Slashdot Mirror

I'm tired of the $2 billion/year ego project that the ISS is.

The goal for ISS is to "conduct the most balanced, efficient, and effective space program". Moreover, it provides unprecendented breakthroughs in research. I think the price tag is worth it.

Others: For more info, read here:

• Spaceviews
• Russian Space Web
• Space.com

You can find more information about this new module here, an official press release here, a few good pictures here, and some information about what was the planned assembly of the space station here. Hope this is interesting to someone. :)

We all know that Microsoft is king of marketing, but even more important than marketing your product to consumers is marketing your image (an image of invincibility) to your competitors.

To pick an inappropriate example, look at the former Soviet Union. They suffered numerous political, economic, and technological setbacks, but how many did we hear about in the west? In 1960, no one in the US knew that almost a hundred people died on the pad of a failed R-16 ICBM launch (the Nedelin Disaster). Half the arms buildup during the 1980s stemmed from a misconception about Russia's actual military capability. Frankly, they did a great job of marketing their image towards us.

If Microsoft appears suitably invincible, then all sorts of things just fall into their laps instead of requiring effort on their part to obtain. Competitors are more likely to get out of their way when a vaporware product is announced. Even lawenforcement is likely to give a good hard second look before diving headfirst into a prolonged legal battle. There is no downside.

Does it surprise me that any of this internal strife has occurred? Hardly. Does it surprise me that it's rarely come toight. Again, hardly. That's just the way these things go.

The russians have already built the docking node that you refer to, and I very much doubt that is cost anywhere near $1billion. Russia is planing to launch Piers, its own docking compartment on Sept 15. This will provide 3 things: a proper airlock (so they dont have to depres a main part of the ISS), a strela 'space crane' for moving other bits of russian space hardware around, and a docking port, so the russians will be able to keep 2 Soyuz escape craft and a Progress cargo craft docked to the ISS at the same time (currently there are only two Soyuz/Progress compatable docking ports - the others are for 'bigger', heavier modules. The Docking Compartment will also help to keep docked soyuz craft in a 'better position' relative to approaching or docked shuttles. Besides, most of the time shuttles will be docking at the US 'end' of the station, well away from the russian side. With the ability to keep two soyuz craft docked, the emergency crew return issue is solved, at least form a technicial point of view. Russia would still need to fund, build and launch two additional Soyuz craft each year. However, If they were allowed to collect $20mil every 6 months for flying either tourists or ESA/Canadian astronauts for example, that would probably cover it, But of course NASA still wants to spend $500Mil developing their own return craft, and another $500 mil to launch each on them on a shuttle. I admit that the NASA CRV (crew return veichle) would be able to return 7, instead of 6 people in two soyuz, and the CRV can handle injured crew members better than Soyuz. But also, I would think that two Soyuz is better than one CRV, from a redundency point of view.

There was a way of doing EVA's, but from the Russian side, and of course that dosn't count to NASA/USA, does it?. The russian module was launched with 2 russian space suits ready and waiting for use, and the 'spherical' docking compartment in Zeveda had all the plumbing etc to support EVAs. In fact, an EVA did take place, but they didn't need to leave the ISS, instead they just moved some docking equipment around. Besides, that was done by russians, so it didn't really count either! However, if an emergency required it, the ISS did have the means before now to conduct a full blown external EVA if necessary. Also, Russia is planing to launch 'Piers', its own docking compartment on Sept 15. This will provide 3 things: a proper airlock (so they dont have to depres a main part of the ISS), a strela 'space crane' for moving other bits of russian space hardware around, and a docking port, so the russians will be able to keep 2 Soyuz escape craft and a Progress cargo craft docket to the ISS at the same time (currently there are only two Soyuz/Progress compatable docking ports - the others are for 'bigger' modules so to speak. With the ability to keep two soyuz craft docked, the emergency crew return issue is solved, at least form a technicial point of view. Russia would still need to fund, build and launch two additional Soyuz craft each year. However, If they were allowed to collect $20mil every 6 months for flying either tourists or ESA astronauts for example, that would probably cover it, But of course NASA still wants to spend $500Mil developing their own return craft, and another $500 mil to launch each on them on a shuttle. I admit that the NASA CRV (crew return veichle) would be able to return 7, instead of 6 people in two soyuz, and the CRV can handle injured crew members better than Soyuz. But also, I would think that two Soyuz is better than one CRV, from a redundency point of view. See here for more info on Piers.

Of course there was a way of doing EVA's, but from the Russian side, and of course that dosn't count to NASA/USA, does it?. The russian module was launched with 2 russian space suits ready and waiting for use, and the 'spherical' docking compartment in Zeveda had all the plumbing etc to support EVAs. In fact, an EVA did take place, but they didn't need to leave the ISS, instead they just moved some docking equipment around. Besides, that was done by russians, so it didn't really count either! However, if an emergency required it, the ISS did have the means before now to conduct a full blown external EVA if necessary. Also, Russia is planing to launch 'Piers', its own docking compartment on Sept 15. This will provide 3 things: a proper airlock (so they dont have to depres a main part of the ISS), a strela 'space crane' for moving other bits of russian space hardware around, and a docking port, so the russians will be able to keep 2 Soyuz escape craft and a Progress cargo craft docket to the ISS at the same time (currently there are only two Soyuz/Progress compatable docking ports - the others are for 'bigger' modules so to speak. With the ability to keep two soyuz craft docked, the emergency crew return issue is solved, at least form a technicial point of view. Russia would still need to fund, build and launch two additional Soyuz craft each year. However, If they were allowed to collect $20mil every 6 months for flying either tourists or ESA astronauts for example, that would probably cover it, But of course NASA still wants to spend $500Mil developing their own return craft, and another $500 mil to launch each on them on a shuttle. I admit that the NASA CRV (crew return veichle) would be able to return 7, instead of 6 people in two soyuz, and the CRV can handle injured crew members better than Soyuz. But also, I would think that two Soyuz is better than one CRV, from a redundency point of view. See here for more info on Piers.