ISS Woes & To-Mars

Palomar · 2005-05-09 07:47:06

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/iss-05zza.html]Roll out the barrel...we'll have a barrel of fun...not

*Will stick this here; don't want to create a new thread for just this.

--Cindy

SpaceNut · 2005-05-11 20:37:19

Well the Iss has recieved another sucessful lift, one more of a continuous string of many more to continue long after the shuttle is retired.
ISS ORBIT RISES 1.3 KM

SpaceNut · 2005-05-12 05:23:35

space politics Senate hearing on shuttle and beyond:
It hasn't shown up yet on the committee's web site, but the Senate Commerce Committee's science and space subcommittee is apparently planning a hearing for next week on issues associated with the retirement of the shuttle and the introduction of the CEV. Such a hearing has been anticipated for some time: new committee chairwoman Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) said some time ago she planned to hold two hearings, one on ISS and on the shuttle; the ISS hearing took place last month.

Will update hearing info as found.

Back to the ISS:
We will have spent over $100 billion by time the ISS is finished. Why would we not want to protect our investment not only in the near term but long term as well?

If all the US can do is resupply missions and these are to be only slightly of more in volume than a progress, soyuz combination then the station is in trouble before it is finished.

Any real repairs are going to need shuttle's lift capacity and bulk size cargo capability for as long as we are willing to protect the investment that we have made. What are the plans to replace the shuttle in this area is of great concern it the shuttle is 100% retired upon completion?

Science questions that utilize the stations capability for a reason yes but science to be preformed only for the sake of doing something with the equipment is a poor waste of time.

We should have moved on other things beyound that by this time. Such as recycling rocket parts into say a lunar cycler, or building a Lunar or mars landers from the same parts and more.

How about melting down the metals from the rockets and making items of need such as micrometeor shields, salvage yard space port docking garage and more.

These are not futuristic uses for the station needing science or technology for we have them. We only need to make the next step.

Grypd · 2005-05-13 03:17:40

It appears that Dr Griffin believes he can have the ISS complete enough to meet international expectations with only 18 launches of the shuttle. He then will have the shuttle retired and its stack converted to provide heavy lift.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mp … 97]Houston Chronicle article

SpaceNut · 2005-05-13 05:53:45

But it is the continued investment into the station that is of question. With the continual breaking of the oxygen generation unit one can only hope that we get the journey to beyound right.

Palomar · 2005-05-15 09:23:54

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/ft … ml]Roughly 140 days of oxygen left

*ISS oxygen generator fails totally; it's gone. It stopped working last week and the crew isn't able to fix it.

As it stands, oxygen supplies in a Progress cargo carrier now at the outpost will last until May 22 or May 23.
The crew also is equipped with oxygen generators that work like drop-down emergency air supplies on commercial airliners. Supplies from those would last until early July. Beyond that, there is a 100-day oxygen supply in tanks attached to the station U.S. Quest airlock.

--Cindy

GCNRevenger · 2005-05-15 11:44:43

Ha ha ha it keeps on becomming more and more of a bad joke... Mir-II here we come!

Without that generator, the ISS will be unable to make use of the water brought up by Shuttle's fuel cells, which will really cut into the payload budget.

Palomar · 2005-05-15 16:00:28

Ha ha ha it keeps on becomming more and more of a bad joke... Mir-II here we come!

*Mir-II; how apt! :laugh:

A money pit -- that's all it ISs.

--Cindy

Mad Grad Student · 2005-05-15 20:45:41

Why in the devil is it this hard to build a space station? A consortium with over 40 years of experience operating space stations is building the ISS, and they can't even keep an oxygen generator running? Good greif, what is this solar system coming to?

GCNRevenger · 2005-05-16 09:36:14

Why?

-The ISS was never actually intended, at least by the US and Russia, to be a research platform. From its inception, it has been a make-work project of mind-boggling scale for both countries from the beginning. Mostly for America, it was intended to be a destination for the Golden Goose (Shuttle) to fly to, and for Russia as the only plausable reason to maintain any real manned flight capability... Not to mention the opportunity to shake down NASA for hundreds of millions by intentionally sabotaging/delaying/lying about their share of the station.

-Persuant to the goal of building a "destination," and thanks to the "on the cheap" construction to sell the ISS to Congress and the Duma, the ISS was not, as the saying goes, "built to last." It was actually built in such a fasion as to require regular servicing throughout its entire life. Hence, things like the Oxygen generator and gyroscopes were built and tested to an inferior level of quality and reliability so that they would require replacement on purpose.

Without the ISS, there would have been no suitable justification to continue flying the Space Shuttle nor the Soyuz/Progress vehicles, which would have resulted in both countries' agencies being gutted if they couldn't come up with a new purpose to exsist. The USAF and Russian needs were to be fulfilled by EELV and Angara too, and there wouldn't be any need for manned flight there.

So, since NASA didn't have the guts (or possibly the support) to actually make exploration their justification to exsist, which would have also nessesitated the elimination of the majority of the Shuttle Army anyway, instead they came up with the idea of a space station... Congress balked at the price and how it would be useless until it was finished, and so then the Russians were brought in as a means of cutting cost, making it habitable earlier, AND keeping Russian rocket engineers from being laid off and going to build missiles for our potential enemies.

A nightmare from beginning to (and I hope not far off) end

SpaceNut · 2005-05-19 10:37:11

NASA Seeking New Ways to Send Crews, Cargo to Station

NASA plans to solicit new ideas for transporting cargo and crews to the International Space Station, the agency's administrator told a Senate panel today.

Part of the outcome of testimony from the as it spacepolitics says, a whirlwind of a "lightning round".

The testimony can be found here at the Human Spaceflight: The Space Shuttle and Beyond just follow each panels members link.

Same old same old thou for needing a way to get there. Or is this just a question of how much are we willing to pay?

SpaceNut · 2005-05-20 07:17:52

As the title says Mounting delays stress space station systems, Oxygen problems exacerbated; flight schedules affected.

The next Russian launching of the Soyuz TMA-7 is now listed a Oct. 22, instead of the original Sept. 27 date which would have brough up a Elektron system replacement unit.

With the delay to launch the shuttle for a fuel tank change and the possible event of a second test soon after this next one. The shuttle launch might not occur until july as indicated in the Another shuttle fueling test scheduled for Friday.

Thou crews are not in any danger the supply of oxygen candles could last 50 days if all canisters work. From there it is onto the oxygen tanks attached to the U.S. ‘Quest’ airlock. They are thought to contain about 362 pounds of gas, adequate for about 90 days of breathing.

GCNRevenger · 2005-05-20 07:34:16

Its still some kind of a bad, sick joke on us... mocking us or something. If the airlock's O2 tanks are emptied, does that mean the airlock won't work anymore?

If NASA really can't make minor repairs/changes to Shuttle way way way more efficently then this, then how in the world do they expect to fly the thing four or five times a year?

SpaceNut · 2005-05-20 07:43:20

Ya 4 or 5 time a year does not sound that hard to do considing it is only 2 times for each and once on the third shuttle. But still why can not a delta or atlas be used just as an oxygen cargo hauler to the ISS? It is not like you need it to dock with the station. Only just get close enough for a space walk in order to put it in closer to the station so as to drain the tanks and then to push it off to the graveyard in the sea once empty.

Palomar · 2005-05-20 08:01:45

*It doesn't seem these have been posted yet, anywhere (my apologies if so; I did scroll back and click links):

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/05 … .html]NASA may partially abandon space station The Iran connection.

(Yeah, let's abandon it -- PERMANENTLY).

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/05 … l]Igniting first oxygen-producing canisters

::shakes head::

--Cindy

SpaceNut · 2005-05-20 08:16:59

The if it is not safe scenario of risk to crew aboard the ISS as played by NASA is getting old. The russians with Mir aging and becoming a death trap kept there's occupied.

If we are not going to us it then convert what pieces that we can for the lunar base from it.
We will need solar panels, lots of air docks, the scientific equipment and its already in orbit.

GCNRevenger · 2005-05-20 09:28:33

Ya 4 or 5 time a year does not sound that hard to do considing it is only 2 times for each and once on the third shuttle. But still why can not a delta or atlas be used just as an oxygen cargo hauler to the ISS? It is not like you need it to dock with the station. Only just get close enough for a space walk in order to put it in closer to the station so as to drain the tanks and then to push it off to the graveyard in the sea once empty.

If its taking NASA this long to launch -one- Shuttle, then five a year is out of the question.

Its very simple why we can't send cargo via Delta/Atlas/etc, its all about the last-mile guidence. Getting into aproximatly the same orbit as the ISS isn't that hard, but rendevous is a difficult procedure. To put things in perspective, you have to be able to come to basically a dead stop with respect to the stations' motion, down to millimeters per minute of drift, even though both vehicles are moving ~25,000km/hr.

To make matters worse, you must aproach the station slowly so that you don't ram into it: a out-of-control freighter that is moving just a little too fast would easily become a missile deadly enough to burst the aluminum balloons that the Astronauts live in, in which case they would all promptly die. The Mir crew on their station got lucky when that Progress vehicle impacted it, all they had was a serious leak.

Plus, you at least have to get the thing within range of the robot arm: the ISS crews are unable to spacewalk away from their station, they -must- keep their feet or their hands on it at all times... So, not only must you be accurate enough to get the multi-ton cargo module to be aproximatly at a dead stop with respect to the fast-moving station, but you have to do it safely enough not to be a serious risk to the station with every flight, and you have to make it smart enough to maneuver within the meters-maximum range of the robot arm.

Its not easy, and you can't do a half-baked rush job

SpaceNut · 2005-05-20 09:44:44

So last-mile guidance, hmm .. isn't that what Dart was all about. Better yet copy the European ATV system for this purpose..

Spacewalk away from their station, they -must- keep their feet or their hands on it at all times... What ever happened to tethers?

you can't do a half-baked rush job... well thats true but all the pieces are there, it is a matter of implementation..

We must dare to be daring and that means risk once we are in a space environment.

GCNRevenger · 2005-05-20 12:19:16

Dart wouldn't have been smart enough to do the job most likly, it was too primative for that kind of job, and wouldn't have been able to safely get that close I don't think. Also, the ESA ATV isn't ready yet either, even if we did try to build/buy a copy.

The tether for an astronaut is purely an emergency safety device, once you are out on that tether away from the station, you couldn't do anything since you wouldn't be able to control your motion, much less the motion of a ten-tonne cargo ship. Even if you did get it going, you would have to be extremely careful to slow it down, lest the poor astronaut accidently smash the cargo vehicle into the station (with him inbetween perhaps).

There are no quick (<100 day) fixes for this situation other then rushing a Russian cargo ship or finally flying Shuttle.

SpaceNut · 2005-05-23 11:42:09

Well one way to help the ISS and get rid of the shuttle sooner is to not use the shuttle for consumable cargo.
NASA to Seek Bids for ISS Cargo Deliveries

NASA Administrator Mike Griffin said the U.S. space agency will call for proposals this year from companies interested in delivering cargo to the international space station (ISS).
NASA announced last year that it intended to buy space station resupply services from the private sector but never got around to issuing a formal request for proposals.

Well is about time then...

But then again how much does Nasa spend now?
How much do we tip the Russians for this service?
Is 500 million to much to pay per flight or is how many tons that matters?

SpaceNut · 2005-05-25 12:14:02

Well it appears that Millionaire resumes space training; Greg Olsen is back in Russia, seeking trip to orbit is back on.
The price is around the 20 million to go.
Will there be others?

SpaceNut · 2005-05-26 10:25:04

Well the station has started burn the russian oxygen candles and there are duds in the batch onboard.

NASA Space Station On-Orbit Status 24 May 2005

The crew burned one SFOG (solid-fuel oxygen generator) "candle" today to increase ppO2 (oxygen partial pressure). An attempt to burn a second candle, however, was unsuccessful. [Russian ECLS specialists have estimated that approximately 20% of the onboard SFOGs will not ignite, which is taken into account in the onboard O2 supplies estimates. Each LiClO4 (lithium perchlorate) cartridge produces 600 liters (1.74 lb) of oxygen by thermal decomposing, enough for one person per day. SFOG operation is done with half masks, protective goggles and air sampling instruments nearby for quick access in the event of odor during candle combustion. Total number burnt to date: 5.]

Lots of science info in article.

Palomar · 2005-05-26 12:24:12

*I'd laugh, if human lives weren't at stake.

Duds, huh? Seems appropriate though, as that's what the ISS is. And a money pit.

How did the space exploration effort so DEvolve? This, overall, would have been an unthinkable EMBARRASSMENT 35 years ago. When we were actually -accomplishing- things (regardless of motive/purpose).

It's exasperating and annoying.

--Cindy

P.S.: Think I'll start making ISS pinatas for sale to space enthusiasts.

Cobra Commander · 2005-05-26 12:54:09

P.S.: Think I'll start making ISS pinatas for sale to space enthusiasts.

Full of money, I hope.

That way when you bring it down you can afford to do something worthwhile.

And don't even think about delivering them on time or on budget.

Palomar · 2005-05-26 15:52:35

P.S.: Think I'll start making ISS pinatas for sale to space enthusiasts.
Full of money, I hope.
That way when you bring it down you can afford to do something worthwhile.
And don't even think about delivering them on time or on budget.

*Hmmmmm...that gives me some additional ideas, Cobra:

--Lined with steel so no matter how many whacks it gets, no rewards forthcoming.

--Make them so fragile just the slightest touch will cause it to fall completely apart.

--Even a soft tap of the pinata stick makes it whirl madly out of control; it flies off the string and threatens to collide with and injure partygoers standing round.

Okay, I'll quit. :laugh:

--Cindy

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#151 2005-05-09 07:47:06

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#152 2005-05-11 20:37:19

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#153 2005-05-12 05:23:35

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#154 2005-05-13 03:17:40

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#155 2005-05-13 05:53:45

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#156 2005-05-15 09:23:54

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#157 2005-05-15 11:44:43

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#158 2005-05-15 16:00:28

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#159 2005-05-15 20:45:41

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#160 2005-05-16 09:36:14

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#161 2005-05-19 10:37:11

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#162 2005-05-20 07:17:52

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#163 2005-05-20 07:34:16

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#164 2005-05-20 07:43:20

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#165 2005-05-20 08:01:45

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#166 2005-05-20 08:16:59

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#167 2005-05-20 09:28:33

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#168 2005-05-20 09:44:44

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#169 2005-05-20 12:19:16

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#170 2005-05-23 11:42:09

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#171 2005-05-25 12:14:02

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#172 2005-05-26 10:25:04

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#173 2005-05-26 12:24:12

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#174 2005-05-26 12:54:09

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

#175 2005-05-26 15:52:35

Re: ISS Woes & To-Mars

Board footer