You are not logged in.
There's been speculation on this forum about the US selling its interests in the International Space Station and getting out from under the thing.
I'm curious. Sell to who? A consortium? Stock holders? Another space agency?
Aside from the question of who would actually have enough money to complete the transaction(s), there is the question of motive. Why would someone buy a share of the ISS?
Assuming you, personally, had enough money to purchase any significant part of the ISS, which part would you want and what would you do with it?
I suppose that it would be more realistic to assume an individual only owned a portion of the station or package aboard it, but if the US really did look to sell out, other ISS partners might try to sell, too. If you played your cards right, you might end up with the whole thing.
"We go big, or we don't go." - GCNRevenger
Offline
I would add an artificial gravity module aka THE WHEEL(Oh glorious object). Inside would be comfy space-style beds, a shower, a toilet, a pet dog, and .25g.
I would also add a communication module, that I would allow companies like Verizon and Virgin Mobile to use for pay.
And of course I would have to add two more docking modules that would allow multiple ships(Soyuz or SpaceShipOne style) to doc of course.
And for a power source, a nuclear fission reactor.
Oh and television access to all the Star Trek and Stargate episodes in the world
The MiniTruth passed its first act #001, comname: PATRIOT ACT on October 26, 2001.
Offline
So you would add on instead of purchasing part of what's there?
"We go big, or we don't go." - GCNRevenger
Offline
Most likely yes.
The MiniTruth passed its first act #001, comname: PATRIOT ACT on October 26, 2001.
Offline
One could probably only take posession of the Nasa built modules only. Which means a lot of shared resources are needed from the other partners.
So any purchase would have to keep in mind lots of upgrade to make it a worth while purchase. Such that you would not need to pay the partners for those services.
Offline
One could probably only take posession of the Nasa built modules only. Which means a lot of shared resources are needed from the other partners.
So any purchase would have to keep in mind lots of upgrade to make it a worth while purchase. Such that you would not need to pay the partners for those services.
Yes, being able to get the whole thing would be critical. And once we had it, there is the question of servicing it and bringing in the things that people want to pay us for. Would that mean we would be forced to use the shuttle or the CEV to bring in, for example, the experiments that people hire us to do? It's hard for me to get the overall picture of the ISS in mind, but some posts on other ISS threads suggest that this would be the case.
Why doesn't someone who knows the ISS thoroughly be a "salesman" and let some of the rest of us (I volunteer) be potential customers and see how this comes out.
Offline
I'm curious. Sell to who? A consortium? Stock holders? Another space agency?
Aside from the question of who would actually have enough money to complete the transaction(s), there is the question of motive. Why would someone buy a share of the ISS?
Assuming you, personally, had enough money to purchase any significant part of the ISS, which part would you want and what would you do with it?
I would avoid the deal.
There is too much up keep on the ISS and you would have to keep busting it up and re-supplying the ISS would be a nightmare. Now if the ISS had already been upgraded with living quarters, gravity wheel, emergency return shuttle and maybe Ion drive engines to reboots the ISS. If there were a transportation system to get to and from the ISS and be able to supply the ISS with new resources at a reasonable price, then I might consider it.
But, then I would probably have competition to be able to get the ISS too.
Larry,
Offline
Doing something more than experiments would be a must. How about turning garbage into solar cells, fuels and maybe actually build something from scratch rather than bringing it up aboard a shuttle or some other rocket. Just bring up the raw materials or some processed ones to use for building. How about a solar furnace for smelting or blending of alloys.
There is alot more we could be doing in space than we are.
Offline
Amen Martian Republic
The very best and most profitable thing to do with the ISS, since it is not fit for a space hotel in its present form (no hab, not enough life support, lack of supplies, not enough Soyuz flights) would be to crash it onto solid ground and sell the debries for museum attractions or specialty jewly trinkets from melted metal.
The trouble of building things in space without the infrastructure, particularly to the ISS, is so great that it is easier to build anything and everything on Earth and simply launch it with more/larger rockets. Using the ISS as a construction or repair platform for anything is a badly losing proposition.
[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
As the date on the expiration seal comes ever closer in 2024, we may have that same question come up again as the Russians are most likely not to want to stay and the chances for replacement updated modules being sent up to keep a station in orbit seems unlikely.
Offline
Orbiting the Earth in style! Hilton Hotels is designing luxurious astronaut suites inside an inflatable space habitat
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech … bitat.html
The race to reinvent the space station
Offline