ISS to be de-orbited in 2016!

[Eccentrus]

It seems pretty bloody stupid, like we're going backwards.

We are not going backwards, we now know what will happen to a human body, given a long exposure to microgravity (days spent going to the moon and back is not long enough) we need to know what will happen to the human body when living in microgravity for months and years, exactly the same problem you'll meet when going to mars, and also, in the apollo program, there's no space toilet, just plastics to go by, but since ISS, there's one working up there. You see, you might think that we're going nowhere, but in fact, we figured out much about what we'll need to survive in space for a long mission. and I personally think that ISS and other habitat stations will be obsolete once the Lunar base is built (refueling and science bases would still be needed of course) And don't forget about the advancements of power management because of ISS is there.

 

[Yoda]

My question would be if we are to de-orbit the ISS in 6-7 years and if it is currently giving us very minimal scientific output why the hell do we even bother finishing the thing ?
Can't we use the money that's beeing waisted finishing something that is obsolete in 6-7 years for better purposes ?

On top of this, if the Orion isn't ready to fly until 2014 ( if it even ever will) are we just to use it for 1-2 years until we throw the ISS away ?

NASA should have a long critical look at what they are doing and what their actual path should be.

Stop dumping money into this bottom-less pit called the ISS and Orion and move on......

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

Very good point.

If Ares-I is not going to be flown until at least 2016, and the ISS is going to be de-orbited in 2016, then why are NASA wasting money designing and building the Ares-I, when it will be obsolete by the time it comes into service???

Why design two separate rockets in order to be able to launch to two different places, when there will only be one thing to launch to (The Moon) by the time they eventually come into service???
NASA would be better off putting all their funding & efforts into the Ares V, and launching Orion atop that.

I agree that a serious review is needed.

I hope that Bolden & The Augustine Commission will evaluate NASA's future plans and come up with something that actually makes sense.

 

[BHawthorne]

It seems pretty bloody stupid, like we're going backwards.

It's because NASA/government is project and mission orientated, not logic orientated. Mission outline accomplished = no more funding = need to get new project. All these things regardless of what is done means big bucks to sub-contractors. What does a sub-contractor care if they de-orbit the ISS if in 20 years down the road they make another equally limited scope station to replace it with? Same with STS and whatever else they come up with in the next decade. Don't fool ourselves into thinking they build this stuff strictly for scientific progress alone. They build it because politicians have aerospace industries in the locations that they govern.

My question would be if we are to de-orbit the ISS in 6-7 years and if it is currently giving us very minimal scientific output why the hell do we even bother finishing the thing ?
Can't we use the money that's beeing waisted finishing something that is obsolete in 6-7 years for better purposes ?

NASA didn't do STS or ISS because of science, they did it to infuse funding into aerospace manufacturing sector. These projects could be seen by some as repayment of political favors to big business. This is much more predominant in military manufacturing than aerospace manufacturing though.

 

[doggie015]

Is it a danger to anyone or anything if left alone?

Need I remind the orbiting community about what happened to Skylab?

It did have a posative impact for Aus, It put esperance on the map in a big way!

 

[JamesG]

It was still a staggering investment to put all that mass up there and it is still a considerable amount of LEO pressurized volume. Perhaps by 2016 they will find a commercial buyer willing to take it off their hands. Or if not, there are always the Chinese...

I'm with boosting it to a stable parking orbit and leave it there either as a future orbiting museum, or as raw materials/platform for some future project.

 

[n122vu]

[rambling]
Why not kill two birds with one stone? Launch a shuttle, dock to the ISS, do a 13 hour OMS burn and push the ISS to lunar orbit. Boom. You've got 6 astronauts on the ISS and at least two on the shuttle doing research in lunar orbit. Deorbit the shuttle and crash it into the moon and measure the seismic effects to see if there are any abnormalities. Give a Soyuz some upgrades to have trans-lunar capability, use that as supply and crew rotation vehicle, and while you're at it, launch up a lunar lander into LEO on one, then launch a TLI-capable boster another, dock with the lander, push it to the moon, dock the lander to the ISS, a couple station crew get in the lander, go to the moon, yada yada, come back to the station....
[/rambling]

Just dreaming, don't take to seriously...

 

[eveningsky339]

I remember the good old days when it took only one launch to put a functional and useful space station into orbit (Skylab).

Then the ISS comes along, being put together bit by bit with the obscenely expensive and complicated space shuttle.

NASA lost its luster after Skylab.

 

[Urwumpe]

I remember the good old days when it took only one launch to put a functional and useful space station into orbit (Skylab).

Then the ISS comes along, being put together bit by bit with the obscenely expensive and complicated space shuttle.

NASA lost its luster after Skylab.

Actually, monolithic space stations like Skylab are technologically far behind modular stations like Mir or the ISS.

Also, Skylab was neither functional nor useful. It was launched pretty damaged and required repairs, for just being partially useful. It was better than the contemporary soviet stations (Hard to tell exactly as they failed by launch vehicle or visiting Soyuz spacecraft), but not so much better for it's 90 tons of mass - compared to 25 tons for the Soviet ones. And I think I don't have to mention the many limitations of Skylab, like needing the Apollo CSM for voice communication and life support.

And I don't say anything about the Shuttle, as long as I don't see the alternative... while the Shuttle has many problems and is to blame for the ISS delays, the ISS did not have more problems than Mir. Mir had many problems with launching it's modules without the Shuttle, and the Shuttle-Mir missions had been one of it's brighter days.

And playing monolithic space stations in orbiter is boring

 

[Unstung]

I read a quote somewhere that said it should just be given to another country who will support the ISS.
NASA needs more funding.

 

[Pilot7893]

One thing that scares me more than anything else is the idea of nothing having any point. Of us living in a pointless world. Of the universe having no value whatsoever. Of course, depending on what your definition of something "having a point" is, this might be true.

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

One thing that scares me more than anything else is the idea of nothing having any point. Of us living in a pointless world. Of the universe having no value whatsoever. Of course, depending on what your definition of something "having a point" is, this might be true.

I feel the same way. I hope that there is some purpose to the universe and our lives in it.

But, I always answer to such questions:

I don't know why we're here, and I don't know what our purpose is. But we are here, so we might as well make the best of it for ourselves, as a species.

 

[willy88]

Why not just give it/sell it to a private corporation?

 

[Arthur Dent]

There are only a few companies out there that could afford it and that a crazy enough to use and maintain it. Maybe Google...

 

[Moonwalker]

If the ISS indeed should be de-orbited in 2016, then that's the second good news beside the Space Shuttle retirement next year. This clears the way for Constellation and so for actions beyond LEO finally. NASA is on a good way, after pausing for more than three decades.

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

If the ISS indeed should be de-orbited in 2016, then that's the second good news beside the Space Shuttle retirement next year. This clears the way for Constellation and so for actions beyond LEO finally. NASA is on a good way, after pausing for more than three decades.

I beg to differ.

If we're going to just scrap the ISS and the Shuttle and go back to the Moon, then who says that we won't just scrap that idea too when we get bored of it?

And I don't think NASA have "paused" for three decades at all. Shuttle, ISS, Hubble, robotic missions to other planets, countless satellites, International co-operation, etc.
NASA have in fact accomplished far more today than they had in the time of Apollo. The only difference, is that maybe it is not as glamorous as landing on the Moon, and so the general public just don't care. But I think that if the public open their eyes and actually look at some of the technical accomplishments, they will find that we are doing much more advanced stuff today than we were during Apollo.

 

[Moonwalker]

If we're going to just scrap the ISS and the Shuttle and go back to the Moon, then who says that we won't just scrap that idea too when we get bored of it?

Constellation is more than going to the Moon.

And I don't think NASA have "paused" for three decades at all.

They did not only pause going beyond LEO, they did not even think about it.

Shuttle, ISS, Hubble, robotic missions to other planets, countless satellites, International co-operation, etc.
NASA have in fact accomplished far more today than they had in the time of Apollo. The only difference, is that maybe it is not as glamorous as landing on the Moon, and so the general public just don't care. But I think that if the public open their eyes and actually look at some of the technical accomplishments, they will find that we are doing much more advanced stuff today than we were during Apollo.

That's completely right.

But we should stop talking about going to Mars manned and start doing so. NASA is able to continue lots of non-manned stuff. But NASA won't operate the ISS, the Shuttle, and go to the Moon, and to Mars. There should be one program, and for the future Constellation is going to become that one program. It's the right path.

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

But NASA won't operate the ISS, the Shuttle, and go to the Moon, and to Mars. There should be one program, and for the future Constellation is going to become that one program. It's the right path.

True. But one could argue that the ISS is part of Constellation, as it is researching and developing the knowledge and skills needed to go and do what the Constellation Program proposes, i.e. living for extended periods on the Moon and Mars.

 

[Urwumpe]

They did not only pause going beyond LEO, they did not even think about it.

Wrong. They just never got the funding to do more than thinking. Until Challenger, there was the OTV+Freedom infrastructure program. Then there was the NLS/ALS. Now there is Constellation.

But without some proper money, even Constellation will be just thinking.

 

[Moonwalker]

True. But one could argue that the ISS is part of Constellation, as it is researching and developing the knowledge and skills needed to go and do what the Constellation Program proposes, i.e. living for extended periods on the Moon and Mars.

Yes. But remember that the ISS already is in orbit since I was 19 years old. Now I'm 30 years old And some day I'll be in the second half of my 30's with the ISS still orbiting the Earth and still no manned mission beyond LEO during my whole life time. Like a lot of astronauts already start to say: it is time to go farther. It really is.

Wrong. They just never got the funding to do more than thinking. Until Challenger, there was the OTV+Freedom infrastructure program. Then there was the NLS/ALS.

That all was not about seriously returning to the Moon and go beyond.

But without some proper money, even Constellation will be just thinking.

Right. But there is one difference: Constellation has become metall and is going to lift off. It is not just thinking anymore at all. It's the first time within more than 30 years that NASA is going to do something different manned seriously. The only bad taste just is all the voices who are going to lose their jobs (which I can understand), and all the Shuttle fans (including me on this) who would like to see NASA stuck on the flying brick for another periods (excluding me on this).