Re: COULD THE ISS BECOME A RUSSO-EUROPEAN PROJECT?
From: Bill Bonde ( ``Soli Deo Gloria'' ) (stderr2_at_backpacker.com)
Date: 08/18/04
- Next message: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: Interstellar Propulsion idea using an Asteroid and a few comets!"
- Previous message: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\): "Re: Interstellar Propulsion idea using an Asteroid and a few comets!"
- In reply to: Jim Oberg: "COULD THE ISS BECOME A RUSSO-EUROPEAN PROJECT?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:57:54 -0700
Jim Oberg wrote:
>
> COULD THE ISS BECOME A RUSSO-EUROPEAN PROJECT?
>
> linked from http://www.spacetoday.net/
>
> 2004-08-05 16:37 MOSCOW. August 3. (RIA Novosti political commentator
> Andrei Kislyakov.)
>
> It is becoming increasingly difficult to tally US declarations about the
> International Space Station (ISS) with reality. On the one hand, President
> Bush and NASA have given repeated assurances that the US still sees the ISS
> as a unique international project in manned space flight. On the other hand,
> words alone cannot make equipment, especially sophisticated space equipment,
> keep functioning. Money is needed for the final version of the space station
> to appear in all its beauty, complete with new Russian and US-Canadian
> elements, the European Columbus orbital facility and the Japanese Kibo
> module.
>
> However, are the requisite funds available? Until the US resumes shuttle
> flights, all the ISS can do is try to survive. No matter how great Russia's
> space capabilities may be, while the shuttles are grounded the station has
> to operate on a minimum skeleton crew of two. So, it appears that before the
> shuttles fly off into the sunset of a well-deserved retirement, a great deal
> of work will have been done. Firstly, this means enabling astronauts to live
> on the ISS on a permanent basis. Secondly, the further construction of the
> US and Canadian modules is pointless without the shuttles, as the entire
> orbital equipment was designed exactly for this transport system.
>
> When commenting on NASA plans for the old shuttles, Nikolai Moiseyev, deputy
> director of Russia's Federal Space Agency, quoted the US side as saying that
> "considerable funds would be required for this, but Congress has not yet
> approved them. The sum in question is about one billion dollars, which is an
> issue for even such a wealthy country as the United States." So, there may
> be some good intentions, but the cash is obviously a problem.
>
> Finally, it looks like the Americans simply fear the ISS. Here is just one
> example. A New York Times report featured a senior NASA official who
> preferred to remain anonymous categorically rejecting the idea of using the
> ISS as a shelter for shuttle crews in emergencies. The argument is based on
> expert conclusions that the space station's present life-support system
> could not cope with the increased demand for oxygen, water and food. The
> figures are as follows: the experience of servicing orbital stations shows
> that the average period a crew of nine can survive is 59.6 days. The
> conclusion was that there would still not be enough time for another shuttle
> to complete a rescue operation. Russian Soyuz rescue spaceships were totally
> ignored, as if the Russian partners simply did not exist.
>
Since there wouldn't need to be nine crew if the shuttle ended up at the
ISS, but instead nine minus the three who could go home right away on
the Soyuz capsule, the math on the total time they could stay needs to
be redone.
- Next message: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: Interstellar Propulsion idea using an Asteroid and a few comets!"
- Previous message: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\): "Re: Interstellar Propulsion idea using an Asteroid and a few comets!"
- In reply to: Jim Oberg: "COULD THE ISS BECOME A RUSSO-EUROPEAN PROJECT?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
