Slashdot Mirror
Houston, We have a Space Station!
This submission just came in:
flufffy writes: "Another module, the Russian Zvezda ("Star"), has just joined the two existing ISS modules up in orbit. The station is now plenty big enough to be seen from the Earth's surface. But where exactly should you look? NASA's SkyWatch, available here, shows you. After you've download the small 300k app., it asks you for your Lat/Long and the satellite you're interested in (including shuttle re-entries), before calculating when and where you can see it next. You can print out the data as a sky chart, with constellations marked! As the ISS seems to be around the equator at the moment, it's low in the southern sky for U.S. skywatchers. Still, the program showed me where to look to the south of Sagitarrius, at about 1 a.m. on the morning of July 26th. This is really cool, and will only get more fun as the ISS gets larger and more visible."
There is so much for the future of Russian economy to be gained from the space program, its not even funny
Practically all the benefits (spinoffs and otherwise) you are talking about from the "Space Program" can come from unmanned exploration work as well. Much of the added cost and complexity of manned projects like the "Space Station" comes from the practical need to get failure probability down to near zero. None of us wants one of our comrades to lose his life up there. Yet this added cost and complexity *has few if any practical spinoffs* on Earth.
Space is probably about the only thing the Russians are good at, as an industrialized nation, right now
From a scientific perspective, this is truly sad. Russia has produced absolutely brilliant contributions to humanity in lots of fields. In my own area of research (probability and information theory) Russians like Kolmogorov, Dobrusin, and Pinsker have done seminal work which has advanced the frontiers of human knowledge. And you know what, this sort of work doesn't need Billions of dollars worth of equipment to do. Yet, in today's Russia, top notch scientists and mathemeticians are having a very hard time making a decent living for their families.
I would much rather that my country (the USA) support Russian science in more cost effective ways than this Space Station monstrosity. A Billion dollars buys a lot of science if spent right.
I'm in favor of space exploration as
much as the next guy, but I can't believe
that we're wasting so many resources on
this useless thing. Robots are much more
cost effective. I'd rather have systematic
(unmanned) infrastructure in space for
exploration.
It's one thing for the U.S.A. with its
booming economy and basically working
society, but Russia is a basket-case!
Why are we wasting thousands of Russian
minds on this inane task with absolutely
no benefits to the Russian people or even
to the state of human knowlege?
In the last 10 years Shuttle flights have been responsible for the Hubble Space Telescope - giving us a much clearer understanding of our universe and how we fit into it. The Hubble needed human servicing to have ever completed its mission.
I'll buy part of this one- Hubble has been a fantastically sucessful and important project, and it did need human servicing. However, it could easily have been launched aboard an unmanned vehicle, and the service missions account for only 2 or 3 out of the 80+ shuttle missions.
We've been able to study the effects of spaceflight on the human body, which mimic many of the changes in the aging process. If we're going into space, we need that kind of information.
I think the bankruptcy of this argument was proved when NASA attempted to actually put a scientific face on the bald-faced political horse-trading that put John Glenn on the Space Shuttle. These people actually claimed that there was scientific benefit to be had from the study of a single septugenarian selected for his political connections, rather than his suitability for scientific study. To give you an idea of the level of science that was taking place on that mission, they actually almost conducted a study of the effect of Melatonin on his adaptation to the shuttle's 90-minute 'day.' All very well and good, but you hardly need to go into space to simulate a 90 minute day. The same experiment could be done in a motel room by pulling the shades and putting a timer on the lightswitch, as Park points out in his aforementioned book. This experiment was canceled at the last minute- for medical reasons, not because of its total scientific worthlessness.
More generally, yes, we need to know about human adaptation to microgravity if we are to engage in long-term space travel. However, we've already learned most of what we need to from Mir and Skylab, and I sincerely doubt we will learn anything truly new from the ISS in this regard. When we start engaging in long-term space travel, it will almost certainly require artifical gravity, if the passengers are to be remotely functional when they arrive.
We've been able to monitor and observe earth-bound phenomena to an extent that has never before been possible, and would not have been possible with robotic craft.
I really don't buy this one. Robotic craft are more patient, more verasatile, more thorough, and far more clear-sighted and functional than any human observer. Essentially all of the scientifically meaningful terristrial observation has been done by automated systems, not humans. The only exception is the (admittedly spectacular) photography produced by the shuttle astronaouts, which have plenty of artistic, but little scientific merit. Even that could have been done (and possibly done better) by a satellite, if we really wanted to do it.
We've given people something to hope for. Sure, robotic missions are great and they bring us loads of scientific data at no human risk, but they lack something that the human imagination needs. No robotic explorer will ever overshadow Neil Armstrong first setting his foot down on a foreign body in space. Who cares about the Russian Luna and American Surveyor probes after that? The world's attention was focused on space because that was a human being out there.
But that's my point! There's no glory or triumph of the human spirit in the space station at all! It will capture the imagination of a few literate geeks for all of about 5 minutes. It's boldly going where dozens of people have gone before. Exactly how much attention gets paid to the latest shuttle launch? Compare that with the astonishing coverage of Sojourner's trip to Mars on the web and in the media, or the power of the single image the (unmanned) Hubble produced of the Eagle Nebula. Multiply that by the ISS's budget and you would have some real human excitement. Sure, give me a trip to Mars and you'll see some Armstrong-era excitement, but the ISS is one giant leap for a man, and one small step for mankind, and everybody knows it. It will be good for a few weeks of media excitement, and then will fade into the background as the shuttles do now.
The missions you list are indeed in various planning stages, but that doesn't alter the fact that much, much more could be done if NASA's planetary exploration had access to the kind of money the ISS is getting stuffed with. It also doesn't change the fact that after a couple of failures caused by the minimal Mars budget, that entire program has been delayed even further.
As for your point about the Venus probe, the costs of lifting such a probe out of Earth's gravity well pale in comparison to the cost of the ISS. The ISS will never pay itself back as a construction platform. To begin with, it is totally unsuited for construction work. All of the costs of manufacturing a probe on earth would be increased by (literally) orders of magnitude if that construction were done aboard the space station. Moreover, unless you're proposing asteroid mining (itself prohibitively expensive), nothing is being saved- you still have to lift the raw materials out of Earth's gravity well, and that cost only gets larger if you do it in several trips. The ISS saves you absolutely nothing in this regard.
"Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" -Salvor Hardin
There is no bubble.. and this is no PR work... Space research is very very important to humanity. The works of NASA, Russian Space agency, ESA etc., should not be seen in the context of simple experiments, but more in sync with space exploration.
...
If we are any bit serious as the human race to go out to the far reaches of the universe we have to start today.. Future generations would not pardon us if we sat quiet and content saying that anything we do will not yield results in our lifetime so why do it....
No we have always and should always stand on the shoulders of giants when we think and act.. to quote Newton !!!
Living in space as opposed to space jaunts are something which only the russians have managed and that too for a short period of a year or so.. I mean we should shortly have generations living there... its a colonial thing.. but we need to have that
So we should all lend our shoulders to the wheel...
-/ramas
- ramas opines !!
One: Skylab fulfilled all it's mission directives, despite a severe mishap at the station's launch, not bad for being built from Apollo's leftovers.
:)
The ISS promises a good deal more immediate benefits to humanity than some foolhardy manned stunt to Mars. As far as the rest of your diatribe, unfortunately science simply hasn't caught up to Trek special effects. As for AI, well, the work is being done at it's own pace in several different approaches by different people, there's no need of an Apollo project for AI. (Personally, the last thing I want are HAL's popping up all over the place until we tame the bloody ATMs.
The most important thing about the station is that it'll actually be a full time space settlement. I didn't fully approve of the way it's being done now, but now that we've spent the money and the time, we might as well start making use of it.
You also need to get a more expansive understanding of progress. Progress seldom happens in big dramatic steps, usually even the most important things go unnoticed until much later. Anyone remember the big hoorah when packet switching was invented? Didn't think so.
Let's spend our money wisely. Let's develop our cislunar presence, enlarge Spacewatch, and learn to manage the junk we're leaving in orbit. As for Mars, there's much to do with unmanned flights before we go to the dangerous and expensive route of sending people.
--Colbey
There's a lot of more useful things that we could be doing -- exploring other planets, trying to discover...
Oh no! Our Mars ship malfunctioned. Our heat shielding is detached, we're losing oxygen, and all we have is maneuvering thrusters. Oh well, at least we have enough power to make it to the International Space Station. Umm... Oh... no we don't, because some guy on /. said it was useless.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
If anyone is curious, 'Zvezda' means 'Star' in Russian, 'Zarya' means 'Dawn'.
just my .02$
http://dtum.livejournal.com
BAH! I subscribe to the "Independence Day" scenario.
It all feeds into a manufactured perception that the DOD is incompetent. That way everyone (including the foreign powers) underestimates them.
Hell the mob has been doing it for years. Do you really think the little Italian restaurant really needs to replace all their platess every 6 months.
They'll be basically 6 kinds of replies to this story:
1) I still don't know why we're wasting money on {tech} when people in {place} are {mode of suffering agreed to be bad}. We should be worrying about solving our problems here on Earth!
2) This is the coolest thing ever! The most magnificent achievement since {primitive yet crucial tech}. It's the first step towards {cosmic achievement}, just like {author} predicted.
3) Imagine a Beowolf cluster of these!
4) I shrug. I am so underwhelmed. Millions and millions of {currency} wasted so we could put more trash in space. It will last less than {hyperbole of brevity} and be as useless as {hyperbole of futility}.
5) Look up these links here. Yeah, I need the karma.
6) Not bad for a Pizza Hut flight.
Fill in the {blanks} and permute at will. Add Microsoft bashing, MPAA/RIAA cursing, RMS, ESR, OpenSource zealotry. Simmer to a boil. Watch if we don't get 400 comments on this one.
THS
---
THS
---
"Poor girl looks as confused as a blind lesbian in a fish market." - Simon R. Green
Great! Where do I sign up!
IIRC, applications for the astronaut training program are reviewed every two years in July; the next screening takes place approximately a year from now. You can find out more information and download application forms at NASA's astronaut selection website. Generally speaking, for admittance as a mission specialist you need to possess an advanced scientific, technical, or medical degree (PhDs and MDs are preferred) as well as demonstrate leadership in your particular field. (Most if not all of the pilots have prior military training, so a civilian's best shot into the program is as a mission specialist). Becoming a NASA astronaut is highly competitive and grueling, as I'm sure you can imagine, but since it is hands down the coolest job imaginable, it won't stop me from sending my application in.
Can you name one substantial scientific benefit gained in the last 10 years of manned space flight? The last 20?
In the last 10 years Shuttle flights have been responsible for the Hubble Space Telescope - giving us a much clearer understanding of our universe and how we fit into it. The Hubble needed human servicing to have ever completed its mission.
We've been able to study the effects of spaceflight on the human body, which mimic many of the changes in the aging process. If we're going into space, we need that kind of information.
We've been able to monitor and observe earth-bound phenomena to an extent that has never before been possible, and would not have been possible with robotic craft.
We've given people something to hope for. Sure, robotic missions are great and they bring us loads of scientific data at no human risk, but they lack something that the human imagination needs. No robotic explorer will ever overshadow Neil Armstrong first setting his foot down on a foreign body in space. Who cares about the Russian Luna and American Surveyor probes after that? The world's attention was focused on space because that was a human being out there.
How about taking a close look at Pluto, which we still know almost nothing about? How about a closer look at Europa, an excellent candidate for the presence of life? How about trying to land a probe on Venus capable of surviving more than a few hours?
Isn't the Pluto Express mission set for a launch date in a few years?
There are already plans to revisit Europa, with a craft that can get below the ice and actually settle the life issue.
A probe to Venus would be very difficult to lift out of Earths gravity well. We'd almost have to build something that heavy in space - where could that take place? Why a space station, of course?
Granted, the ISS isn't that big a leap, but it is a leap. The ISS is a worthwhile project, and will continue to advance humanity's progress to the stars.
- Infoart - my favorite;
- Multilex - slower but larger.
Do not slashdot them - I need 'em for my work. Do not try to enter transliterations of russian words (like Zvezda from Çâåçäà) there - this would not work. You can try english words however.Here's some translations:
If you want to see russian graphics in this message, ensure you read it in Cyrillic Windows-1251 encoding so what Xx looks like Õõ. (If you've got correct fonts.)
Every secretary using MSWord wastes enough resources
I'm sick of seeing this "$200 for a doorknob, $435 for a hammer" crap people spout about the government.
This is where those numbers really come from:
The government often pays for things to be beuilt by contract. Instead of listing every item and price on invoices or work orders or whatever the hell they are, they take the price of the entire contract and divide it by however many items there are. Thus, though a computer system on an F-16 may cost $10,000 and the special gold tempered cockpit glass may cost $50,000 per bubble, a hammer used by Lockheed Martin or General Dynamics (aren't they the same company now or something?) still only costs $15 or $20.
So, in other words, while we're paying $435 for a hammer, we're also paying $435 for the highly special radar scanning tip in the nose of the aircraft.
The Space Station User's Guide is a terrific resource on the entire space station (written and assembled by one of the engineers who worked on it BTW), including the live NASA TV broadcast of the docking.
And yes, I submitted this link this morning to Slashdot but it got rejected in favour of the Space.com link in this story - go figure.
"The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid