Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA Consider "Demanning" Space Station

Posted by Hemos on from the planning-for-the-worst dept.

Heartbreak writes "James Oberg, in an article for MSNBC, says that NASA is making contingency plans to leave the International Space Station without a permanent crew for up to a year if the Russians can't deliver the required Soyuz and Progress spacecraft to support it. A serviceable Soyuz is required to evacuate the crew in an emergency when the US Shuttle isn't there, and Progress is needed for resupply. The Russian space program is doddering on the edge of financial collapse after several recent setbacks, including the failure of Lance Bass to pay up. What SF writer could have imagined that humanity's dream of exploring space would be brought to the edge of extinction by the financial irresponsibility of a pop music star? It would be a boring and depressing story, at best." Of course, some would argue that the space station was a boondoogle to start with.

3 of 358 comments (clear)

  1. Re:ISS: largely worthless for science by dpilot · · Score: 5, Informative

    As a docking facility/point-of-departure, the ISS is *terrible*. Its inclination is so high that it's tough to get loads there and back, and subsequent exit/entry insertions are off the plane of the ecliptic, so you've got to correct there, too.

    --
    The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
  2. Re:Could Science Ever Be Done in the ISS by sunking2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Very little science is being done because it is currently a 3 man crew. Up until just recently NASA has had the 6 man crew pretty much in limbo because of cost over runs. Before a larger crew can be used Node 3 and the US HAB module need to be launched and attached. After that the Japaneese Experiment Module (JEM) will be launched and attached. It's not until JEM is opeations that any resemblence of real science can occur

  3. Re:Stupid! by Peter+T+Ermit · · Score: 3, Informative
    I say we find a way to make it profitable. Everyone knows that once there's money to be made development takes off (no pun intended). Maybe NASA should consider bringing tourists into space just for the extra revenue!

    Yeah, right. Do you have any idea how much the ISS costs? $100 billion. Each shuttle flight costs $400 million. Even a Soyuz costs $100 million, and the Russians take a tourist only when they have an unused seat on the flight.

    At the current going rate of $10 million a tourist (and $10 million tourists are pretty rare), you'd need to get 10 in every Soyuz (capacity 3) and 40 in every Shuttle (capacity 7) to break even on launch costs alone. Then throw in the cost of the space station... ha, ha. Profitable -- not in this lifetime. But then again, since "everyone knows" that there's money to be made, these numbers *must* be wrong.