| Author | Message | ||
     Doerman |
Now that the construction phase is completed with the last shuttle flight, what will be the Space Station's ongoing missions? I did a light search on NASA's website and Google in general and I have not come across concrete statements regarding what the crew and equipment is expected to accomplish in the months/years to come. I know there are multiple science labs on the vehicle and a bunch of different projects and experiments are going on but I have seen no details on that. Do any of you have data/information of what's next up for the IST? Early on, if memory serves, one of the purposes for the IST was to serve as an orbital re-supply station for missions to other destinations. That seems to have fallen by the wayside. In other words, now that we have it, what are we going to use it for? | ||
| 2008xb12scg |
And how will we get there? john Glenn said he couldn't believe we had to go to another country to get a ride... | ||
| Xdigitalx |
2014 we will have a new rocket to ride in, until then the Russians are our taxi. | ||
| Dannyd |
Lazer beam mounting platform to use against asteroids and aliens!! | ||
| Cityxslicker |
next 'reality' tv show location - it seems most of what the media want to feed, promote, replicate; and apparently at a sickening level, we will consume, obsess and emulate. It is a veneer of life so close to the parameters of the propaganda of 'Soviet Realism' that few see it. | ||
| Whatever |
| ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
2014 we will have a new rocket to ride in, until then the Russians are our taxi. Hasn't Orion been pushed out to 2016,at the earliest? | ||
| Aesquire |
Orion is dead. You'll never see another NASA built manned ship fly again. NASA's new job is making Muslims feel better about themselves by promoting the awesome science created by islamic alchemists back in the 14th century. ( at which point the mullahs stopped all that modern sexy licentious crap and dragged islam back to the 8th century, where it resides today ) Truth to tell, NASA hasn't built much for decades. It was long vanished American Aerospace companies that built space ships. Like Rockwell, Grumman, and Northrup. ( though Grumman still builds a very fine line of jets, but that industry is under attack by the President... ) No, Orion is toast, before a single one is built. Private, American space enthusiasts will build the next generation. In fact, the capsule already flies, and, because the private guys are smarter than Congress, built it to carry people even though the contract with NASA is just for a resupply truck. Shmart guys built it with a hatch and window. They could carry you into space this year, if you tossed cash at them and told NASA and the rest of the Gov to kiss off on "man rating".... I might wait until they have a little more practice, if I were you. http://www.spacex.com/ See also Scaled Composites http://www.scaled.com/ They haven't hit orbit yet, but with Burt Rutan ( retiring soon ) they got a good team. I like a company that knows what its doing. ( like Erik Buell Racing ) http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/aviation_week /on_space_and_technology/index.jsp?plckController= Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=a68 cb417-3364-4fbf-a9dd-4feda680ec9c&plckPostId=Blog% 3Aa68cb417-3364-4fbf-a9dd-4feda680ec9cPost%3Ace084 daa-4385-40ee-9664-b29f4a0cfecb&plckScript=blogScr ipt&plckElementId=blogDest So there is hope, but not for NASA. It's been a bloated work program for years. Sorry we've abandoned space as a nation, but if you learn Chinese, you still might see the Earth from far away. We just won't hold the high ground anymore. ( and that means we lose. ) | ||
| Aesquire |
Ooops! sorry, forgot, NASA's other job is promoting Global Warming. | ||
| Sifo |
NASA's other job is promoting Global Warming. Do you have any idea how much CO2 is pushed out the tail pipe of the space shuttle?  | ||
| Aesquire |
None. It runs on Hydrogen & Oxygen. The exhaust is water vapor. A far more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2. ( the solid boosters do put out some CO2 ) | ||
| Sifo |
the solid boosters do put out some CO2 Quite a lot! | ||
| Gregtonn |
Uh, seems someone needs to make a clear distinction between the International Space Station and the Space Shuttle. I was one of the engineers who designed many of the power system ORUs (Orbital Replacement Units) for the International Space Station. (When we first started designing it, it was named Space Station Freedom.) The Space Station will continue to be used for many years to come. The Space Shuttle will not. G | ||
| Gaesati |
Surely, it is in the interest of small government to encourage private enterprise to build the next generation of space craft without cost to the taxpayer? Richard Branson seems to be one entrepreneur who is well on the way. | ||
| Blake |
Not so much. An aircraft like his that merely spurts up to 100,000' then just falls back down to earth is not really a spacecraft as it has no means of achieving orbit or actually remaining in space. It's nothing but a very expensive amusement ride. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
or a poor mans ICBM | ||
| Gaesati |
True, but surely the technology and skills are out there in private industry and the efficiency of the private sector makes the process vastly cheaper. There is a role for government in seeding programs but the market should be able to mobilise capital if an activity is worth doing. | ||
| Aesquire |
Blake, if he makes money on his high priced amusement park ride, that's fine with me. The Concorde never made money, and the US SST's never flew. ( even though one model cost more to cancel than to finish..... ) The ISS is a great thing. ( and it's paid for. You'd NEVER be able to build it today. Isn't our money better spent on social programs for the transgendered? That logic completely skips that fact that every dime spent on space gets paid to humans here to build stuff. Remember jobs? ) Good science can be had there, if good choices are made. Microgravity is a very interesting place to do some stuff. Diamonds can be grown cheaply to any size. ( not a likely source for jewelry, unless a Kardashian gets engaged and needs a 5 pound ring to upstage a sister ) Unlikely chemical compounds can be created, etc. etc. True, it's international nature means we spent much longer building it, and essentially paid for the Russian bits, a couple of times. ( had to fix them so they'd actually work ) But we now have to hitch a ride to get there. And the Russians are perfectly capable of going passive aggressive on giving us rides up, if, for example, we annoy them with such little things as asking them to stop selling modern anti-aircraft gear to Iran or Syria or Libya. "Sorry Houston, we had to cancel your seats and give them to Rupert Murdoch's newspaper staff so they could get away from some cell phone scandal." Besides, they'd pay more. Bottom line for me is that Space is the high ground. There's a reason castles are built on hills. Projectiles go further, and recon is easier. While we do not currently have orbital weapons, such concepts as Thor and Brilliant Pebbles are pretty developed. Easy enough to do if we wished. The tech is all there. That ALSO means the Chinese could start putting a full Thor array into orbit and use it on us, or India. Denials would be SOP for the Chinese, after all they never admit to anything the don't want to. ( remember the vicious attack on that poor jet fighter by our unarmed 1950's converted prop airliner? ) | ||
| Aesquire |
Gaesati, I'm all for private industry in Space. The question is, will they be allowed? Will any rocket company be put out of business by the same religious exploitation that this President promises will make coal power plants obsolete? Will the Global Cooling Cultists make rocket exhaust the new "denier" evil? | ||
| Gaesati |
Does government have the right to stop individuals going into space if they can get there? Does government have the right to stop business exploiting space thereby creating jobs and a tax stream? | ||
| 46champ |
Does government have the right to stop individuals going into space if they can get there? Does government have the right to stop business exploiting space thereby creating jobs and a tax stream? NO Does government have the ability to stop individuals and business from going and exploiting space? That is a different question and unfortunately that answer is yes. | ||
| Doerman |
Good feedback. Mostly on lift capacity. And fortunately SpaceX seems to be able to take on what NASA is defocusing. I was more curios to find out what the Space Station will be used for now that the construction phase is completed. Aesquire touched on some of it. It is really hard to find concrete mission statements for the IST in searches. maybe there is no concrete mission statement. | ||
| Aesquire |
Concrete mission statement? No, that would be too heavy.  the ISS has multiple uses. Planetary observation, a safe haven in orbit, a science platform, and the ever evolving search for how to stay alive in a very hostile environment. How long can you live in freefall? What are the best foods and exercises to keep some muscle tone? Fat lot of good a Mars expedition will be if the astronauts can't walk. How do you make a life support system that will run for months and years? Mir was famous for growing mold, and you can't use clorox cleanup in a sealed can. Lots to learn. The problem is not what to do, it's getting the first 70 miles up. After you are in orbit, the rest of the solar system is easy. There are a variety of space drives that are too weak to lift you 100 miles up and Mach25 sideways, but are fine to get to Mars or the Asteroids or even Pluto. ( still a Planet damn it! some people! ) Once you can get reasonable orbital costs, exploiting the riches of the System are profitable. Raw materials, solar power, etc. Solar has issues on Earth. There's night, the best places for sun tend not to have enough water to wash the dust off, and covering Texas with panels is going to annoy the natives and the environmentalists. And it should. Ban cross country motorcycle racing, but it's fine to cover the desert with mirrors and boilers? That would change weather patterns and microclimates as dew forms in the new shadows and changes all sorts of balances. But. Put the same acreage in orbit, and you no longer need to wash them, and the power can be beamed down even at night. ( You also need superconducting main power lines to shuffle the power around and a backbone not prone to overload and blackouts. ) The Space Solar project will create many jobs both here and in orbit, ( mostly here ) and build the infrastructure for more and cheaper access to orbit. The only question is will the power sats have English writing on the parts, or Chinese? As for Raw Materials, a single one mile wide nickel iron rock would mean no iron mining needed for a year. Platinum group metals may be found in asteroidal rock. Helium 3 from lunar dust... And it's always a good idea to have more than one basket to keep your eggs in. Not to mention that today we'd have zero chance of deflecting a Killer Rock. If we have the high ground, we'd have a chance. Face it, if you can't get Bruce Willis and Billy Bob up there with a nuke, we all die.  | ||
| Gregtonn |
Okay, I guess even though the thread title is about the ISS it seems to be mostly about launch vehicles. One small fact that most people don't seem to know: The Space Shuttle has never had the ability to exceed low earth orbit. In other words, we (USA) don't currently have a man-launch vehicle capable of reaching the moon or even launching space cowboys to a nearby asteroid. G | ||
| Aesquire |
The ISS is going to stay up as long as we keep shipping it fuel and keep it maintained. Hopefully it will be around awhile. Why so few people know what it's for? NASA is the only organization on the planet that could make space travel boring. That's why no one knows what or why they do anything. It's freaking amazing. Tom Hanks should be in charge, we'd have colonies on the moon by now, and the first interstellar probes would already be on the way. The Shuttle, and Star Trek, are the only places where they routinely take the engines up to 110% power. On Star Trek a monitor explodes. on the Shuttle they wonder if they could get upgraded to a Pentium II. Get to the moon? Heck no, we lost half the plans for the Saturn, and the old data tapes can only be read if you refurb a computer out of a museum, if there still is one on Earth. We can't even get to orbit. We also don't have mach 3 spyplanes anymore, or a lot of great stuff from the 1950's. Consider that we had a prototype mach 3 jet bomber that surfed it's own shock wave, was also intended to be the test project for a mach 3 SST and was built from Stainless Steel Honeycomb. ( Also one of the 2 prototypes crashed after a mid air collision on a promo photo shoot. ) | ||
| Crackhead |
The shuttle was never built to achieve great then polar orbit. It's main focus was to haul stuff up. Think of it as a giant truck or in a pinch a buss (STS-3xx). I agree with Aesquire, we have given up the high ground. The ISS doesn't have a mission statement because it suffers from multiple personality syndrome. In order to get the $ to built ISS, NASA had to ••••• it's self out to politicians. | ||
| Etennuly |
Star-wars projects like space weapons aimed at Earth targets, and killing each other, are short term goals of the space race. Is not the real mission of the space program that we have a way to get off this rock to another rock for survival of the species? We are planning for the big leveler of an asteroid that will make a crater the size of Texas and make life forms(us) extinct on Earth. That is if we do not kill off life on the planet with our own foolishness and toxins first. So like bacterial microbes we must move on to infect another planet with our being. Like bacteria we will have to alter our bodies to be able to live on the new host planet. But really, if we don't get there before our demise, it is all wasted effort. So I say let's quit bickering about the small stuff Worldwide, stop blowing each other up and get everyone to focus on saving the species(except of course the one's we don't like(the power of being first)) so that our thirtieth generation of children, from now out into time, has a place to live since we will have used up this planet and all of it's resources. | ||
| Blake |
>>> Mostly on lift capacity. And fortunately SpaceX seems to be able to take on what NASA is defocusing. That should read "what Obama is defocusing." Congress thankfully has other ideas. Of course then there is the military. Almost all the heavy lifting to orbit capability is provided by private industry. NASA just provides the launch facilities. | ||
| Blake |
Brian, >>> or a poor mans ICBM Yeah, one that comes back down right on his own head. LOL. | ||
| Gregtonn |
"Almost all the heavy lifting to orbit capability is provided by private industry." Partially true. The real heavy lifting is done by rockets built outside the US. I have first hand knowledge of how/why the Chinese got help from Loral with their rocket guidance systems. It had nothing to do with espionage. It had to do with the lack of a reliable heavy lifter and some poorly thought out decisions. G |
