Russia to bar US from ISS flights after 2020


Recommended Posts

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.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

 

And a lot of cheesy movies!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.