angkor writes "The date has been set. Space.com has the news. Mir will plunge into the Pacific Ocean on March 6, 2001. Farewell old friend!" It looks final this time. Update: 01/13 03:32 PM by michael: I swear we won't post about Mir anymore until the pieces start raining down. :)
Reading that article, I was reminded of reading about the procedure involved with giving a lethal injection to a death row inmate. Almost makes it sound like an execution.
Tis a pity that after having spent all that energy pushing that much metal out of ye old Terran Gravity Well, that we cannot find a way to use it, rather then let it fall back down the well. I mean why not give it to the ISS for furture in-orbit construction, ie: for a Mars craft. We're only going to have to shove it back up again. Different set of atoms, same stuff.
--
Remove the rocks to send email
-- On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
Mir was a success in several ways
by
dsplat
·
· Score: 2
I remember thinking several years ago when Mir suffered every disaster that didn't involve weather or earthquakes, that it was amazing how well it survived all of the problems. I hope that the lessons learned from it are put to good use on the ISS.
-- The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
Re:Looks like MirCorp has approval for "Mir 2"
by
Chairboy
·
· Score: 2
The free-floater is going to be dependant on ISS and won't have indepentant docking mechanisms for anything other then the ISS. It's supposed to be a free floating factory without crew for generating things that need extreme microgravity (eg, any manned vessel is not usable for growing certain crystals and making certain measurements because people are always shaking the station).
This is NOT an alternative to Mir, sadly. That, and since MirCorp is behind it, it's unlikely to see the light of day. They started strong w/ Mir, but they didn't use enough sense and oversold themselves before they got METS.
I was wondering about that mutant space fungus on the Mir too. It has been up there mutating like crazy in the radiation. Isn't it a threat when it comes back to earth on board the deorbiting (crashing) Mir. Who knows what over lifeforms (like bacteria) may be up there as well. I think it would be much safer though much more expensive to blast Mir into space than to have it crash into earth.
Re:Why not re-use some parts from Mir on ISS
by
jthomas2
·
· Score: 2
It's not going to happen as the inclination of Mir is different from ISS. Inclination changes are among the most "expensive" in terms of delta-V operations. However, FINDS's MET project would have used atmospheric drag to change the inclination of Mir gradually change the orbit of Mir using an electromagnetic tether.
Actually the Russians wanted to have ISS at the same inclination but for political reasons a "compromise" inclination was chosen that is sub-optimal for everyone involved. Even as late as the launch of the first Russian module they were pushing to switch the inclination. If they did that, the stations could at least serve as lifeboats to each other and some modules and/or equipment could be moved over. Remember, much of Mir dates to 1995 when the "American" modules were launched. (Read Dragonfly if you have a chance, it's a great book, I'm surprised someone hasn't submitted a review yet)
Of course, Mir would need a substancial capital infusion if it were to return to operational status. That was the whole point of MirCorp, not to use a dying station, but to re-fit it & open it for commercial operations. Hopefully their latest plans will go smoother.
Re:Uhm we had one up in the 70's
by
Maurice
·
· Score: 2
IIRC it was not manned and operational continuously (it was also not capable of that). There were a total of 3 missions to the station, the longest one lasting 84 days. Skylab was more or less abandoned since early 1974 up until reentry. Mir was manned continuously from 1986 up until some time in 1999. Also, the Russians had other space stations before that (Salyut 1-7). Salyut 7 was up for 9 years, but was also not manned all the time. I'm not as ignorant as you think.
"And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning
as it were a lamp, and it fell upon a third part of the rivers, and upon the
fountains of waters;
"And the name of the star is called Wormwood; and the third part of the waters
became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made
bitter."
END Obligatory "end of the world" post
Well, someone had to post it:P
Mir is a realic - and History
by
itzdandy
·
· Score: 2
I think its a shame bringing down MIR. Its a part of our history and it should remain up there in orbit. Maybee in the not to distant future it could be a museum. Its already in a stable orbit so why not leave it, i will cost more to bring it down than to let it set empty up there.
If they'd just wait a few more years!
by
fudboy
·
· Score: 2
If the Russians could just wait a few more years, I promise them, I will do my best to retrieve the 'Mir' space-station for them, returning it safely so that they may stick it in a museum. Considering certain advances in RLV technology, a heavy lifter shuttle-barge is sure to be developed soon- and I'm going to buy one. I will gladly swing by and pick it up for them. Can someone please suggest they park it in a libration point, someone that knows a powerful Russian politico personally?
:)Fudboy
--
:)Fudboy
I guess I'm only a Fudboy, looking for that real Transmeta
Back in the days of Skylab, the only TV (for the US) was the horrible 3 tv networks.
But today, in the 21st century, I wonder if some new network, maybe CNN, or heck, maybe even NASA could have a high altitude plane attempt to film any or all of the re-entry and subsequent shower of hardware?
You can kill the revolution, but first you have to kill all the revolutionaries.
--
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
100 tons of equipment is being thrown away. But what would you propose to do with it otherwise?
It's 15 year old equipment. Technology has change a lot in 15+ years. (The equipment was probably obsolete at launch time anyway.) Moving equipment from one orbit to another probably exceeds the value of launching new equipment. Not to mention reliability issues. People to strip off old equipment, etc.
It would cost significant money to try to "save" MIR. The fungus would continue growing. One of the modules is currently depressurized and uninhabitable. So what would be the point of spending even more money to make it just one more piece of orbiting space junk?
One idea that springs to mind is to salvage smaller parts of equipment. But it's still all "used" and "obsolete" equipment. Who wants "used" parts in space where everything must work. You can't just call up a repairman because one of your CRT's just quit working.
Now to try "Think Different"...
In fact, one of the several reasons to abandon MIR is because it is just too dangerous for Americans. Other reasons include, not establishing a second-hand market for used space junk -- thus decreasing the amount of money congress sends to needy space contractors. Bringing that fungus back down to earth is a neato experiment to see what will happen. If Russia were to keep MIR, it would potentially reduce the fighting over control of the ISS. As you can see from this paragraph, there are lots of reasons to bring down MIR.
You can wound the revolution, but first you have to kill all the revolutionaries.
--
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
Re:Why not re-use some parts from Mir on ISS
by
DickBreath
·
· Score: 2
All of MIR's parts were probably obsolete at launch time, 15 years ago.
It probably would cost as much to "save" some of MIR's parts as to launch new shiny, up to date equipment. Add it up. Cost to launch a salvage crew. Cost to keep MIR operational. Cost to transfer equipment between two different orbits. Cost to return salvage crew to earth, possibly including a trip to ISS. Then you still end up with an empty useless shell of MIR in orbit as yet another (large) piece of space junk.
Reliability? Who wants to have used, obsolete, space junk in an environment where your life can depend on the reliability of equipment?
Fungus problems. Why even remotely risk bringing any fungus to ISS from MIR. It's bad enough bringing fungus from earth.
Part of MIR is uninhatibable and depressurized.
You can kill the revolution, but first you have to kill the revolutionaries.
--
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
Finally the marvel-station goes...
by
nutpoks
·
· Score: 2
Well, it has been up there way beyond anyone's expectations. The station was designed to be in space only for a decade or so. It being able to be up there so long is practicly a miracle, so this was just a matter of time...
Are the Russians going to plan the construction of a station to replace MIR? I think splashing down MIR without a replacement in progress/inorbit is a serious injury to the collective progress of space exploration for the human species in general.
Looks like MirCorp has approval for "Mir 2"
by
jthomas2
·
· Score: 3
Russia Space Agency seems to be on board now. There were a few news reports but it hasn't gotton a whole lot of publicity.
Sounds like they are building a free-floater that will co-orbit & can dock w/ ISS so it can use the same re-supply mechanisms as ISS but yet be completely independent so you don't have to fill out 7 kg of paperwork before you can dock w/ it.
It also seems as if Titov has approval to go on ISS in April. We'll see how it all works out though. Should be interesting.
Why does this come to a surprise to everyone, everything up in space has a intended lifespan, MIR has far out lived its expectations. Its actualy pretty remarkable engineering, look how long it too america to finaly get a space station into orbit. I respect NASA, but i wish they would actualy get going and quit stalling.
This is really too bad. 100+ tons of equipment are basically being thrown away, and that's a damn shame. If US export restrictions hadn't stopped MirCorp from exporting the METS electrodynamic tether to Russia for launch to the Mir, Mir could have been put into a high storage orbit.
METS uses an electrical cable that's deployed a few kilometers towards the earth that has an electrical charge run through it to act against the Earth's magnetic field and push whatever it's attached to upwards. Using this, Mir could be at 400 or 500 miles up now, safe from danger of atmospheric drag and all at the cost of one Progress launch (METS fits on one Progress).
Slashdot Mirror
Reading that article, I was reminded of reading about the procedure involved with giving a lethal injection to a death row inmate. Almost makes it sound like an execution.
-Restil
Play with my webcams and lights here
MirCorp dumps Mir station by michael on Tue Dec 12, '00 12:17 PM MST 34
At Last, Mir to be Ditched by CmdrTaco on Thu Nov 16, '00 07:45 AM MST 267
Mir To Crash Into Pacific by Hemos on Mon Oct 23, '00 08:48 AM MST 282
Mir Likely To Be Deorbited [Updated] by timothy on Tue Oct 03, '00 12:06 PM MST 321
Go not unto/. for advice, for you will be told both yea and nay (but have nothing to do with the question)
Cheers,
Earl
Tis a pity that after having spent all that energy pushing that much metal out of ye old Terran Gravity Well, that we cannot find a way to use it, rather then let it fall back down the well. I mean why not give it to the ISS for furture in-orbit construction, ie: for a Mars craft. We're only going to have to shove it back up again. Different set of atoms, same stuff.
--
Remove the rocks to send email
On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
I remember thinking several years ago when Mir suffered every disaster that didn't involve weather or earthquakes, that it was amazing how well it survived all of the problems. I hope that the lessons learned from it are put to good use on the ISS.
The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
The free-floater is going to be dependant on ISS and won't have indepentant docking mechanisms for anything other then the ISS. It's supposed to be a free floating factory without crew for generating things that need extreme microgravity (eg, any manned vessel is not usable for growing certain crystals and making certain measurements because people are always shaking the station).
This is NOT an alternative to Mir, sadly. That, and since MirCorp is behind it, it's unlikely to see the light of day. They started strong w/ Mir, but they didn't use enough sense and oversold themselves before they got METS.
I was wondering about that mutant space fungus on the Mir too. It has been up there mutating like crazy in the radiation. Isn't it a threat when it comes back to earth on board the deorbiting (crashing) Mir. Who knows what over lifeforms (like bacteria) may be up there as well. I think it would be much safer though much more expensive to blast Mir into space than to have it crash into earth.
Actually the Russians wanted to have ISS at the same inclination but for political reasons a "compromise" inclination was chosen that is sub-optimal for everyone involved. Even as late as the launch of the first Russian module they were pushing to switch the inclination. If they did that, the stations could at least serve as lifeboats to each other and some modules and/or equipment could be moved over. Remember, much of Mir dates to 1995 when the "American" modules were launched. (Read Dragonfly if you have a chance, it's a great book, I'm surprised someone hasn't submitted a review yet)
Of course, Mir would need a substancial capital infusion if it were to return to operational status. That was the whole point of MirCorp, not to use a dying station, but to re-fit it & open it for commercial operations. Hopefully their latest plans will go smoother.
-Jay Thomas
http://www.uiuc.edu/~jthomas2
IIRC it was not manned and operational continuously (it was also not capable of that). There were a total of 3 missions to the station, the longest one lasting 84 days. Skylab was more or less abandoned since early 1974 up until reentry. Mir was manned continuously from 1986 up until some time in 1999. Also, the Russians had other space stations before that (Salyut 1-7). Salyut 7 was up for 9 years, but was also not manned all the time. I'm not as ignorant as you think.
Or possibly a web cam mounted to it? On pay-per-view, of course.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
As it'were, and twas, it tiss and twill be.
Thusly spake, the word of Bob.
Obligatory "end of the world" post
:P
"And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning
as it were a lamp, and it fell upon a third part of the rivers, and upon the
fountains of waters;
"And the name of the star is called Wormwood; and the third part of the waters
became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made
bitter."
END Obligatory "end of the world" post
Well, someone had to post it
I think its a shame bringing down MIR. Its a part of our history and it should remain up there in orbit. Maybee in the not to distant future it could be a museum. Its already in a stable orbit so why not leave it, i will cost more to bring it down than to let it set empty up there.
If the Russians could just wait a few more years, I promise them, I will do my best to retrieve the 'Mir' space-station for them, returning it safely so that they may stick it in a museum. Considering certain advances in RLV technology, a heavy lifter shuttle-barge is sure to be developed soon- and I'm going to buy one. I will gladly swing by and pick it up for them. Can someone please suggest they park it in a libration point, someone that knows a powerful Russian politico personally?
:)Fudboy
:)Fudboy
I guess I'm only a Fudboy, looking for that real Transmeta
Back in the days of Skylab, the only TV (for the US) was the horrible 3 tv networks.
But today, in the 21st century, I wonder if some new network, maybe CNN, or heck, maybe even NASA could have a high altitude plane attempt to film any or all of the re-entry and subsequent shower of hardware?
You can kill the revolution, but first you have to kill all the revolutionaries.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
100 tons of equipment is being thrown away. But what would you propose to do with it otherwise?
It's 15 year old equipment. Technology has change a lot in 15+ years. (The equipment was probably obsolete at launch time anyway.) Moving equipment from one orbit to another probably exceeds the value of launching new equipment. Not to mention reliability issues. People to strip off old equipment, etc.
It would cost significant money to try to "save" MIR. The fungus would continue growing. One of the modules is currently depressurized and uninhabitable. So what would be the point of spending even more money to make it just one more piece of orbiting space junk?
One idea that springs to mind is to salvage smaller parts of equipment. But it's still all "used" and "obsolete" equipment. Who wants "used" parts in space where everything must work. You can't just call up a repairman because one of your CRT's just quit working.
Now to try "Think Different"...
In fact, one of the several reasons to abandon MIR is because it is just too dangerous for Americans. Other reasons include, not establishing a second-hand market for used space junk -- thus decreasing the amount of money congress sends to needy space contractors. Bringing that fungus back down to earth is a neato experiment to see what will happen. If Russia were to keep MIR, it would potentially reduce the fighting over control of the ISS. As you can see from this paragraph, there are lots of reasons to bring down MIR.
You can wound the revolution, but first you have to kill all the revolutionaries.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
All of MIR's parts were probably obsolete at launch time, 15 years ago.
It probably would cost as much to "save" some of MIR's parts as to launch new shiny, up to date equipment. Add it up. Cost to launch a salvage crew. Cost to keep MIR operational. Cost to transfer equipment between two different orbits. Cost to return salvage crew to earth, possibly including a trip to ISS. Then you still end up with an empty useless shell of MIR in orbit as yet another (large) piece of space junk.
Reliability? Who wants to have used, obsolete, space junk in an environment where your life can depend on the reliability of equipment?
Fungus problems. Why even remotely risk bringing any fungus to ISS from MIR. It's bad enough bringing fungus from earth.
Part of MIR is uninhatibable and depressurized.
You can kill the revolution, but first you have to kill the revolutionaries.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
Well, it has been up there way beyond anyone's expectations. The station was designed to be in space only for a decade or so. It being able to be up there so long is practicly a miracle, so this was just a matter of time...
Are the Russians going to plan the construction of a station to replace MIR? I think splashing down MIR without a replacement in progress/inorbit is a serious injury to the collective progress of space exploration for the human species in general.
There is a link here.
Sounds like they are building a free-floater that will co-orbit & can dock w/ ISS so it can use the same re-supply mechanisms as ISS but yet be completely independent so you don't have to fill out 7 kg of paperwork before you can dock w/ it.
It also seems as if Titov has approval to go on ISS in April. We'll see how it all works out though. Should be interesting.
-Jay Thomas
http://www.uiuc.edu/~jthomas2
Why does this come to a surprise to everyone, everything up in space has a intended lifespan, MIR has far out lived its expectations. Its actualy pretty remarkable engineering, look how long it too america to finaly get a space station into orbit. I respect NASA, but i wish they would actualy get going and quit stalling.
-| My other ride is your mom |-
Is this now a new species?
and as such, is it subject to the endangered species act?
(Waitaminute - they're russians!)
or is this going a bad movie version of the Andromenda Strain?
I imagine that this fungus problem will be something that they will have plenty of time to sort out on the new space station.
That may be the ultimate problem to long distance space travel.
Avoiding being consumed by space fungus.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
This is really too bad. 100+ tons of equipment are basically being thrown away, and that's a damn shame. If US export restrictions hadn't stopped MirCorp from exporting the METS electrodynamic tether to Russia for launch to the Mir, Mir could have been put into a high storage orbit.
METS uses an electrical cable that's deployed a few kilometers towards the earth that has an electrical charge run through it to act against the Earth's magnetic field and push whatever it's attached to upwards. Using this, Mir could be at 400 or 500 miles up now, safe from danger of atmospheric drag and all at the cost of one Progress launch (METS fits on one Progress).
Sigh....