be up 300 tons to LEO while still fully reusable. At that level even the swamp masters couldn't keep straight face with their funny business.
I've often wondered if moving the ISS into a junkyard orbit with plans to eventually let another innovator melt down the already refined metals would be more useful than launching new stuff at $10k per kilo
I'd rather they keep it around and reuse the modules for future projects. Sure it's old, but the modules could still be repurposed as extra crew or storage space.
@@Uzarran yup - send in robotic machines to continue using parts while human requirements could be powered down to save energy - possibly having it as a rescue point for other space going hmans in case of emergencies.
@@Uzarran IIRC, due to the long duration in space, it's likely that the modules are coldfusion welded together. separation might be quite hard... outside of the newer modules...
@@Uzarran As I understand it, the 2030 ISS retirement is driven by the fact that the aluminum structure has a safe lifetime based on metal fatigue (and maybe radiation exposure, but I don't know). That being said, if ISS is retiring anyway, Axiom would be crazy not to scour the inside of the ISS for usable hardware before they detach. One big exception to the ISS module lifetime is the PMM (formerly one of 3 MPLMs... Google it), which was designed to stand up to *multiple* Shuttle launches for ISS cargo resupply, and is now used as a permanent storage closet. If you look closely at some of the renderings of Axiom's free-flying station, you see a remarkably ISS-looking module that's about the right size... I wonder what's happening with the other 2 MPLM modules that are still on the ground? :)
To be honest I *really* want the current ISS to be saved, not destroyed, even if at present it is only mothballed somehow. Surely it could be boosted into a MEO and left? Assuming we survive as a species for the next decades, it could be one of the first items in humanity's Space Archaeology museum! Also, getting all that mass into orbit has cost a lot, surely there will be a use for it even if it cannot be realized right now?
Axiom modules will now doubt catch a ride with Space X, either on a falcon 9, falcon heavy, or a starship. I think NASA should pay space X to build them a station, but the more the merrier I guess. We probably should have 3 or 4 different stations being built simultaneously in case one does not work, goes over budget or takes too long...
Not a bad gig; take the government paycheck, get your head around NASA's intentions, then 'leverage' your expertise (I'm being polite here) and rake the big bucks.
@@smoothlyrough512 I'm sure it's not all worn out and the folks building the new segments oversaw the development of the old ones. I guarantee they will be salvaging equipment before decommissioning the ISS.
Why cant you add booster rockets to take the old space station into a further orbit so we can still use it instead of letting it burn up and losing all the material and cost.
It's regularly re-boosted as it is. It has to be. So will the Axiom station. Orbital decay isn't the point. Just as with Mir (and like any car, plane, or ship), it's reaching the point where age and wear and tear is making it more trouble/cost than it's worth to maintain. Eventually you cut your losses, and go to something new, including new integrated technology. Nothing lasts forever.
What I find interesting in the comments to this video is how anti-human crewed space flight many of them are. May I remind people, all major US companies which are doing or planning human crewed space flight receive government funding through NASA. That includes SpaceX and Blue Origin.
Guess they didn't learn their lessons from Apollo one? Padded walls, with electric lighting and wiring right behind the padding is a recipe for a space fire. Just as lethal in space, as on the ground. Hab one needs massive redesign. No padded room. Geez. A little common sense goes a long way, Axium. As for that glass bucket, it'll blow out, as soon as it passes the Carmon line. Way too much glass, or polycarbonate, and not enough structural metal. That's why the cupola on ISS has smaller view ports, and MMOD shield shutters.
Using the ISS to build a new space station sounds promising. But using yesterday's technology is not always a good idea... NASA boss Bill Nelson is beginning to look a little fossilized. He was largely responsible for ensuring that the SLS was built for $23.8 billion by resurrecting the few remaining RS-25 Space Shuttle engines. Older people have valuable experience but this tends to make them less open to creative out-of-the-box thinking. BTW I'm a 77-year old AMAB 🤣
No, no they should not have. The space shuttle was the worst thing to ever exist in terms of space exploration. Nasa's own director admits they set us back 50 years in terms of space exploration.
Im happy to know they're not just sending rich people up who would get in the way of the actual crew. Nice to know they are actually doing something that helps everyone plus is give Axiom more funding to build more cool stuff
I bet on SpaceX. With a custom non-reusable second stage, one starship would easily double the usable volume of the entire ISS. All you need is build a hub, dock a dozen of these one-way modules, than two regular starships as shuttle, maybe a bunch of escape pods if people are really paranoid.
@@anoniemw.222 When you launch something that last decades, reusability of the vehicle isn't the main concern. Starship is still big, you just need larger pressurized living quarters, smaller tanks and simpler engines because it's not coming back.
IMO, Space X can always develop a fairing to fit on the "StarBooster" for the big bucks. There's enough lifting capacity on the Booster anyway... so if they can develop a orbital delivery vehicle for Overt-Sized equipment, they are literally the Antonov of Spaceflight (Reference to the AN-225) and therefore relatively safe until the other guy get his rocket to start flying... then again... NASA need SpaceX to actually fly... Artemis literally hangs on that...
@@ThisNoName But half the ship is feul tanks and removing those in orbit will be quit hard. Also the engines need to be brought down with another flight. It seems for me way better having spaceX launch one big infatable module. That would really have a lot of space and maybe could even spin for gravity.
@@anoniemw.222 Half of that fuel are used for cancelling out all that orbital speed so the ship can come back to earth, and half of the engines are designed with landing in mind. None of those are necessary if it's a one way trip. You can either have a detachable second stage that ditched like any other rockets, cost is not a factor if the main module stays up for decades. Even without separate second stage, you can still shrink the tanks by half, probably 3 smaller vacuum engines, no heatshield and landing accessories, effectively double the pressurized living space.
There is nothing wrong with old guys and experience in leadership, there is however a problem with ONLY old people in leadership. To survive and grow long term, an influx of fresh blood is important, and the people who have the skill need to get the chance to grow all the way to the top.
We’ll done on the video. Not sure if you are open to suggestions, but there is an aspect of this topic that has yet to be fully explored. Soon, there will be a human rated Starship. Once that occurs, it won’t just be a lowered cost for people to get to orbit, but a massive increase in capacity. If a fully crewed Starship wants to bring people to orbit, where will it take them? Not to the ISS. No room for that many people. Axiom? Haven One? Nope… Demand will exceed supply from the moment Starship is ready to launch people to space. Who is working on the first space station capable of hosting 100+ people? Emphasis on the plus, because there will certainly be more than one crew Starships
Nobody currently working on stations with a capacity 5 times the highest number of people who’ve been in space at once has a good chance of succeeding. There’s just not enough demand.
@@oberonpanopticon Don't get me wrong, there is currently no demand for 100's of people to dole out the $50M plus per seat to get to orbit. With Starship, the equation changes quite a bit. "If you build it, they will come" may be a bit cliche, but in this case, I think it is true. At best, Starship will make orbit this year. At best, it will be two more years to get a crew variant ready. Once that happens, it will still take a year or two for most people to trust this sufficiently as a means to get into orbit. That mean, by 2028 or 2030 at the latest, there should be a place for people to be taken to once there. I know I'm being optimistic on these timelines. But still, within these same timelines, and the carrying capacity of Starship, someone surely could put something up there that people would attract visitors in droves.
@@timothycrystal2623 Perhaps. Time will tell. I’m a bit less optimistic than you, I’d say it’ll be the 30s-40s before we see space tourism really take flight (ba dum tss)
Seems like a miss not designing for Starship payload capacity / dimensions which are 2x the diameter and 1.5x the length you could design and build each module. that's a massive difference in volume (609 m^3 to 3420 m^3), ~6 times more internal volume. Seems silly to design ISS v2.0 when you could literally white sheet a brand new approach due to the massive advantages you get with Starship as your transport vehicle.
Maybe Starship can't be the long-term, permanent space station solution most people expect, but what if it fills the niche of a sort of temporary, short-term space station for limited to large crew capacity? Here's what I mean: 1) Have 'Space Station' variant starships that can be launched to orbit with astronauts and everything they'll need for their mission. 2) Launch the space station into orbit and let it remain there (days, weeks, months) for as long as the mission requires. 3) Deorbit and land it at the end of the mission with the astronauts, and do necessary refurbishments or feature additions. *You could have a docking adaptor/interface for emergency/ad-hoc crew and supplies ingress/egress. This provides a unique, reusable space station solution for special use cases. This is especially a good solution for space tourism. You'd have no need for crew transfer between spacecraft AND station as the spacecraft IS the station. EDIT: You could then have hundreds of Starship Space Stations up there with thousands of astronauts (on different missions) or even tourists. Again, just land the starships whenever they complete their missions.
it would be Good to Have a liveable space station where people can live for years as astronauts are working on mars to make it a liveable planet for people to be able live on
We haven't solved how to keep humans healthy in space yet, so while a few individuals have managed long durations in LEO, that involves massive amounts of daily exercise and they are still "crippled" by the body changes when they get back to earth.
How do you repurpose ancient and worn out electronics, including 20+ year old computers? How do you repurpose crew modules encrusted with 20+ years of human skin cells and other grime? The interiors of the ISS are literally yellowed and disgusting. How do you repurpose large metal sections without a giant foundry? The ISS is literally warn out and obsolete.
Whoever designed the station in the animation @0:46 doesn't know shit about physics. You can't just fit a giant ring to the side of your space station and have it spin like that - it will cause the whole structure to spin as well. This is basic, basic stuff.
That is what the flower petal thing around the dome is for, it looks like it can close when not in use. I assume all of the other windows have something similar to minimize exposure to meteorites and debris when someone isn't looking out of them.
Yo NASA instead of throwing away the ISS why not push it into a higher orbit and use it as like a Orbital Warehouse and emergency Orbital Oasis/lifeboat? Stock it up with some extra parts, food, water, oxygen fuel Etc... that way if anything happens to the new space station or any other space station they will be able to get some stuff to fix them up... and in case somebody spaceship has a catastrophic failure they would have a place to hang out until a rescue ship can get there...
I hope that spaceex can engineer their Starhip is such a way that they can return a 7 meter part of the ISS International Space station, and return it to Earth and display it in the future in a museum in USA somewhere, maybe Space Museum
At the very least, crash it on the mood where they can salvage the metal or use it as a gathering spot for all the space junk they can to use as a shield. Sure;y the solar panel alone would be worth salvaging for the moon?
@@richardweighill8556 exactly or shit put in in orbit around the moonwhere gravity is not as strong as the earth where thrusters would have to be constantly used sure downside is resupply shit they only need 3 man crew
@@richardweighill8556 You know it would be very difficult to boost the entire ISS up to escape velocity (it would have to be very slow acceleration, not a typical high-thrust trans-lunar insertion, or the module connections would break apart, not being designed for that). And after a *crash* (it would come in at many thousands of miles per hour) you have nothing but fragmentary pieces of no use to anyone, not some neat pile of metal.
One module each year!?! Why so slow when spaceX is doing a heavy launch, starlink deployment, and or any other type of orbital flight every 3 months?? I really hope that the timeline is much more expedited than that.
You're not considering construction. Doesn't matter how many launches per year when you need a full clean room facility for the construction of each module. Then you need to transport it in its clean state. Each module will also have its own unique weight profile that will require calculations of its impact on launch dynamics. As well as the transfer orbit to its initial Dock with the ISS.
The observatory is huge for tourism. If they fly 1 week out of 4, they will make just over 2 billion per year to upgrade and maintain their station. They will need that funding because there are no taxpayers footing the bill. The funding needs to come from somewhere.
It is also huge for the people who work on the station. The ISS has observation windows too - just not as large. As someone who worked in a very large building without windows for years, it is nice to be able to look outside. And one of the perks of working in orbit is definitely the view.
I'm looking forward to the Axiom Station. I still wish that these companies would work on developing a toroidal type rotating station. I know the cost would be more but the finished product would be far superior to anything any other company or country is planning.
Why can't they just retain the space station in orbbit.. they were able to bring it there so definitely they are capable of preventing it from deteriorating from its orbit... and staying up there...
Why would you want all that material to burn up on reentry when Space X could push it into a higher orbit and use it as the first stage of a recycling and fabrication station, to be able to make other products to be used in space, like other space ships
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
Have to admit that being able to help build something like the ISS, and then decades later, get to build your own space station using the ISS as it's base, and then leave, like a child leaving home, would be all kinds of awesome.
Yes, a perk that can make you a billinaire on the taxpayers dime. It used to be only the politicians cashed in.
Here u go....I completed your 200 likes
We can now build an ISS size station for close to a Billion, instead lets go back to the people who made the ISS cost 100 billion to get things done.
@@dixonhill1108 NASA did all the initial research, development, and testing. They discovered how humans can live and work in space, They developed materials, technology and procedures for things that had never been done before. Of course this would be more expensive than what would be required decades later by the private companies who would build something based all that existing science and technology.
It should now be bit 🪙 coins 💻👾🖥️⚖️👽💨🦠☁️🌨️🌍🌎
I honestly see no issue with Axiom having so much experience. I think it makes them less likely to make the same mistakes and keep costs down.
As an old guy, seeing the new guys making the same mistakes over and over again was not that great. Old doesn't mean you have less passion, in fact most of the new guys seen to think it was just another job. I would rather have a team that really wanted to be there.
@@RS-ls7mm experienced dudes vs new dudes that need experience , but i dont think we should risk this for some new dudes to get some experience. so the execs should be more experienced
Yes experience in making things 10 times more expensive than they need to be. 1 module a year says it all, these units are gonna be incredibly expensive and come in over budget. I'm now know why Elon is trying to get Trump elected.
americans cost down...what r u smoking bro?
@@walaueh3138 We don't need to train and hire hundreds of people for Axiom if we have the current plan going. Not to mention their medical knowledge.
Axiom is not the first nor the only commercial module docked to the ISS. The Bigelow Expandable Activity Module (BEAM) has been docked to the ISS since 2016...
And it's kinda sad they went tits up. They had it done and figured out now we have Sierra space working on theirs but beam was done long ago
Didnt know axiom was just nasa in a business suit. Thats crazy
Thats not crazy
NASA has to plan with what actually exists. All this tech is pretty much proven and available NOW. These guys have actually BUILT and operated a station before. All these new guys are brilliant and driven, but like Elon, they rarely see the problems that only experience reveals.
Down the road, Starship will revolutionize trips to orbit and give an order of magnitude of extra payload and space, but it is still in development. And Elon Time is Elon Time. NASA has to be more hardheaded. If they don't get something up now, they may find their funding drying up. No bucks, no Buck Rogers.
@@i-love-space390incredibly written comment
@@i-love-space390 you indeed seem to love space
@@i-love-space390 Axiom should hope to work with SpaceX, not for some crazy terraforming or "civillian mars base" project, (both are horrible ideas and not worth it.) For the reliable launch vehicles. Also, I appreciate your view on the current state of the project.
“The Right Stuff” was about the NASA Mercury Program and the original NASA astronauts., not the Apollo program.
Gordon Cooper a true hero
What, are you saying he didn't watch the movie? 😂😂 Technically, all of that was part of the same space race, although Eisenhower and Kennedy were both more worried about orbital weapons. Don't tell my brainwave physics teacher that though. He thinks he knows everything.
@@phil20_20the book was about the early years of spaceflight during the Mercury program. Didn’t involve Apollo at all.
You forget the inflatable Bigelow Expandable Activity Module, still docked to the ISS and serving as an additional storage space. Sadly, Bigelow suspended operations two years ago, but this _was_ the first module by a private company to be docked to the ISS.
Sierra has taken the Bigelow initiatives. I'm looking forward to Dreamchaser and BEAM HABS
Too bad Bigelow kinda “spaced out” with conspiracy theories.
Would you want to live in an inflatable module?
@@kirishima638 Of course. For the same launch mass, you can make it both more spacious and more resilient than metal cans.
@@kirishima638 Expandabilty. It would stretch and hold more crew for later deployments. It would be very strong beyond Kevlar and bounce micro-meteoroids off or trap them in the baffles. Self-healing to reduce unnecessary EVAs. Bigger objects might require a course alteration to the orbit.
I’m sure someone from Bigelow could explain it better.
Not aluminum. It would just bounce radiation all around the cramped crew compartment and killing them. We lucked out during Apollo missions that there weren’t any CMEs from the sun during the moon landings or the astronauts wouldn’t be dying of old age like they have been. Charlie Duke and Harrison Schmidt I think are still around.
Great info. On one hand I'm glad they are utilizing the wisdom and experience of people who are exceptionally qualified. On the other hand I worry that this was a no bid attempt to create a clique where they take care of their friends and expect to be taken care of themselves in the future.
Taxpayer dollars for personal advances, match made in heaven.
They need to step away from the Congress model . You really need the best of who SpaceX have left available … Axiom and BO are just not efficient or excellent enough for the job …
I'd rather accountable entities push forward in space than unaccountable private entities. Do you really trust billionaires with our space future, given their track record of thoroughly trashing the Earth with no regard for anything but $$$.
@@JackoNorm So... people that run businesses are greedy and evil but people that work in government don't care about money and are angels. Interesting world view you have there.
@@thanksfernuthin apparently, Vacuous innit?
What I didn't see you talk about was the orbital maneuvering section and the refueling system. Without periodic boosting, the new Station will decay. It also needs a system to orient the station in orbit, either with powerful gyros or an RCS system (or both, since gyros eventually develop too much spin.) The RCS needs refueling.
If there is no thrust and control module, which spacecraft in the US inventory will be re-boosting the Station? Dragon 2 has the OMS facing the wrong direction. I think the Starliner may have the re-boost capability. Not sure if Dream Chaser has any nose thruster that can re-boost, since it docks the Service Module to the station.
Every Axiom module will have navigation and propulsion/reboost capability. They have to, because Axiom doesn't own a Space Shuttle! ;) Whatever launch vehicle they use, the module itself will still need to be responsible for final rendezvous and approach to ISS.
EXPERIENCE is everything.
I'm all for hosting scientific experiments in LEO, however, what we really need is a true manufacturing plant up there in LEO which can manufacture the parts needed for a much larger manufacturing plant in L1 or L2. That plant would basically build out larger spacecraft that wouldn't need to go back and forth out of Earth's gravity well. It's like building a shipyard.. you wouldn't build one out in the middle of nowhere without access to the actual ocean; nor are you expected to haul a cruise ship (or other large oceanic craft) back to being land-bound.
Honestly smaller ships coming from earth and docking at a space station where passengers get on bigger ships with larger pay loads sounds cool
can't wait till we be building _Spirit of Fire_ in space....
That idea is impractical at this point. Just the difficulty of fashioning metal in space would be multiplied not to mention miles of wiring having to be done by a weightless person.
@@macc240038 It isn't as impractical as you might think. There are some private companies out there developing and testing large scale manufacturing robotics. The "first ship" and facility would be a pain to get going, sure.. but where do you think all of the future metals would come from? Not Earth, for sure =)
a assemble area to put together a space ship in a enclosed area useing sections that click/fit together would be good ..
Brilliant video! These get better and better, keep up the good work and thanks for the news.
They named the space station after the one in WALL-E lol
That test stand had a long time to cure. These additions are going to seal the deal for quite a few launches. Great job SpaceX and all of you fighting the good fight on the ground and being our eyes and ears for this journey! ❤🎉
All who works in NASA, also knows, EARTH IS A CLOSED SYSTEM, NOBODY CANNOT LEAVE EARTH, THERE IS NOWHERE TO GO. They all know it, yet willingly deceive.
+ they are in the masonry club - that says it all.
NASA deals with CGI and Hollywood basements, making “SPACE”, to deceive mankind.
Great video, thanks. Only one minor error, The Right Stuff book is about Mercury, not Apollo.
Since the Axion crew quarters are nicer than the ISS quarters. I predict the ISS crew will be a little jealous of the newer rooms.
They hired people that know what they are doing. Good plan.
I like the idea of the transparent bubble at the bottom of the station. I would rather see one big enough to have a lounge kind of seating area for people to sit and socialize. I would be like a getaway from the closed in feeling the Space station may create. It might be a way for people to relax and destress. I think that once Space X solves all of their problems with Star Ship and make it a complete success, they should start focusing on ways to create much larger space stations with all of the capabilities that humans need to spend years in orbit around other planets and moons in our solar system. These capabilities must include these top features: 1) Gravitational spin. 2) Complete protection from solar radiation. 3) Recycling systems. 4) Several dock ports (that might just be mainly for small shuttles) 5) A second smaller space station in orbit near the main space station that would act as a parking lot for other ships that wish to visit the main station. The second station would not need Gravitational Spin, or as much radiation shielding. Visitors would only be staying at the smaller station for a few days at a time. The smaller station would also act as an emergency place to go if there was a major catastraphy on the main station. 6) There would need to be greenhouses for growing on the station. 6) There would need to be a medical bay. 7) There would need to be accomodations for hundreds of people at the very least.
At that point it’d be easier to just build a hotel on the moon
Also, you could just have the parking lot attached to the non-rotating middle of the gravity ring, with a bearing or whatever
Also, seating could be an interesting challenge in zero gravity
@@oberonpanopticon I was thinking that the shuttles and emergency escape pods could be mounted on that area that has no spin. Perhaps 1 or 2 larger ships could be docked there as well.
@@k.sullivan6303 It’d also be a good place to put solar arrays if they wanted renewable power.
That's what seat belts are for! 😀@@oberonpanopticon
Is there any hardware that they could salvage from the iss? Solar panels for example?
The most important thing is the decades of experience that the people at AXIOM and at NASA have with the ISS. The solar panels specifically are very outdated and inefficient, and I imagine that's the case for the majority of the technology on-board, but the experience in operating and constructing it is invaluable
@@ivonniebaby The panels on the ISS have only just this year been updated (& another update is coming), so while the old ones are probably well past use-by, the new ones should still be quite serviceable.
so is there any new design to launch spaceship from station´s launch pad to study sun or to moon´s surface?
Assuming that the Axiom leadership is dedicated to the mission and not "take the money and run" as ppl in executive positions of other companies have done in the past (golden parachutes), then the company goals of building the new station are admirable and obtainable. 😎
Nh, you don't hit and run at that level. You take the money and build a revolving door for all current and future bureaucrats to continue sucking taxpayer sweat and blood after retirement.
@ThisNoName hadn't thought of it that way 🤔. Truth be told, they do that too, and ppls buddies enter and exit that revolving door. It's a fraternity, if you're "in the club." 🫣
@@Tinman_56 Guess it's up to SpaceX and how much and how soon Elon can deliver his sub 10 million starship launch promise. Rumor says it might be up 300 tons to LEO while still fully reusable. At that level even the swamp masters couldn't keep straight face with their funny business.
It's the NASA equivalent of SF guys going to Blackwater, IRS guys going to Deloitte and Field Grades going to Lockheed and Grumman
I've often wondered if moving the ISS into a junkyard orbit with plans to eventually let another innovator melt down the already refined metals would be more useful than launching new stuff at $10k per kilo
I'd rather they keep it around and reuse the modules for future projects.
Sure it's old, but the modules could still be repurposed as extra crew or storage space.
@@Uzarran yup - send in robotic machines to continue using parts while human requirements could be powered down to save energy - possibly having it as a rescue point for other space going hmans in case of emergencies.
@@Uzarran IIRC, due to the long duration in space, it's likely that the modules are coldfusion welded together. separation might be quite hard... outside of the newer modules...
@@Uzarran As I understand it, the 2030 ISS retirement is driven by the fact that the aluminum structure has a safe lifetime based on metal fatigue (and maybe radiation exposure, but I don't know). That being said, if ISS is retiring anyway, Axiom would be crazy not to scour the inside of the ISS for usable hardware before they detach.
One big exception to the ISS module lifetime is the PMM (formerly one of 3 MPLMs... Google it), which was designed to stand up to *multiple* Shuttle launches for ISS cargo resupply, and is now used as a permanent storage closet. If you look closely at some of the renderings of Axiom's free-flying station, you see a remarkably ISS-looking module that's about the right size...
I wonder what's happening with the other 2 MPLM modules that are still on the ground? :)
A "junkyard orbit"? Cost would be huge and likely vetoed by roscosmos.
Tom Wolfe’s book was on the MERCURY program NOT the APOLLO program.
I spotted no mention of re-boosting the orbit of Axiom once it has un-docked from ISS. How will that be done?
To be honest I *really* want the current ISS to be saved, not destroyed, even if at present it is only mothballed somehow. Surely it could be boosted into a MEO and left? Assuming we survive as a species for the next decades, it could be one of the first items in humanity's Space Archaeology museum! Also, getting all that mass into orbit has cost a lot, surely there will be a use for it even if it cannot be realized right now?
love the intro with the music and snaps of zooming in
What is the music in the beginning?
A seamless bubble would be cooler window for the window room.
Axiom modules will now doubt catch a ride with Space X, either on a falcon 9, falcon heavy, or a starship. I think NASA should pay space X to build them a station, but the more the merrier I guess. We probably should have 3 or 4 different stations being built simultaneously in case one does not work, goes over budget or takes too long...
There are 3 or 4 stations licenced for LEO, all private and budget is not NASAs problem, at least on these...
That intro was fire🔥🔥
Not a bad gig; take the government paycheck, get your head around NASA's intentions, then 'leverage' your expertise (I'm being polite here) and rake the big bucks.
You could save a lot of launch & equipment costs if the new station was allowed to salvage equipment off the old station before they deorbit it.
You don't think they'll transfer functional internals before leaving?
Yes, itd be safe to use old worn out stuff for a new space station.
Why would you do that..? Not everything thats old needs to be reused. Its been up there for decades, let it retire..
Then why not just use the ISS? The ISS is at the end of its lifetime, the new station requires new, up-to-date technology.
@@smoothlyrough512 I'm sure it's not all worn out and the folks building the new segments oversaw the development of the old ones. I guarantee they will be salvaging equipment before decommissioning the ISS.
Does it have life pods?
I think SpaceX Super Heavy could be a basis for a space station also.
I believe the same thing, RV spaceship
Is the glass going to be “transparent aluminum” instead of plexiglass for transparency and strength?
Why cant you add booster rockets to take the old space station into a further orbit so we can still use it instead of letting it burn up and losing all the material and cost.
It's regularly re-boosted as it is. It has to be. So will the Axiom station. Orbital decay isn't the point.
Just as with Mir (and like any car, plane, or ship), it's reaching the point where age and wear and tear is making it more trouble/cost than it's worth to maintain. Eventually you cut your losses, and go to something new, including new integrated technology.
Nothing lasts forever.
Great project. A Comercial space station is what is needed.
Skylab was underrated in terms of design, both functionally and aesthetically. Much more pleasant and interesting than the ISS
6:06. “Pannel”. SERIOUSLY?!?!?!
Spell check. USE IT BEFORE YOU PUBLISH.
“Old guys” you mean, seasoned space veterans? You don’t want green horns running your space operation. 1:52
What about adding a telescope?
Space telescopes work best as free-flyers, not disturbed by vibrations from the rest of the station.
What I find interesting in the comments to this video is how anti-human crewed space flight many of them are.
May I remind people, all major US companies which are doing or planning human crewed space flight receive government funding through NASA. That includes SpaceX and Blue Origin.
You do realize NASA gets their funding from tax payers? It's not like NASA or or government earns money.
Does a spce station wear out. Why n ot remodle the old station.
Wow! I’m buying into Axiom Space technologies, this looks so cool, thank you for amazing video update
Wasn't "the right stuff" more about the Gemini project? Maybe I just didn't make it to the Apollo part.
It was about Mercury.
Guess they didn't learn their lessons from Apollo one? Padded walls, with electric lighting and wiring right behind the padding is a recipe for a space fire. Just as lethal in space, as on the ground. Hab one needs massive redesign. No padded room. Geez. A little common sense goes a long way, Axium. As for that glass bucket, it'll blow out, as soon as it passes the Carmon line. Way too much glass, or polycarbonate, and not enough structural metal. That's why the cupola on ISS has smaller view ports, and MMOD shield shutters.
Using the ISS to build a new space station sounds promising. But using yesterday's technology is not always a good idea... NASA boss Bill Nelson is beginning to look a little fossilized. He was largely responsible for ensuring that the SLS was built for $23.8 billion by resurrecting the few remaining RS-25 Space Shuttle engines. Older people have valuable experience but this tends to make them less open to creative out-of-the-box thinking. BTW I'm a 77-year old AMAB 🤣
I wish we had a replacement updated Space shuttle to help with the new step forword.
I was the 7th person to like this amazing video. Keep up the good work!
Wait the ship from wallie was named axiom
Good vid, will be interesting to see what they make when starship is online
We need to get a shuttle program going again they should kept shuttles going
No, no they should not have. The space shuttle was the worst thing to ever exist in terms of space exploration. Nasa's own director admits they set us back 50 years in terms of space exploration.
Im happy to know they're not just sending rich people up who would get in the way of the actual crew. Nice to know they are actually doing something that helps everyone plus is give Axiom more funding to build more cool stuff
If international Space Station called “ISS” - Axiom Space Station could be…
nice job, enjoyed the video
Hmmmm I was only 4th this time. I do always learn from your great videos, even though I am one of those old guys.
I bet on SpaceX. With a custom non-reusable second stage, one starship would easily double the usable volume of the entire ISS. All you need is build a hub, dock a dozen of these one-way modules, than two regular starships as shuttle, maybe a bunch of escape pods if people are really paranoid.
that defeats the whole purpose that makes it affordable. Starship would be beter suited to being up huge mudules
@@anoniemw.222 When you launch something that last decades, reusability of the vehicle isn't the main concern. Starship is still big, you just need larger pressurized living quarters, smaller tanks and simpler engines because it's not coming back.
IMO, Space X can always develop a fairing to fit on the "StarBooster" for the big bucks. There's enough lifting capacity on the Booster anyway... so if they can develop a orbital delivery vehicle for Overt-Sized equipment, they are literally the Antonov of Spaceflight (Reference to the AN-225) and therefore relatively safe until the other guy get his rocket to start flying...
then again... NASA need SpaceX to actually fly... Artemis literally hangs on that...
@@ThisNoName But half the ship is feul tanks and removing those in orbit will be quit hard. Also the engines need to be brought down with another flight. It seems for me way better having spaceX launch one big infatable module. That would really have a lot of space and maybe could even spin for gravity.
@@anoniemw.222 Half of that fuel are used for cancelling out all that orbital speed so the ship can come back to earth, and half of the engines are designed with landing in mind. None of those are necessary if it's a one way trip.
You can either have a detachable second stage that ditched like any other rockets, cost is not a factor if the main module stays up for decades. Even without separate second stage, you can still shrink the tanks by half, probably 3 smaller vacuum engines, no heatshield and landing accessories, effectively double the pressurized living space.
I wanna go...
There is nothing wrong with old guys and experience in leadership, there is however a problem with ONLY old people in leadership. To survive and grow long term, an influx of fresh blood is important, and the people who have the skill need to get the chance to grow all the way to the top.
We’ll done on the video. Not sure if you are open to suggestions, but there is an aspect of this topic that has yet to be fully explored.
Soon, there will be a human rated Starship. Once that occurs, it won’t just be a lowered cost for people to get to orbit, but a massive increase in capacity.
If a fully crewed Starship wants to bring people to orbit, where will it take them? Not to the ISS. No room for that many people. Axiom? Haven One? Nope…
Demand will exceed supply from the moment Starship is ready to launch people to space. Who is working on the first space station capable of hosting 100+ people? Emphasis on the plus, because there will certainly be more than one crew Starships
Nobody currently working on stations with a capacity 5 times the highest number of people who’ve been in space at once has a good chance of succeeding. There’s just not enough demand.
once starship is operational there will also be the option to launch way bigger modules for way less
@@oberonpanopticon Don't get me wrong, there is currently no demand for 100's of people to dole out the $50M plus per seat to get to orbit. With Starship, the equation changes quite a bit.
"If you build it, they will come" may be a bit cliche, but in this case, I think it is true. At best, Starship will make orbit this year. At best, it will be two more years to get a crew variant ready. Once that happens, it will still take a year or two for most people to trust this sufficiently as a means to get into orbit.
That mean, by 2028 or 2030 at the latest, there should be a place for people to be taken to once there. I know I'm being optimistic on these timelines. But still, within these same timelines, and the carrying capacity of Starship, someone surely could put something up there that people would attract visitors in droves.
@@timothycrystal2623 Perhaps. Time will tell. I’m a bit less optimistic than you, I’d say it’ll be the 30s-40s before we see space tourism really take flight (ba dum tss)
A Starship that will never reach the stars.
The floating civilization station in the movie Wall-E was called Axiom. 😶 Life imitates art; was Pixar predicting our future?
yes because this is a world run by rampant capitalism
Seems like a miss not designing for Starship payload capacity / dimensions which are 2x the diameter and 1.5x the length you could design and build each module. that's a massive difference in volume (609 m^3 to 3420 m^3), ~6 times more internal volume. Seems silly to design ISS v2.0 when you could literally white sheet a brand new approach due to the massive advantages you get with Starship as your transport vehicle.
Cool Northrop Grumman is making a space station.
Realization hits: O-O
Maybe Starship can't be the long-term, permanent space station solution most people expect, but what if it fills the niche of a sort of temporary, short-term space station for limited to large crew capacity?
Here's what I mean:
1) Have 'Space Station' variant starships that can be launched to orbit with astronauts and everything they'll need for their mission.
2) Launch the space station into orbit and let it remain there (days, weeks, months) for as long as the mission requires.
3) Deorbit and land it at the end of the mission with the astronauts, and do necessary refurbishments or feature additions.
*You could have a docking adaptor/interface for emergency/ad-hoc crew and supplies ingress/egress.
This provides a unique, reusable space station solution for special use cases. This is especially a good solution for space tourism. You'd have no need for crew transfer between spacecraft AND station as the spacecraft IS the station.
EDIT:
You could then have hundreds of Starship Space Stations up there with thousands of astronauts (on different missions) or even tourists. Again, just land the starships whenever they complete their missions.
100 mile high club.....I wonder how many people have thought that when they see that glass dome 😉
The US Space Force needs to have their own orbital space station.
"Solar Pannel"??
it would be Good to Have a liveable space station where people can live for years as astronauts are working on mars to make it a liveable planet for people to be able live on
We haven't solved how to keep humans healthy in space yet, so while a few individuals have managed long durations in LEO, that involves massive amounts of daily exercise and they are still "crippled" by the body changes when they get back to earth.
that video clip in the beginning looks cool. where's it from?
This video
It’s an eye opener that individuals can pay $55M to travel to space. And, there’s a waiting list! That blows me away!
🤐
Well the hardware is already up there!
Weird, surely every single piece of the ISS can repurposed, or recycled for use in a new station, instead of becoming atmosphere or ocean waste.
It’s old and has taken a lot of wear and tear
I don't understand how the so called bright minds at NASA decided that deorbiting the ISS is the best option.
You gonna pay for all that? It's cheaper to aim it for the atmosphere and watch her burn. Doubt much, if any make it to the ground
How do you repurpose ancient and worn out electronics, including 20+ year old computers? How do you repurpose crew modules encrusted with 20+ years of human skin cells and other grime? The interiors of the ISS are literally yellowed and disgusting. How do you repurpose large metal sections without a giant foundry?
The ISS is literally warn out and obsolete.
Not to forget the radiation that the iss was pumeled with will still live on
3:45
Job requirements: Japanese capsule hotel experience, 1 year
They can’t rely on Blue Origin to build a private space station because that will never happen.
Whoever designed the station in the animation @0:46 doesn't know shit about physics. You can't just fit a giant ring to the side of your space station and have it spin like that - it will cause the whole structure to spin as well. This is basic, basic stuff.
Did Axiom figure out how to protect windows from debris and meteoroids?
That is what the flower petal thing around the dome is for, it looks like it can close when not in use. I assume all of the other windows have something similar to minimize exposure to meteorites and debris when someone isn't looking out of them.
@@_shadow_1 Someone's bound to forget...
The reason they are mostly old guys is because the length of time it takes to gain knowledge and experience to do hard stuff.
Yo NASA instead of throwing away the ISS why not push it into a higher orbit and use it as like a Orbital Warehouse and emergency Orbital Oasis/lifeboat? Stock it up with some extra parts, food, water, oxygen fuel Etc... that way if anything happens to the new space station or any other space station they will be able to get some stuff to fix them up... and in case somebody spaceship has a catastrophic failure they would have a place to hang out until a rescue ship can get there...
This is vrey innovative. It's at the cutting edge of technology!!
The iss is just old tec i dont know why they dont keep some of it if not all of it as a back up or safety ship.
because its actively dying and wont last more then a few years more.
Russia proposed to close ISS already in 2024. Station is dying.
U.S asked time at least until 2028.
Private space missions can expand research into practical development of space.
This was great information!!
Impressive!
I hope that spaceex can engineer their Starhip is such a way that they can return a 7 meter part of the ISS International Space station, and return it to Earth and display it in the future in a museum in USA somewhere, maybe Space Museum
At 7.03 min was that Darth Vader ? 😂🤣😂🤣
Say some thing about , new methods to safeguard space station from debri or micro impacts
honestly they should repurpose some of the modules as storage etc dont see why they need to just abondone them
At the very least, crash it on the mood where they can salvage the metal or use it as a gathering spot for all the space junk they can to use as a shield. Sure;y the solar panel alone would be worth salvaging for the moon?
@@richardweighill8556 exactly or shit put in in orbit around the moonwhere gravity is not as strong as the earth where thrusters would have to be constantly used sure downside is resupply shit they only need 3 man crew
@@richardweighill8556 You know it would be very difficult to boost the entire ISS up to escape velocity (it would have to be very slow acceleration, not a typical high-thrust trans-lunar insertion, or the module connections would break apart, not being designed for that).
And after a *crash* (it would come in at many thousands of miles per hour) you have nothing but fragmentary pieces of no use to anyone, not some neat pile of metal.
It’s should be pushed into a storage orbit, also build the station from one end and discard old parts from the other end.
One module each year!?! Why so slow when spaceX is doing a heavy launch, starlink deployment, and or any other type of orbital flight every 3 months?? I really hope that the timeline is much more expedited than that.
You're not considering construction. Doesn't matter how many launches per year when you need a full clean room facility for the construction of each module. Then you need to transport it in its clean state. Each module will also have its own unique weight profile that will require calculations of its impact on launch dynamics. As well as the transfer orbit to its initial Dock with the ISS.
most likely that's initial plans. if they have more customers, they might be able to expand way faster...
The observatory is huge for tourism. If they fly 1 week out of 4, they will make just over 2 billion per year to upgrade and maintain their station. They will need that funding because there are no taxpayers footing the bill. The funding needs to come from somewhere.
It is also huge for the people who work on the station. The ISS has observation windows too - just not as large. As someone who worked in a very large building without windows for years, it is nice to be able to look outside. And one of the perks of working in orbit is definitely the view.
They do have 3D printers up their building...
How can you send down the space station on mars
It would make sense to use the ISS to provide a hotel type of use to build a new station.
I'm looking forward to the Axiom Station. I still wish that these companies would work on developing a toroidal type rotating station. I know the cost would be more but the finished product would be far superior to anything any other company or country is planning.
Why is noone buiding a rotating space station to try and generate artificial gravity, or have they decided that that wont work?
Why can't they just retain the space station in orbbit.. they were able to bring it there so definitely they are capable of preventing it from deteriorating from its orbit... and staying up there...
Class as always
Ngl it looks like a subnautica base
Exiting...don't forget the 'disconnect' feature! ☝️😬
WALL-E on the Axiom
Why would you want all that material to burn up on reentry when Space X could push it into a higher orbit and use it as the first stage of a recycling and fabrication station, to be able to make other products to be used in space, like other space ships