The American, European, and Japanese ISS modules also contain experiment racks, so the cross-section in which people can move around is only a 2 x 2 meter square. The Russian modules are even more cramped than that.
...Why the ISS is so claustrophobic, but the Skylab was so spacious and futuristic?
ISS:
Skylab:
Discovery One:
:shrug:
Personally, this comes to my head to compare the stations:
Skylab:
ISS:
:shrug:
Whatever the heck "futuristic" means to you, it may or may not have, but small it is not.
Well by looking at the images, they can also feel like this:Why the ISS is so claustrophobic, but the Skylab was so spacious and futuristic?
Skylab:
ISS:
...Why the ISS is so claustrophobic, but the Skylab was so spacious and futuristic?
I wonder how spacious would the innards of a shuttle ET feel like - they wanted to turn them into space stations too, back when NASA was cool.
Back when NASA was cool indeed.
IndeedBecause Saturn V.
Because the ISS is inhabited without break for over 15 years now? While Skylab was only occupied for 171 days in total.
The ISS looked really like fresh from the furniture stores brochure when it was launched...
I would say, the ISS is still way more futuristic - because it is a real space station and not some attempt at it.
Nice, over the years, the interior materials are worn or damaged?
Well, for visualization:
Why exactly did this idea of using ETs never catch on? (I know internal volume isnt everything with station modules, but it still seems like a pretty decent idea)
Let me guess, now you like the AE86 Sprinter Trueno.