Axiom Station's First Module Is Not Far From Completion! 

hang in there and enjoy what you can see.

Be glad about all the advancement you saw.

Just keep it going I believe you could hit 100 and be okay to remember and see some of the future!

I am under 20 right now, very nice! I can see more future

@@Darsh0606 you might see more than I will then, I'm in my 20s

no offense but that’s like saying staples center isn’t the lakers home because it’s owned by another company. while true, not the whole truth @Kyplanet893 kind of like how the stadium isn’t owned by the lakers. it also does concerts, and events , (as well as the clippers another team) unrelated to the lakers . but it is still most known for being the home of the lakers. the lakers set the schedule everyone else has to follow. taylor swift can’t play if the lakers are playing

@@nikkokpit’s really not, nasa doesn’t own it, it’s owned and operated by axiom space nasa is only one customer of many for this station, i could just as easily make the argument that ESA or Spacex owns it using this logic lol

That NASA will be using just like ISS.. Because all the other stations are owned by our enemies who coop with the iss... And seeing as nasa has no new station in the works Axiom will be its new perm base of.operation

It is a workplace that NASA can rent... but it can also be full with ESA/ISRO/JAXA depending on who gets the seats

any company sharing a station with nasa will be playing by nasas rules.

If efficient propellant use is your only goal, then yes. But there are many more considerations beyond efficiency of mass-to-orbit. One of the favorite activities for astronauts (and one of the biggest PR talking points) is looking out the cupola at the Earth below. The current orbit allows the ISS (and Axiom Station) to traverse over almost all of the populated surface of the Earth. Almost any visitor from any country can look out and, with the right timing, see his/her own country down below. You get a tremendous variety of landscapes to observe. The PR and outreach impact of this should not be dismissed. Now imagine an orbit designed purely for maximum propellant efficiency - an equatorial orbit. You would see the Amazon jungle, followed by thousands of miles of the Atlantic Ocean, followed by equatorial Africa, followed by thousands of miles of the Indian Ocean (the southern tip of India would be visible), followed by Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, northern Australia, followed by thousands of miles of the Pacific Ocean, and back to the Amazon jungle. That is all you would ever see. You would never see North America, Europe, and the vast majority of Asia. You would never see the Aurora. Ever. Obviously this issue would be less severe with a low/mid latitude launch from the US, but you get the idea. The point is there's more to consider than just efficiency.

@@regolith1350 Obviously, but there are more efficient orbits that still provide other benefits. The current ISS inclination was chosen primarily because it's the lowest possible for Baikonur launches without flying over China. This is no longer a consideration.

​@@CausticLemons7yeah but that's irrelevant since they are firstly meant to act as an expansion to the ISS until it's decommissioned. Because of this the initial modules won't be have enough power, life support or thermal control to fully operate without support from the ISS, until more modules have been added.

A 50 cal bullet doesn't travel at 17K+ miles per hour. Just sayin'. 😉

Talking about next-gen' Space Stations.

Engineers tend to work within many simultaneous constraints not just "stronger is better"

Working on number #4...!! True Story. ..!!

Perhaps those modules and truss will be past their "use by" date i.e. worn out, technically outdated, design outmoded etc?

@@davidstevenson9517 That's why I specifically ruled out keeping the older modules like Destiny, and you definitely can't reuse the Truss.

@@regolith1350 why can't they reuse the truss? and solar panels?

My guess would be space x. I wouldn't use any other because the safest most reliable is Space X

Scotty hasn't invented it yet...

It was already patented when the movie came out, which isn’t surprising because rubies are made of aluminum :/ it’s not actually as mind blowing as something like transparent steel would be. Or transparent titanium, that would be cool.

With THAT title, no. Anyway, We intend to UTILIZE our Solar System, not colonize it. Earth is perfect for us and besides, 100 years from now our population will be reduced to about 3 billion (Peaking at 9 Bill. 2045; passed 8 Bill. 2022). AI will HAVE to do most of the work for us, both out there in Space and down here at Home. If you want colonization, read "The High Frontier" by Gerard K. O'Neill (1977). I read it in 1979, aged 16, courtesy of my Public Library, here in New Zealand. Dr O'Neill showed what we could achieve by simply utilizing our Moon, just next door, a mere stone throw away.

Lucky you! Hello from New Zealand, a very long way from Axiom Space (or anywhere, really...)

Was thinking the same thing. As a private entity, why not change the way things are done?...

Rotating wheel design is very expensive and requires scaled development, very time consuming. (Also known as "Clarke" design after Arthur C. Clarke, creator, who is also credited with geosynchronous orbit, aka "Clarke Orbit", who also wrote the screenplay for "2001: A Space Odessy" with that beautiful Wheel Station rolling through LEO).

Don't forget the first two ISS modules are Russian owned and built and Japans' modules are also of indigenous design and construction. Love the Thales Alenia lunar surface module; a space station module with legs and wee steps up to the airlock. Great little outposts for Artemis crews. (Re: TheSpaceBucket)

NASA funds some of these projects with contracts, so in a way it is NASA's.

@@fitnesstop112 nasa doesn’t own it, doesn’t matter if they pay for *some* of it (because they don’t pay for all of it either)

@@fitnesstop112 nasa still doesn’t own it, it’s owned and operated by axiom space (sorry if you see this comment twice my reply doesn’t seem to be loading)

@@kypickle8252 Who is the project for? You are splitting hairs over nothing. This isn't clickbait; you are a crybaby.

@@filonin2 the project is for anyone who can purchase a ticket for the station And i dont see how im a crybaby, and I did not say this was clickbait. I just want an accurate title, which has happened, since it looks like the title of this video has been changed to be more accurate. I'm not angry, and I dont really understand why youre insulting me right now

Not necessarily; Axiom Station will be expanded upon separation so who knows? Possibly Axiom opted to use an existing module concept by an experienced manufacturer; let Sierra Space do all the spadework. Axiom Station must "leave the nest" by 2029, after all.

Standardized modules will be possible once we get past the development stage and can work on module prototypes with confidence. Space station modules average 20 tonnes in weight and 4.5 metres in diameter, far too heavy and large for SPX Falcon 9 or Heavy (both limited to 10 tonne/3.5 diam. max. to LEO) Until recently, only Proton, Atlas 5, Delta IV and CZ-5 could launch modules that size. Gone, now, are Atlas 5 and Delta IV but Vulcan (27tn) has joined "The Space Station Club" and New Glenn (35tn) is only months away from earning membership. We'll get there.

Agreed. Let the Russians spend 30 hours to get to the damn thing!

A space tug could shunt Axiom Station into a more U.S. friendly orbit upon separation. ULAs Centaur 5 will have a orbital re-fuelling capability i.e. to remain in orbit after launch, refuelled (by what?) and put to work as a improvised space tug; to shunt payloads, that are launched separately, to higher orbits (watch that one!). Another company(?) is designing a purpose-built space tug to rendezvous with satellites for refueling and/or shunting (re: TheSpaceBucket). And the National Team have their Cislunar Transport for Blue Moon/GATEWAY/Artemis operations; a space tug, of sorts (unsuitable for Axiom). So there are 1 or 2 space tugs becoming availiable for Axiom Station to move to a new, more U.S. friendly neighbourhood.

SpaceX did put out a proposal to use a Starship as a Space Station, but they didn’t really put much effort into it - it was a throw in the dark. The biggest downsides are modularity for later expansion and of course the massive engines and fuel tanks which are just a waste. What Starship will be great at is launching massive modules, ones we’ve never seen before. Like Airbus’s LOOP - the largest non inflated module, or Siera Space’s LIFE 3.0 module, which’ll have an interior space of 5000m^2 (5x the volume of the ISS!)

Life is so short! Imagine how I feel; I've followed Spaceflight since I was 6 years old and now I'm 61!

He didn't. That's his voice. Get used to it or leave.

The irony of complaining about detachment from humans while failing to recognize a human.

That was no human!@@filonin2