NASA and the ISS

[Timdreamer]

So, the American taxpayer paid through the nose to build the International Space Station and NASA is now planning to turn it over to a private corporation. Once again we get stuck footing the bill and get no benefit from it at all. :bang: Well, almost none... :lol:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech...poration/ar-BBvOx2P?li=AA4Zoy&ocid=spartandhp

 

[markkoelsch]

I thought we were not the sole owners of it. How do we make this decision unilaterally?

I think we should just stop using it, and stop paying to launch astronauts to it. We have garnered what we could from it already I do believe.

I might feel different had try built it to support the assembly of larger interplanetary craft in earth orbit.

 

[JStarStar]

There is a point to continuing manned space flight "just to do it" -- to increase our operational skills in the discipline.

If we drop out of participation in the ISS Americans will make space flights on a once-every-2-3 years basis (i.e. About the same as the Chinese space program.)

 

[cerving]

Maybe NASA should just sell their assets to Space-X. The last presidential candidate who was a big NASA supporter was John Glenn...

 

[SaturnV]

I no longer interested in this station. What the hell do there at all? Otherwise, it is logical, NASA have not rocket to get there This agency after stopping the shuttle turned into amateur association Sent small robots into space and nothing more.I forgot the new telescope. This is good but insufficient.

 

[Peartree]

I no longer interested in this station. What the hell do there at all? Otherwise, it is logical, NASA have not rocket to get there This agency after stopping the shuttle turned into amateur association Sent small robots into space and nothing more.I forgot the new telescope. This is good but insufficient.

Just this week the ISS astronauts were installing the docking adapter for commercial spacecraft. At least two such craft (SpaceX and Boeing) are scheduled to arrive at the ISS within the next year or two. NASA itself is developing another spacecraft that should fly in the next three years that should eventually carry heavier payloads than the SaturnV. Also, for what it's worth, the spacecraft currently flying, such as DeltaIV Heavy, are NOT small. Neither should someone describe the most recent Mars rover as "small" when it is roughly the size of an SUV. And, although it *is* smaller than the Space Shuttle, the space plane currently being flown by the US Air Force should likewise not be described as "small." Although manned spaceflight has, in recent years, not been as exciting as during the heyday of the space race, NASA and other organizations have been very busy and the pace of rocket launches in the United States and around the world has been very busy.

 

[SaturnV]

I read about it. Just do not understand how these new ships will be brought over a load of Saturn V. 3 course he could drive the entire space station currently weighs tons to 450 if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Peartree]

I read about it. Just do not understand how these new ships will be brought over a load of Saturn V. 3 course he could drive the entire space station currently weighs tons to 450 if I'm not mistaken.

Mass as of last year was 924,740 lb (462 tons). The pressurized volume was 32,898 cu ft.

Saturn V mass to LEO was 310,000 lbs (155 tons).

That's at least three maxed out Saturn V flights purely by weight.

The habitable (pressurized) volume of Skylab, which was essentially the entire third state of a Saturn V vehicle was only 12,750 cu. ft.

So again, it would take a minimum of three full up Saturn V flights to equal the current ISS.

That said, construction using the mighty Saturn V would have been a LOT faster than it was using the Space Shuttle but flights to simply fly up supplies and crew would have been wasted on such a massive (and expensive) vehicle.

 

[SaturnV]

Naturally, Saturn V would not deliver crew ,to supply the crew and no sense of the shuttle. A small rocket as a Soyuz or Falcon is sufficient. The shuttle should only be used for removing cargo from orbit, not for uploading. This could be used far more expensive cargo rocket.But the question of what makes this station for me remains open. I have not heard to test new nuclear rocket engine. Neither magnetic shield. nor laser beam against micrometeorites. What are they doing there anyway?Why not at least module with artificial gravity by rotation, I think this is not at all difficult to do and it will be very comfortable to sit 1.2 hours per day in gravity.