Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Russia to bar US from ISS flights after 2020

41 posts in this topic

Posted

Take it where?

>

Their end has maneuvering engines and could be moved into another orbit. Once there more Russian modules could be added to enlarge it, at least 3 of which have already been built. Russia has been planning this for some time.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The delay in getting a shuttle. replacement was the fault of Congress and several presidents, of both parties.

Back in 1993 the HL-20 spaceplane was being developed to replace Shuttle after the ISS construction was done. It was stupidly cancelled, along with its 40% bigger brother the HL-42. Its design was sold to SpaceDev and is now part of the Commercial Crew program: SNC's Dream Chaser spaceplane. (SpaceDev merged with SNC)

 

yeah, but it still doesn't change the fact you cancelled the shuttle before there was a replacement ready. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Shuttle had to end, it was too dangerous to fly (14 deaths), and they required too much refurbishment between flights. Using real math vs. govt bean counter math it cost about $1.4 billion/launch.

 

And all 14 of those deaths were ultimately down to penny pinching bureaucrats who ignored warnings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Welcome to the new cold war...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Got it reversed. We cancelled the replacement before Shuttle HAD to be abandoned. Then Congress compounded it by underfunding Commercial Crew, which could have been flying next year.

Even with the underfunding SpaceX is ahead of schedule and be flying their own Astronaut Corps by next year. NASA and some in Congresz are watching closely, and meetings are being held about putting the Commercial Crew programs pedal to the metal.

And all 14 of those deaths were ultimately down to penny pinching bureaucrats who ignored warnings.

Yup. No argument there. That just shows how bad governments run things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think it's shameful that the US didn't replace the Shuttle program before it was discontinued.

 

 

THIS, they knew how long the shuttles were good for.  They should have replaced the shuttles when they had the money.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Retaliation over the Ukraine sanctions, which are startimg to hurt.

This has been brewing for some time anyhow. They'be threatened to discontinue RD-180 sales to the US before, and they have endlessly delayed launching several new modules to ISS so they can use them in a new Russia-only military space station.

They may try to disconnect part of the Russian section of ISS for their new station, leaving ISS with no propulsion system with which to reboost when needed.

To continue using ISS the other partners would have to replace the missing capabilities, or let it burn up over the Pacific on reentry.

An alternative would be to let that happen, then transfer ISS National Laboratory activities to a commercial station, most likely built by Bigelow Aerospace and SpaceX who have a partnership.

2 Bigelow BA-330 modules would be slightly smaller than ISS and able to handle a crew of 6. ONE BA-2100 Olympus module would be almost 2x the volume of ISS and able to handle a crew of 12. Add modules as needed, tinker toy style.

Alpha Station

bigelow-alpha-station.jpg

BA-2100 Olympus

bigelow+big.jpg

Genesis testbed still on-orbit since 2006

Z111.jpg

 

No I am not Russian but the photos read "ours is bigger than yours". And this is what is going on with Ukraine right now. Ukrainians want to be Russian and by the looks of it the entire country might vote 100% pro-Russia but the US have to have their way to look strong in the eyes of the "allies".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Welcome to the new cold war...

 

Hot or cold, war drives technological advances so... not really a -bad- thing in this case! :p

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Ignore... somebody answered my previous question on one of the pages prior.

Edited by bguy_1986

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Ignore... somebody answered my previous question on one of the pages prior.

 

they have a contract til 2020. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

No I am not Russian but the photos read "ours is bigger than yours". And this is what is going on with Ukraine right now. Ukrainians want to be Russian and by the looks of it the entire country might vote 100% pro-Russia but the US have to have their way to look strong in the eyes of the "allies".

Those station modules are by a private company who has been developing the tech since 2000 using private funds, long before the current problems. Also, NASA has been talking about using private space stations after ISS for several years.

This just improves the business case for both.

That these would be larger is due to the fact that Bigelow's polymer based technology, which is far cheaper to deploy than ISS's tin cans, gets cheaper per cubic meter as you make them larger. A side effect of Geometry 101.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Why go to the expensive time / effort to get cans docked into orbit again, just build on the moon :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Those station modules are by a private company who has been developing the tech since 2000 using private funds, long before the current problems. Also, NASA has been talking about using private space stations after ISS for several years.

This just improves the business case for both.

That these would be larger is due to the fact that Bigelow's polymer based technology, which is far cheaper to deploy than ISS's tin cans, gets cheaper per cubic meter as you make them larger. A side effect of Geometry 101.

 

geometry 101 also says that by simply blowing them bigger the only thing you achieve is getting more useless space for floating around, actual usable space doesn't increase as much as the volume you need to fill with breathable atmosphere. unless you also in subsequence transport up a lot of latticework and modular floors and walls and cabling to build usable space inside them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Why go to the expensive time / effort to get cans docked into orbit again, just build on the moon :D

 

Can't do zero g research on the moon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The Bigelow modules have a large central core, perfect for logistics and hardware as well as stiffenting the structure and connecting the docking bulkheads, and the outer walls are likewise usable for equipment mounts etc. In short, there's not as much empty space as you're presuming. The BA-2100 is also divided into several decks, further increasing useful "wall space" and minimizing dead air space.

All open spaces can be divided into cubicles such as a radiation shelter for solar events, a galley, bathroom, sleeping bays etc.

Some versions of BA-2100 are divided and have a huge airlock to allow bringing crewed spacecraft inside for servicing.

BA-330 mockup w/o wall hardware

ba-330-3-800.jpg

BA-2100 model

bigelow_interior.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hot or cold, war drives technological advances so... not really a -bad- thing in this case! :p

 

And a lot of cheesy movies!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.