Re: ISS after completion

On Nov 12, 6:07 am, Harmon <harmon.ever...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
As I understand it, NASA is planning on "retiring" the ISS at the end
of its nominal planned lifetime of ten years past its completion date
of 2010, that is, in 2020. The ISS will be somehow retired and moved
off NASA's books. But they are still going to need it around to serve
as a shipyard/staging area for expeditions to The Moon or Mars. I
suspect something like a private consortium will be encouraged to
purchase it, or a "Port Authority" will be formed to manage it. Then,
NASA will sign on as something like an anchor tenant, to be able to
use it as such a shipyard/staging platform.
This has several consequences. For one thing, a quasi private
organization will be able to actively go after profit making
activities that NASA can't go after - space resort tourists and so on,
so that NASA is only paying a couple of hundred million per year as a
tenant in this facility, rather than paying the entire one and a half
or two billion that it currently is costing them. The assumption is
that if the ISS is being run by a private consortium, or a quasi-
private "Port Authority", the managing organization will be able to
make up the difference in the cost of maintaining the ISS with income
generated by its various private income generating activities.
This brings up questions about what possible other income generating
activities those might be, and what income can be expected to be
generated. And what activities are mutually exclusive?

Bigelow has announced he will charge 15 million dollars for a 4 week
stay for a single tourist, or lease a 300 cubic meter module for 88
million per year. This does not include transportation, or, I'm
assuming, spacewalks. If we assume that the ISS might accommodate 6
guests per week, that might translate into 78 tourists per year, for a
total income of 1 Billion, 170 million dollars.
But those tourists are going to want an orbit that is a high
inclination orbit, to go over their home country. A space shipyard
for Moon and Mars expeditions will want a much lower orbit, if not
strictly equatorial.

Other income producing concepts include microgravity research, but
that requires a vibration free environment. Including guests and a
shipyard on a space station provides excessive amounts of bouncing and
vibration, so I don't see those uses as being compatible. Is there a
good option for a "free flyer" module to accompany the ISS and be used
for research? That essentially requires a separate spacecraft, power
supplies and all, to be developed, that can dock with ISS, undock,
drift along on its own for a while, and then either be retrieved, or
accelerate on its own to dock again with the ISS.

What options are out there for money making projects for a privately
operated ISS?
Harmon


The relocation of ISS to our moon's L1 is technically doable, although
Venus L2 would be a whole lot more ISS and humanly survivable.

Besides folks in usenet naysayland being so well mainstream snookered
and clearly dumbfounded past the point of no return, therefore
officially certified as deaf and dumb, but otherwiae are these folks
also blind?

What if our semitic Third Reich wizards of most everything that was
NASA/Apollo, were still in charge of your private parts? (how much
longer before we see WWIII?)

What if in spite of our knowing the whole truth and nothing but the
truth, you silly folks insisted upon staying fully snookered and
dumbfounded past the point of no return?

The honest to God space race to our moon is nearly a done deal, as a
lunar based Chinese take-out franchise is likely to open soon,
starting with their moon's L1 and working their way down to that nasty
surface with those rad-hard androids and other robotics as safely
leading the way.

What part of our NASA/Apollo LLPOF worth of those supposed missions to/
from that highly electrostatic charged, as well as naked anticathode
gamma+X-ray+UV+IR(by day) saturated, and otherwise of such fluffy
crystal dry worth of an extremely low surface-tension environment, of
our somewhat salty and PHYSICALLY DARK as a open pit coal mine of a
moon is still all that believable?

Of course China is most likely to takeover the primary control/
management of our moon, as well as of its most valuable L1. (wouldn't
you, if you only could?)

Here's a couple of little extra astronomy and of hard core physics
truth worthy kinds of news that we can all use:

Comet Holmes Bigger Than The Sun
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/browse_frm/thread/035fd77608e6cc36

http://www.ifa.hawaii.edu/faculty/jewitt/holmes.html

Secondly, the book "Dark Mission" is actually a darn good name for
most any lunar kind of mission, and our good old Richard C. Hoagland
is clearly one of them pesky insiders that can obviously get away with
publishing almost anything, as long as it directly or indirectly
supports their NASA/Apollo ongoing ruse/sting of the century.

As per the usual Zion Third Reich plan of their global domination
actions, it seems these faith-based and thus incest mutated and
otherwise borg like folks of our NASA/Apollo disinformation fuckology
are right as rain, as we outsider kind of honest village idiots do in
fact suffer rather badly from the "specific type of mental disorder"
called the WTANBTTD (whole truth and nothing but the truth disorder).

In third place is "Japan First Back To The Moon!" / kT
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/browse_frm/thread/f38a85929879b6a0

That's absolutely right, however China is not exactly sitting on their
extremely wise old butts, are they.
http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2007/11/20071113_kaguya_e.html

BTW, notice how extremely dark and otherwise somewhat average coal
like 0.11 or actually of a slightly sooty darker kind of soft albedo,
that which our extremely dusty old and electrostatic charged moon
really is, as having been so clearly JAXA/HVTV imaged within the very
same FOV, as well as having been illuminated by the very same raw
solar spectrum that's unavoidably skewed by the excess amount of those
violet and UV photons.

Do we see anything of that naked lunar terrain that's looking the
least bit NASA/Apollo 0.65~0.075 albedo worthy, like a certain guano
island as xenon arc lamp spectrum illuminated and otherwise physically
modified to suit their hocus-pocus landings? (silly question, as I
didn't think so)

Now try to imagine how much brighter than Earth the little violet
color skewed pixel(s) worth of Venus are going to look. Actually the
likes of Mars, Jupiter and Saturn should also become part of those
future JAXA/KAGUYA(SELENE) obtained images, along with a few of those
most bright of background stars unless having been intentionally
spectrum filtered out or PhotoShop removed.

And to think that there's so much more of the truth to come via JAXA/
KAGUYA(SELENE), as well as from whatever China can uncover is just
around the next corner.
--
Brad Guth

.

Loading