ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

The cosmos at our fingertips.
User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 21593
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by bystander » Wed Jul 27, 2011 4:52 pm

New uses for Space Station
European Space Agency | 2011 July 27
For more than a decade, the International Space Station has been a busy orbiting research lab. But it could soon take on a new role as a testbed for ambitious missions deeper into space.

Future ventures could include Mars missions, lunar habitats or travelling to an asteroid – all needing new technologies and techniques that could be tested on the Station.

Following yesterday's meeting of the orbital outpost's Multilateral Coordination Board, member agencies expect to begin identifying specific technology initiatives based on sample exploration missions.

The Board meets periodically to coordinate Station activities, with senior representatives from ESA, NASA, the Canadian Space Agency, Russia's Roscosmos and Japan's Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology.

The meeting also discussed standardising space systems, including the revised International Docking Systems Standard, as well as the Board's effort to gather information on how successfully the Station has been used, the results of which will be published in September.

ESA use of Station

Exploitation of the Station's research facilities is already well under way.

ESA astronaut Paolo Nespoli performed more than 30 experiments during his six-month MagISStra mission, which ended with his return to Earth in May.

Another European 'passenger' – the life-size Matroshka mannequin – ended its latest tour of duty in March, after a year monitoring radiation inside Japan's Kibo module. Paolo removed internal dosimeters from Matroshka for return to Earth.

Other European experiments have been retrieved from outside of the Station. The Expose-R package hosted nine biological samples, including plant seeds and bacterial spores, to study the effects of two years of direct space exposure.

Another space exposure experiment involved fungi known for damaging spacecraft materials. Russia's Mir station was particularly afflicted by fungal growth.

ESA experiments on a variety of crew members are providing new insights into the effects of weightlessness on our balance and how we perceive motion and tilt.

Physical processes are also being probed: the last Shuttle mission recently delivered new samples for a furnace in ESA's Columbus module to investigate rapid solidification of molten metals in weightlessness.

A Station for science

The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer is a partnership of hundreds of scientists and 16 countries, designed by CERN and tested at ESA's ESTEC technical centre. It has already collected more than two billion observations of galactic cosmic rays since in May 2011.

NASA has designated the Station's US segment as a national laboratory to encourage its use by national agencies, private firms and universities.

The Canadian Space Agency and NASA will test robotic refuelling systems delivered to the Station by the last Shuttle.

Roscosmos is investigating wheat and vegetable cultivation and human adaptation to long flights.

The Station is being used as a platform for observing Earth, while Japan's X-ray camera is looking in the other direction for cosmic objects such as black holes and neutron stars.

Space Station to Be Sunk After 2020
Discovery News | AFP | 2011 July 27
Russia and its partners plan to plunge the International Space Station (ISS) into the ocean at the end of its life cycle after 2020 so as not to leave space junk, the space agency said on Wednesday.

"After it completes its existence, we will be forced to sink the ISS. It cannot be left in orbit, it's too complex, too heavy an object, it can leave behind lots of rubbish," said deputy head of Roskosmos space agency Vitaly Davydov.

"Right now we've agreed with our partners that the station will be used until approximately 2020," he said in comments released on Wednesday.

A piece of space debris narrowly missed the space station last month in a rare incident that forced the six-member crew to scramble to their rescue craft.

The ISS, which orbits 220 miles above Earth, is a sophisticated platform for scientific experiments bringing together space agencies from Russia, the United States, Europe, Japan, and Canada.

Launched in 1998, the ISS was initially expected to remain in space for 15 years until an agreement was reached to keep it operating through 2020.

By going into a watery grave, the ISS will repeat the fate of its predecessor space station Mir which Russia sank in the Pacific Ocean in 2001 after 15 years of service.

Moscow this month proclaimed the beginning of "the era of the Soyuz" after the U.S. shuttle's last flight left the Russian system as the sole means for delivering astronauts to the ISS.

Russia is currently developing a new space ship to replace the Soyuz capsule which is single-use, except for the section in which spacemen return to Earth, said Davydov.

Tests of the ship will begin after 2015 and it will have "elements of multi-use whose level will be much higher than they are today," he said, adding that Russia will compete with the United States in building the new-generation ship.

"We'll race each other."

Davydov said it remains unclear what will come after the ISS and whether mankind will see the need for a replacement orbiting close to Earth.

"Lots of our tasks are still linked to circumterrestrial space," he said, while adding that a new space station could be used as a base for building complexes that will explore deeper into space.

"I cannot rule out that it will be used to put together, create the complexes that in the future will fly to the Moon and Mars," he said, stressing that "a serious exploration" could not be done without manned flights.

NASA Considers New Uses for $100 Billion Space Station
Space.com | 2011 July 27
NASA and its international partners are discussing new options for the International Space Station, including innovative ways to use the $100 billion orbiting laboratory as a testing ground for technologies to help future deep space exploration.

The space station's Multilateral Coordination Board, which is made up of representatives from the space agencies that built the orbiting lab, examined potential technology initiatives that could support voyages to an asteroid or Mars, or could be used in the development of lunar habitats.

The coordination board discussed those options in a meeting yesterday (July 26) and also reviewed plans to ramp up use of the station now that its 13-year construction is complete. The officials also evaluated efforts to standardize systems and operations at the outpost, including plans for a standard spaceship docking system. [Photos: Building the International Space Station]

The station's Multilateral Coordination Board includes senior representatives from NASA, the Canadian Space Agency, the European Space Agency, the Russian Federal Space Agency, and the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. The board meets periodically to ensure coordination of station operations and activities among the partners.

Currently, NASA and its international partners plan to continue operating the space station through at least 2020. [Infographic: The International Space Station Inside and Out]

Scientific and technological research is an ongoing part of life aboard the space station. Here are some examples of the work that has been done, and is continuing to be done, at the orbiting laboratory:
  • Using the International Space Station as a national laboratory is expanding. Memorandums of understanding are in place between NASA and other U.S. government agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health, which is now in its second year of selecting experiments for research in microgravity related to human health.

Space Act Agreements also allow private firms and universities to conduct research in areas like vaccine development, gene differentiation, plant studies and advanced propulsion technologies.

Earlier this month, NASA formally selected the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space, a nonprofit organization, to stimulate, develop and manage uses of the station by organizations other than NASA on the American segment of the outpost.
  • The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer, which was delivered and installed on the station by a visiting space shuttle crew in May, has already collected more than 2 billion observations of galactic cosmic rays. The astrophysics instrument represents a partnership of hundreds of scientists from sixteen countries, led by Nobel laureate Samuel Ting.
  • Robotic technologies developed by the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) for the station have been used to improve the dexterity of surgeons on Earth in fine scale surgery. In the coming months, NASA will be testing a humanoid robot assistant, called Robonaut 2, that was developed in partnership with General Motors. Furthermore, an experiment to test the ability to robotically refuel satellites in orbit was launched earlier this month onboard the final space shuttle flight – Atlantis' STS-135 mission.
  • The space station partnership is working to share data from remote sensing instruments mounted on the orbiting outpost and to increase the application of such data for use in disaster response. For example, the Hyperspectral Imager for the Coastal Ocean has collected more than 3,510 images, providing unprecedented spectral resolution of difficult-to-map coastal waters. The International Space Station Agricultural Camera snapped its first pictures on June 10. Its data is used to assess crop health and rapid changes during the growing season.
  • NASA's studies of their astronauts' health during long duration stays on the station have identified relationships between diet and bone loss that offer important insights for ongoing and future research.

Recently published data on chemical changes in pharmaceuticals identified that low-dose ionizing radiation in orbit degrades many medications, indicating the need to develop more space-hardy medications for future human spaceflight beyond low-Earth orbit.
  • The Russian Federal Space Agency, or Roscosmos, continues experiments aimed at human adaptation to future long-duration expeditions. Effects of the flight conditions on the cardiovascular system, the respiratory system and bones are being investigated in a series of dedicated medical experiments. Wheat and vegetables are being planted, followed by genetic, microbiological and biochemical tests of the plant. Four different long-duration Russian astrobiology experiments were also returned after spending two years exposed to the environment of space.
  • In addition to astronomical and Earth observations, Japan promotes biotechnological research by analyzing structures of high-quality protein crystals grown on the station that have led to treatments for muscular dystrophy. Japan also continues experiments related to future long-term human spaceflight missions, such as investigating bone loss, the effects of radiation and countermeasures of those. Scientists have also gained insight into fields of fundamental life and materials science from research conducted in the Japanese Kibo laboratory.
  • Educational activities on the station reach thousands of students around the world. In May and June, hundreds of thousands of students watched the adaptation of spiders to a space environment and compared their behavior to spiders in classrooms on Earth through the website BioEdOnline.org. The spiders returned to Earth on the shuttle Atlantis when it landed for the final time on July 21.

Construction of the International Space Station began in 1998, with five space agencies representing the 15 countries that designed and built the orbiting lab. The station's backbone-like main truss is as long as a football field, making it the largest spacecraft ever built. The orbital complex consists of 13 rooms and is typically home to a six-person crew.

With NASA's space shuttle fleet retired, the U.S. space agency plans to rely on its international partners to deliver crews and cargo to the space station until new privately built spaceships become available.

Russian Soyuz spacecraft have routinely ferried astronauts and cosmonauts to and from the space station since 2001, when the first crew took up residence. Unmanned robot cargo ships from Russia, Japan and Europe also make regular delivery flights to the orbiting lab.

NASA has contracts with two private spaceship builders, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) and Orbital Sciences Corp., to build and launch robot cargo ships to ferry U.S. supplies to the space station. The first of those flights could occur by December of this year, NASA officials have said.
Know the quiet place within your heart and touch the rainbow of possibility; be
alive to the gentle breeze of communication, and please stop being such a jerk.
— Garrison Keillor

User avatar
orin stepanek
Plutopian
Posts: 8200
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Nebraska

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by orin stepanek » Wed Jul 27, 2011 5:30 pm

Moscow this month proclaimed the beginning of "the era of the Soyuz" after the U.S. shuttle's last flight left the Russian system as the sole means for delivering astronauts to the ISS.

Russia is currently developing a new space ship to replace the Soyuz capsule which is single-use, except for the section in which spacemen return to Earth, said Davydov.

Tests of the ship will begin after 2015 and it will have "elements of multi-use whose level will be much higher than they are today," he said, adding that Russia will compete with the United States in building the new-generation ship.

"We'll race each other."
Looks like we have to start from scratch while the Russians are still in business! :?
Orin

Smile today; tomorrow's another day!

User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 21593
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by bystander » Wed Jul 27, 2011 6:10 pm

orin stepanek wrote:Looks like we have to start from scratch while the Russians are still in business! :?
Not from scratch :!:

http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php? ... 76#p153525
Know the quiet place within your heart and touch the rainbow of possibility; be
alive to the gentle breeze of communication, and please stop being such a jerk.
— Garrison Keillor

User avatar
neufer
Vacationer at Tralfamadore
Posts: 18805
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:57 pm
Location: Alexandria, Virginia

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by neufer » Wed Jul 27, 2011 6:23 pm

orin stepanek wrote:
Looks like we have to start from scratch while the Russians are still in business! :?
Old Scratch: The devil; so called from Schratz or Skratti, a demon of Scandinavian mythology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Scratch wrote:
<<Old Scratch or Mr. Scratch is a folk name for The Devil in the local legends of New England and pre-Civil War America. The character is exemplified in the short stories "The Devil and Tom Walker" by Washington Irving and "The Devil and Daniel Webster" by Stephen Vincent Benet. Old Scratch is also referred to in The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain, in The Sing-Song of Old Man Kangaroo by Rudyard Kipling, in A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens, in The Three Clerks by Anthony Trollope, in Miracle Monday by Elliot S. Maggin, and the game Alan Wake by Remedy Entertainment.
  • The Phantom glided on into a street. Its finger pointed to two persons meeting. Scrooge listened again, thinking that the explanation might lie here. He knew these men, also, perfectly. They were men of aye business: very wealthy, and of great importance. He had made a point always of standing well in their esteem: in a business point of view, that is; strictly in a business point of view.

    `How are you.' said one.

    `How are you.' returned the other.

    `Well.' said the first. `Old Scratch has got his own at last, hey.'

    `So I am told,' returned the second. `Cold, isn't it.'
    >>
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/start-from-scratch.html wrote:
'Start from scratch' : Begin (again) from the beginning, embark on something without any preparation or advantage.

'Start from scratch' is an expression which has altered slightly in meaning since it was first coined. It is now usually used to mean 'start again from the beginning' - where an initial attempt has failed and a new attempt is made with nothing of value carried forward from the first attempt (as opposed to 'made from scratch' which means 'made from basic ingredients').

In the late 1800s, when 'start from scratch' began to be used it simply meant 'start with no advantage'. 'Scratch' has been used since the 18th century as a sporting term for a boundary or starting point which was scratched on the ground. The first such scratch was the crease which is a boundary line for batsmen in cricket. John Nyren's Young Cricketer's Tutor, 1833 records this line from a 1778 work by Cotton: "Ye strikers... Stand firm to your scratch, let your bat be upright."

It is the world of boxing that has given us the concept of 'starting from scratch'. The scratched line there specified the positions of boxers who faced each other at the beginning of a bout. This is also the source of 'up to scratch', i.e. meet the required standard, as pugilists would have had to do when offering themselves for a match.

Scratch later came to be used as the name of any starting point for a race. The term came to be used in 'handicap' races where weaker entrants were given a head start. For example, in cycling those who were given no advantage had the handicap of 'starting from scratch', while others started ahead of the line. Other sports, notably golf, have taken up the figurative use of scratch as the term for 'with no advantage - starting from nothing'.

The Fort Wayne Gazette, April 1887, contains the earliest reference to 'starting from scratch' that I can find, in a report of a 'no-handicap' cycling race: "It was no handicap. Every man was qualified to and did start from scratch."
Art Neuendorffer

User avatar
orin stepanek
Plutopian
Posts: 8200
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Nebraska

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by orin stepanek » Wed Jul 27, 2011 7:38 pm

bystander wrote:
orin stepanek wrote:Looks like we have to start from scratch while the Russians are still in business! :?
Not from scratch :!:

http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php? ... 76#p153525
I take it that it already built and ready to go? :rocketship: :?
Last edited by orin stepanek on Wed Jul 27, 2011 7:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Orin

Smile today; tomorrow's another day!

User avatar
orin stepanek
Plutopian
Posts: 8200
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Nebraska

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by orin stepanek » Wed Jul 27, 2011 7:45 pm

neufer wrote:
orin stepanek wrote:
Looks like we have to start from scratch while the Russians are still in business! :?
Old Scratch: The devil; so called from Schratz or Skratti, a demon of Scandinavian mythology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Scratch wrote:
<<Old Scratch or Mr. Scratch is a folk name for The Devil in the local legends of New England and pre-Civil War America. The character is exemplified in the short stories "The Devil and Tom Walker" by Washington Irving and "The Devil and Daniel Webster" by Stephen Vincent Benet. Old Scratch is also referred to in The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain, in The Sing-Song of Old Man Kangaroo by Rudyard Kipling, in A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens, in The Three Clerks by Anthony Trollope, in Miracle Monday by Elliot S. Maggin, and the game Alan Wake by Remedy Entertainment.
I must say; "I didn;t know that!" I"ll remember it. Interesting, Thanks. 8-) :)
Orin

Smile today; tomorrow's another day!

User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 21593
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by bystander » Wed Jul 27, 2011 7:50 pm

orin stepanek wrote:
bystander wrote:
orin stepanek wrote:Looks like we have to start from scratch while the Russians are still in business! :?
Not from scratch :!:

http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php? ... 76#p153525
It's still on the drawing boards?
No, it's already in test (big success, so far). The current plan is to merge the final two tests (ISS Rendezvous/Docking) into a trip to the ISS.

http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php? ... 76#p138426
Know the quiet place within your heart and touch the rainbow of possibility; be
alive to the gentle breeze of communication, and please stop being such a jerk.
— Garrison Keillor

User avatar
orin stepanek
Plutopian
Posts: 8200
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Nebraska

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by orin stepanek » Wed Jul 27, 2011 7:57 pm

bystander wrote: No, it's already in test (big success, so far). The current plan is to merge the final two tests into a trip to the ISS.
http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php? ... 76#p138426
Oops! you posted this as I was editing my reply! :oops: :P
Orin

Smile today; tomorrow's another day!

User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 21593
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by bystander » Wed Jul 27, 2011 8:01 pm

The current Dragon capsule is a cargo vessel. A crew version has already been built with mods planned for deep space missions.
SpaceX also has started development on a heavy booster required for deep space launches (mod of Falcon 9).
Know the quiet place within your heart and touch the rainbow of possibility; be
alive to the gentle breeze of communication, and please stop being such a jerk.
— Garrison Keillor

User avatar
orin stepanek
Plutopian
Posts: 8200
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Nebraska

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by orin stepanek » Wed Jul 27, 2011 8:15 pm

Reminds me of Appolo 8-)
Orin

Smile today; tomorrow's another day!

User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 21593
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by bystander » Fri Jul 29, 2011 5:49 pm

Know the quiet place within your heart and touch the rainbow of possibility; be
alive to the gentle breeze of communication, and please stop being such a jerk.
— Garrison Keillor

User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 21593
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Russia Backtracks on Plan to Sink Space Station

Post by bystander » Fri Jul 29, 2011 5:54 pm

Russia Backtracks on Plan to Sink Space Station
Discovery News | FoxNews/SciTech | 2011 July 29
Despite earlier comments indicating the station would be sunk by 2020, a spokesperson says they hope to extend the station's life.
  • International science agencies agree to try to operate the ISS beyond 2020.
  • The Russian space agency's spokesperson said they were in agreement with the plan to extend the station's life.
  • Previously, a head official at the Russian agency had said they would sink the station by 2020.
Know the quiet place within your heart and touch the rainbow of possibility; be
alive to the gentle breeze of communication, and please stop being such a jerk.
— Garrison Keillor

User avatar
orin stepanek
Plutopian
Posts: 8200
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Nebraska

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by orin stepanek » Sat Jul 30, 2011 1:04 pm

"I believe we're on the cusp of a golden age of industry-led innovation,"
Industry or government; going to be paid for either way! by product or by taxes! Though I think it is healthier to have industry involvement! :)
Orin

Smile today; tomorrow's another day!

User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 21593
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

LAT: Backup plan for the International Space Station

Post by bystander » Sun Jul 31, 2011 7:44 pm

Backup plan for the International Space Station
PhysOrg | Ralph Vartabedian, LA Times | 2011 July 31
The space shuttle flew to the International Space Station 37 times, but its retirement leaves NASA reliant on the Russian Soyuz for future trips, raising the question of what would happen if the Soyuz is grounded for an accident or another problem.

As it turns out, NASA does not have a formal contingency plan, said Michael Suffredini, NASA's program manager for the space station. But without hesitation, he rattled off a list of steps the agency could take.

"We would keep the crew on orbit for some months and likely extend that if we thought that was viable," Suffredini said. Crews normally stay six months.

If necessary, the space station crew could leave via the two docked Soyuz capsules, which can each carry three astronauts.

The station can be operated by ground controllers, so long as critical parts - such as guidance gyroscopes - don't require human hands for repairs. It carries 6 metric tons of fuel, enough to keep it boosted to the proper orbit for 360 days. Russian progress cargo ships can replenish the fuel supply robotically.

An analysis after the Columbia shuttle accident showed that if the space station were unoccupied for more than six months, the chance of it leaving orbit and crashing into the atmosphere would increase tenfold, although that risk is still minimal, Suffredini said. "Most of our critical systems have redundancy," he said.

Even that low risk is something to think about, given the station's importance and cost. The space station represents one of the most complex and ambitious construction projects in human history, requiring new technologies in materials, tools and spacesuits, as well as the development of new human skills for working in space. It is regarded as the most expensive machine ever built, with the U.S. cost alone about $65 billion. Combined with the other partners' shares, the program's life-cycle cost is more than $100 billion.

The station was completed only this year and is finally ready to allow NASA, along with its international partners, to conduct full-scale research. Initially, 36 hours per week of research will be done on the American side of the station, while the Russians will control their own programs in their labs.

NASA has an ambitious agenda in astrophysics, biology and medicine, said agency spokesman Kelly O. Humphries. Clinical trials are about to start on a vaccine pioneered at the station for a type of salmonella, he added.

Others say any verdict on the quality of that science is not yet in. "We are just getting into the science program, and the outcome of that is yet to be determined," said Charles Vick, a senior analyst at GlobalSecurity.org, a Washington think tank.

If the station were to fall into harm's way while unmanned and had to be "deorbited," NASA would aim it at an empty spot in the ocean. Such a decision would rest with the Space Station Control Board, an international panel that runs the program and is chaired by Suffredini.

"Given the significance of this decision, we would ultimately make a recommendation to our agency leadership, who would ... approve any plan to deorbit the ISS," he said.

(c) 2011, Los Angeles Times.
Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.
Know the quiet place within your heart and touch the rainbow of possibility; be
alive to the gentle breeze of communication, and please stop being such a jerk.
— Garrison Keillor

User avatar
BMAONE23
Commentator Model 1.23
Posts: 4076
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 6:55 pm
Location: California

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by BMAONE23 » Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:21 am

Since the altitude is no longer dependant upon being reachable by the Space Shuttles, one just needs to send a robootic capsule with enough fuel to place the ISS in a permanently stable orbit.

User avatar
Beyond
500 Gigaderps
Posts: 6889
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:09 am
Location: BEYONDER LAND

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by Beyond » Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:41 am

BMAONE23 wrote:Since the altitude is no longer dependant upon being reachable by the Space Shuttles, one just needs to send a robootic capsule with enough fuel to place the ISS in a permanently stable orbit.
Good idea! Once the correct size boot has been determined, all it need do is give the ISS a little kick and it's set forever, or so.
To find the Truth, you must go Beyond.

User avatar
orin stepanek
Plutopian
Posts: 8200
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Nebraska

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by orin stepanek » Mon Aug 01, 2011 2:45 pm

Here's a strange thought! Do they have a backup plan for a toilet malfunction? :roll: If they have a longer than usual stay they will need to have planned maintenance in place for things that could go wrong. :wink:
Orin

Smile today; tomorrow's another day!

User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 21593
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by bystander » Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:34 pm

orin stepanek wrote:Here's a strange thought! Do they have a backup plan for a toilet malfunction? :roll:
Just step outside. :shock:
Know the quiet place within your heart and touch the rainbow of possibility; be
alive to the gentle breeze of communication, and please stop being such a jerk.
— Garrison Keillor

User avatar
Ann
4725 Å
Posts: 13851
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 5:33 am

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by Ann » Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:51 pm

bystander wrote:
orin stepanek wrote:Here's a strange thought! Do they have a backup plan for a toilet malfunction? :roll:
Just step outside. :shock:
The Castle of Malmöhus
This is the Castle of Malmöhus. The construction of the Castle of Malmöhus began in 1436. Note on the level where you find the big windows a tiny "door" on the far right, to the immediate (upper) left of a larger door. This tiny door appears to have been the toilet intended for the lady of the castle. She used her toilet by sticking a part of herself out of this door. But although winters can be cold in this part of the world, at a latitude of 55°37´N (and the winters were particularly bitterly cold in the 17th century), the lady of the castle in the 17th century probably still managed to keep her anatomy warmer than an astronaut would, if he had to "open a door and get himself partly outside" in order to use the toilet! :shock:


Ann
Color Commentator

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 18601
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA
Contact:

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by Chris Peterson » Mon Aug 01, 2011 5:07 pm

BMAONE23 wrote:Since the altitude is no longer dependant upon being reachable by the Space Shuttles, one just needs to send a robootic capsule with enough fuel to place the ISS in a permanently stable orbit.
There is no such practical orbit. In order to be reached by humans in a cost effective, relatively routine way (which is provided by Soyuz) it needs to be in low Earth orbit. Such orbits are both unstable, and require continuous adjustment to dodge space debris.

Even if it were practical to operate ISS in a middle Earth orbit, where there is far less debris and the orbits are much more stable, the amount of fuel that would be required for the boost would be, literally, astronomical. I doubt there's any existing technology that could realistically get that much fuel up to the ISS.
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com

User avatar
BMAONE23
Commentator Model 1.23
Posts: 4076
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 6:55 pm
Location: California

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by BMAONE23 » Mon Aug 01, 2011 5:15 pm

I would imagine that a small SRB similar to the Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, assembeled at and attached to the space station (components sent up in several separate launches or possible in 1 resupply module) would be sufficient. Even a small ION engine or two with propellant would fit in a resupply module and could be sufficient to gradually establish a new orbit

User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 21593
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by bystander » Mon Aug 01, 2011 5:27 pm

But as Chris explained, such orbits are not practical, at least if you want to maintain the ISS as a research base (which is what it was designed for).
Know the quiet place within your heart and touch the rainbow of possibility; be
alive to the gentle breeze of communication, and please stop being such a jerk.
— Garrison Keillor

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 18601
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA
Contact:

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by Chris Peterson » Mon Aug 01, 2011 5:41 pm

BMAONE23 wrote:I would imagine that a small SRB similar to the Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, assembeled at and attached to the space station (components sent up in several separate launches or possible in 1 resupply module) would be sufficient. Even a small ION engine or two with propellant would fit in a resupply module and could be sufficient to gradually establish a new orbit
It would require a huge amount of fuel- many trips would be required. The delta-v required to go from LEO to MEO is significant, as is the ISS mass. Using ion thrusters might be possible, although it would require substantial modifications to the ISS to attach them, and additional power. And then a thrust time of several years. But if you did all that, it would be in an essentially inaccessible orbit, which seems like a funny place to put a manned space station!
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com

User avatar
neufer
Vacationer at Tralfamadore
Posts: 18805
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:57 pm
Location: Alexandria, Virginia

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by neufer » Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:02 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
The delta-v required to go from LEO to MEO is significant, as is the ISS mass. Using ion thrusters might be possible, although it would require substantial modifications to the ISS to attach them, and additional power. And then a thrust time of several years.
By my calculations:

1 Newton of constant ion thrust (~11 Dawn ion engines) could raise the ISS orbit by about 65 km per year.

It would require minor modifications to the ISS to attach them, and minimal additional power.
Art Neuendorffer

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 18601
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA
Contact:

Re: ISS: Deep Space or Deep Six?

Post by Chris Peterson » Mon Aug 01, 2011 8:18 pm

neufer wrote:By my calculations:

1 Newton of constant ion thrust (~11 Dawn ion engines) could raise the ISS orbit by about 65 km per year.
Sounds about right. So a system like that could boost the ISS into a fairly stable very low medium Earth orbit (2000 km) in just 25 years.
It would require minor modifications to the ISS to attach them, and minimal additional power.
I don't think any modifications that require significant EVA activity are considered minor. You'd need many tons of xenon for a propellant, so all that mass would have to be carried up, not just the engines. At full thrust, the engines would be consuming 25 kW, which is fully one quarter the capacity of the solar panels that supply power to the ISS. Of course, these are eclipsed about a third of the time, and partly eclipsed half the time. So if the thrusters operate continuously, they will also be drawing heavily on the batteries, meaning they will likely have to be replaced more often than the current ~5 years. So it sounds to me like adding ion thrusters would have a profound impact on the ISS power systems.
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
https://www.cloudbait.com

Post Reply