You are not logged in.
Why do we need an outpost in LEO again? Maybe an unmanned fuel depot, but if we are going to the Moon and Mars and we built a rocket of decent size, there is no need for a space station.
No matter how much any heavy lift rocket can lift, there will still be a need for orbital assmebly beyond simple docking. And theres a good deal of science that can be done only in 0g.
I submit that the ISS may not be the best platform to do this, but its an asset, and a good place to start.
"Yes, I was going to give this astronaut selection my best shot, I was determined when the NASA proctologist looked up my ass, he would see pipes so dazzling he would ask the nurse to get his sunglasses."
---Shuttle Astronaut Mike Mullane
Offline
Commodore,
We need a space station for many reasons, I agree that some could be managed from earth, but as development in space expand the permanent presence of personnel in orbit will be essential to the long term viability for humanity in space.
the outward costs are reduced if we use personnel in orbit to go to moon and then mars, Thus making space a 2-5 year cycle for explorers.
In spacecraft development we design simple cartage designs based on the truss structures used on the ISS as the building blocks for large cargo crafts for the moon, and each component could be designed as a shuttle cargo bay module or a cargo pod for the Ariane 5 Hybrid Launch Vehicle or Energia Launch Vehicle, just to name a few.
Also a engine module designed the same to be added at the end of the modular craft, for its one-way mission to moon or mars, and they disassembled at destination.
Offline
Commodore,
I believe the ISS, is the right platform , but it needs additional modules for that task -> gantries, additional robotic arms, automated vehicle docking areas, and additional thruster units for weight changes, and also fuel depot storage modules with emergency jettison processes.
Then we might get there, The private sector can build those components for space expansion and manage those themselves.
Offline
Even figuring the 5 items you mentioned, Which I have no cost figures for and the need for probably a few delta 4 an couple of Atlas V to get it there. We are lookin just in rocket purchase of 500 million to probably 750 million. The operations crew, Fuel and other stuff would just add to the cost of doing this to turn it into something usefull IMO. Ya, the cost could be spread out over a few years but how long should we continue to go slowly.
Offline
NASA says it’s fixed shuttle foam problem
But astronauts can’t patch Columbia-level damage
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5831547/
Snipet last paragraph:
The space agency is aiming for three shuttle flights in 2005 and then five a year through 2010, by which time station construction should be completed. The three remaining shuttles will be retired at that point, and NASA’s focus will shift to flying to the moon and beyond that to Mars.
I do not see Nasa even coming close to the 5 missions a year because of the turn around times after each flight.
Offline
Which is why NASA has re-negotiated ISS plans with the partner countries for an even more bare-boned ISS plan, which will shave the launch requirements to around 18 flights. In five years, with an average of 3.5 flights a year, this can be pulled off.
[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]
[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]
Offline
You have any good, detailed links to the new ISS plans, GCNRevenger? I mean, what will be scrapped, what not?
Please, pretty please?
Offline
Unfortunatly no, its heresay. Done in response to the Columbia accident, since sending up 25 flights in five years with three shuttles is unlikly.
[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]
[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]
Offline
That is why ESA have been development a cargo module for the Ariane V Luanch Vehicles for the ISS. If we use the ISS as our main humanflight platform in LEO then we need to add more partners to the project including building a private enterprise ISS program that would bring a private contractor into LEO, and build up expertise in LEO developments for the future of engineering in space.
Spreading the load to expand the ISS Platform it will allow, more variety of modules and components to expand the frontiers of humanity in space, while allowing everyone to set goals for the future.
Secondly a series of two or three modules could be added for space toruism managed by another private enterprise partner and expand than frontier a bit more. Also keeping the toruists away from the business end of the ISS. This will bring private enterprise into space, on a semi-permanent basis.
Know we have a space toruism and first spacedock developed and manned then we go after expanding to the moon and building a more comprehensive vessel to mars, with dozen or so, vehicles for landing on the Martian Surface, its moons and orbit for surveying and communication needs
With the spacedock it allows the creation of the cargo crafts for the moon to expand humanity to the moon. The possibilities are endless, but it needs a new approach to space, not just for scientists but now the business and public as well.
Offline
What? The ATV has been a part of the program since the ESA got onboard practicly, it has been in development for years, its hardly a new thing. Furthremore, the ATV cannot deliver payloads of signifigant volume (batteries, gyros, space suits, LSS gear, science racks, etc) because its hatch is too small, and neither the ATV nor Soyuz can return signifigant materials, either science samples for Earthly analysis or products from a private superchip/superdrug module.
The ISS is not really suited for expansion either, its gyros cannot accomodate a signifigantly larger station, there are few node hatches on the US or Russian ends of the station that are practical to attach large modules, plus additional equipment will introduce even more vibration, which will ruin sensitive experiments.
If you are going to build a large space station, then it would certainly be easier, cheaper, and last longer than the ageing and finicky ISS to simply build a new one. This time, with large pieces, inflatable modules, and perhaps a nuclear powerplant standard.
[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]
[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]
Offline
Bad Planning, I hope that we don't keep doing this , that is why the public things this is a was of resources, We need to build large platforms, So design the platform systems to build platforms 20x of current ISS Specifications or more. But the ISS could be upgraded to accommodate additional modules including a new gyro / command module, issues will have solutions, and we need to expand NOW not wait for another platform in another 10 years. Even we need to remodel the platform with a new gyro module with the extensions and change the central point of control. Use CAE process to work on this issue. Make a decision and then work on an implementation plan, it will also provide additional life to the space station.
Offline
Nah, making a huge station attached to the ISS doesn't make any sense. The gyros are housed in the center of the truss roughly where the center of gravity is, and if you stick a huge space station on the end of the ISS, then even if you move the gyros you are going to put the whole thing under high torque loads... it might simply snap if you change attitude.
The ISS is also getting old... it was never intended to last for a long time without constant heavy maintenance, which is no longer possible without Shuttle.
[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]
[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]
Offline
Then why spend the 200+ B building it , it was our beach head into space, If you design additional facilities to be connected to the ISS the center of gravity would move to between the new modules and the old modules, Think of ISS as phase one of a master plan housing development but in this case it is first phase of a large space platform, that over time change and even delete the ISS components as it changes and evloves, but we need to start now, not wait design , and build another, continously change the ISS Platform into the large spacesport in LEO. Don't waste the money building the ISS then starting on something else, use it and remodel it, save the money.
Offline
ISS is not getting old. It was designed to last 30 years, and it still has a long time left.
Offline