• Space Station to be abandoned
    153 replies, posted
[QUOTE=MacD11;22675580]Thanks obama for ruining childrens dreams.[/QUOTE] Its funny, one of the first things he did (As someone pointed out with great depth earlier, and I mentioned on the first page) was reject the idea / plan. And in case people haven't noticed, as its been posted one every page now. [b]This article is a year old, it is not news. News kinda has to be new to be news. [/b]
Hand it over to the Chinese instead.
[QUOTE=demoguy08;22682490]Hand it over to the Chinese instead.[/QUOTE] Or the ESA.
No one wants it, why won't anyone read the entire thread before posting? International funding to the ISS ends in 2016, which is why they wanted it to end. It won't be the ISS after 2016, it will be a purely American station. Obama extended it for 4 years, but to be honest it's a complete waste. It's job is done. It's computers are ancient by Today's scientific standards, as most of them were assembled between 1990-1998.
I'd bet most of the important stuff is older than that, I guess people would want to put tried and tested technology out there instead of the brand new stuff that could go horribly wrong (As it sort of did a few years ago, the Russian computers refused to communicate with the Americans for a day). I guess the only way they could keep it in space is by basically rebuilding it every 15 years, but that would make no sense and it would be better just to build yet another one. Also, wow Skylab was only in use for 1 year. Atleast the ISS is getting a good 15+ year usage out of it.
Don't worry, I'm a scientist When you are in space, the atoms start to lose their bond since its not the same gravity on earth. So anything on earth wont be the same in space. Thats another reason for astronauts muscles getting weak not just from the lack of exercise but from their entire body that was MEANT to live on earth being in 0 gravity. same things go for the space station. Radiation from the sun, the intense temperatures and no gravity take a toll on the space station. Its better to create something new instead of use the ISS till the last little hole you cant plug up with a piece of gum. Its all about safety of the astronauts. Honestly, I'd feel safer if I was going to a new space station instead of an old one that is falling apart all over slowly. :science:
I want them to put a camera in it live when it burns up so we get to see it's last epic moments.
[QUOTE=Nyaos;22683229]I want them to put a camera in it live when it burns up so we get to see it's last epic moments.[/QUOTE] Funding has been extended to 2020, this is old news.
[QUOTE=wewt!;22683235]Funding has been extended to 2020, this is old news.[/QUOTE] That's irrelevant to my post but whatever.
[QUOTE=Nyaos;22683256]That's irrelevant to my post but whatever.[/QUOTE] It's barely relevant :smug:
its cause its an apple product iSS
[QUOTE=evilweazel;22674648]Bring it down somehow and put it in a museum because it's really fucking important?[/QUOTE] It would be a museum in its own right,lol.Anyways,I wonder what it would be like if it was crashed into a city like a bomb?That would be cool. do that shit in gmod spacebuild
this just in: america quits space
A part of me just died. Most of my childhood I awaited the day they would finally finish building the ISS, and now so shortly after its completion they want to let it burn :smith:. Despite economic troubles down here on earth, I get sad anytime we cut funding for any sort of space exploration.
wat a waste lol
why does ISS have to go the way of Mir? :( atleast it'll look pretty on re-entry
Probably something to do with the components only having a life span of 20 years. Atleast they saw it coming and didn't have to suddenly decide to deorbit it.
[QUOTE=FunnyBunny;22677338]Why can't they booster engine it out of orbit, better to let it float around in space than burn up in the atmosphere[/QUOTE] Yes it be amazing to set up cameras, that are self powered by the remaining energy and the sun, attach a booster or a sail, so we could wacth it and the space surrounding it, for a millennia. [editline]10:21PM[/editline] [QUOTE=ZombieWaffle;22683848]its cause its an apple product iSS[/QUOTE] God damned apple Nazi's
OP is an idiot that posted a year-old article. Since then Constellation has been canceled and the ISS will be extended to at least 2020.
[quote]It'll be a controlled reentry, to ensure that it doesn't take out a major city[/quote] Doesn't matter if it's a small city or town.
[QUOTE=Jsm;22674678]How exactly do you suggest getting something through the Earth's atmosphere which is not designed to, and most likely actually designed to break up as it passes through (To aid in the eventual de-orbit)[/QUOTE] Piece by piece on a shuttle or something
[QUOTE=Zareox7;22674381]After a while the technology gets old and becomes a liability with increased risk of failure. They probably expect to put up a new one with much better and up-to-date technology. I do say it's a bit of a waste after putting all that money into it recently.[/QUOTE] Parts of are less than a month old and your saying it should be replaced with newer tech? Even 5-6 years later they won't be too old.
I wish it was possible to crash it into the moon, just to see what it would look like
[QUOTE=meppers;22692067]I wish it was possible to crash it into the moon, just to see what it would look like[/QUOTE] it would take too much energy, money and planning to send it 300,000+ kilometers into the moon one might as well plan to blow up the moon instead
Why dont they crash it into the moon gently and then try to re assemble crew areas that were damaged. That way we have a moon base.
ITT: People who obviously know more than NASA about their own space station
[QUOTE=Master117;22674857]Both the US government and NASA have been making some piss poor decisions concerning space exploration lately. I wonder what the fuck is going on. Maybe some alien race that is kept classified by the government is threatening us if we keep putting shit into space.[/QUOTE] You're onto something. [editline]11:03PM[/editline] Monday, July 13, 2009 nice
[QUOTE=Idi Amin;22692254]Why dont they crash it into the moon gently and then try to re assemble crew areas that were damaged. That way we have a moon base.[/QUOTE] you cannot crash something into the moon "gently" and doing a soft landing with something the size of the ISS would take offensively large amounts of fuel to accomplish
How would they go about de-orbiting the ISS? Or would they just let it run it's course? Seems like it would cost a lot to actively de-orbit it.
[QUOTE=winsanity;22692580]How would they go about de-orbiting the ISS? Or would they just let it run it's course? Seems like it would cost a lot to actively de-orbit it.[/QUOTE] it seems as if actively deorbiting it would cost less than keeping it in orbit
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.