Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA Engineers Question ISS Safety

Posted by michael on from the in-the-event-of-a-water-landing dept.

Atryn writes "New Scientist is reporting concerns over deteriorating equipment on ISS. ISS will celebrate another anniversary on Nov 2 marking its 3rd complete year. This story was also covered on CNN International and covered on Space.com."

13 of 247 comments (clear)

  1. They just don't make em like they use to.... by reality-bytes · · Score: 5, Funny

    Good grief, safety concerns over equipment after just three years!

    Its not like back in my day (Mir era) - All they had to do back then to keep things ship-shape was to put a coin in the meter and remember to wind up the master computer every day.....

    --
    Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
  2. Odd... by hookedup · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Washington Post reported Thursday, however, that two officials overseeing health and environmental conditions on the space station didn't sign off on the launch, instead signing a dissent that warned about ``the continued degradation'' of the environmental monitoring and health maintenance systems and exercise equipment vital to the astronauts' well being.

    Shouldnt these people _have_ to agree that it's safe in order for it to keep operating? They, after all, are the "officials overseeing health and environmental conditions". Who has to say 'yes' or 'no' and have it mean something?

  3. There's a lot more CYA going on at NASA nowadays by monkeydo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The next time something goes wrong no body wants to be the engineer who didn't warn management. Look far a lot more of these announcements of engineers predicting bad things, just in case.

    --
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
  4. Keep the ISS manned by sssmashy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There is believed to be tension within NASA between safety experts who fear the ISS is becoming dangerously dilapidated and astronauts and managers who do not want to leave the outpost unmanned for fear it could become vulnerable to an accident that would make it spiral out of control.

    Space travel is generally acknowledged to be risky. The astronauts are certainly aware of this. NASA should do all they can to repair the ISS, but it makes no sense to jettison a project that cost tens of billions of dollars (not to mention millions of man-hours) simply because the risk levels have increased.

    1. Re:Keep the ISS manned by brulman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At the same time, I think we have to ask ourselves if the ISS is worth the tens of billions of dollars paid, the billions yet to be paid, as well as the potential risks to the lives of the brave men and women we place there. The ISS has never lived up to the research potential promised when it was sold to the taxpayers.

      --
      "the best safety of the frontier...will be secured by total annihilation of the few remaining indians" L Frank Baum 1890
  5. Re:Russians by Aadain2001 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Change in manufacturing practices around the world. Now, instead of builting things to last forever and a day (including a nuclear explosion), things are being built to look damn nice, but fail after a "reasonable" amount of time so that people will buy more stuff. There's no reason why this mentaility wouldn't effect the NASA contractors.

    --
    Space for rent, inquire within
  6. I don't know what's so shocking... by Not_Wiggins · · Score: 5, Insightful

    *Any* complex machinery/construction/whatever is going to need maintenance over time. What I find irritating isn't so much that NASA thinks pieces need to be replaced, but the public's reaction to such news. "What?!? You want more of my money to *repair* the darn thing before it is done being built?"

    Just because it is in space things doesn't mean things won't wear out. This isn't the Star Trek Universe.

    Although, it should be interesting to see how the need for maintenance will affect the development of the spacestation. Sometimes it seems like it was projected based purely on a "best-case" scenario (ie, everything works right the first time and works right until all the work is done).

    I'd like to see how this impacts projected missions to the ISS... if they don't step up the number (of missions), will this lead to an escalating decay in productivity (ie, every flight will be just to bring repair parts for what has been built already?).

    --
    Diplomacy is the art of saying, "Nice doggie!" until you can find a rock.
  7. How Safety works. by mumblestheclown · · Score: 5, Interesting
    1. Something gets designed and deployed
    2. For each time interval from initial design to infinity, some engineer is complaining that it's not safe enough and that a more expensive solution or complete redesign is necessary.
    3. For each complaint, managers, who are not technically illiterate, but not as "into it" as the engineers, need to evaluate risk based on imperfect information.
    4. Usually, system robustness and other factors dominate. the system is just fine. the engineer's complaints fade into obscurity, even though "deep down" the engineer knows he was right.
    5. But, occasionally, something goes wrong. Instantly, the managers become know-nothing literature-major innumerate MBAs. The engineer who picked the "winning" flaw gains fame.
    6. Therefore, claiming that something will go wrong with the ISS is a good way as any to win the lottery.
    7. The problem MUST be that managers are unschooled in dynamic systems theory, right? Because they don't understand complexity, probability, and risk---right?
    8. But wait, that's wrong! Today's managers ARE trained in those things - i mean, that is the very basis of being a technical manager today! what's the problem then?
    9. could it be that the engineers are trained in engineering and don't know how to effectively communicate and QUANTIFY their risk assessments? nobody at /. will agree to this, but imho, that view is easily at least half right.
  8. Where did Velcro come from? by afniv · · Score: 5, Informative

    Although the space industry has developed countless technologies used in everyday (and not so everyday) life, Velcro and Tang are not among them.

    Velcro history

    To see real space based technologies hop over to a this NASA site.

    --
    ~afniv
    "Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier"
    Richard von Weizs
  9. Will the Chinese Space Station work better? by randall_burns · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Personally, I suspect it will-and the ramifications to the US power structure will be tremendous. The US elites expend a lot of energy to maintain the image that the US is _the_ technological superpower. Problem is, the US government isn't run by men like Franklin and Jefferson any more(guys that got fame by being scientists/inventors)-the congress today is composed almost entirely of a bunch of lying weasels that spend much of their time begging for money from corporate oligarchs and planning their eventual "cash out".

    So can China beat the US in space? At this point, I suspect it can. The US elites are so rapicous they can't provide technical incentives to maintain the present industries in the US without liquidating resources-let alone build new space industries.

    Besides, folks like Bush/Clinton are both kept in office by a steady stream of credit from China and other far eastern countries. Sooner or later that will come to an end. The Chinese leaders strike me as much more cagey than the old Soviet elites-they won't make a really big splash until they think it is too late for the US elites to do anything about it.

  10. A few more links by aengblom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I always find it interesting when Slashdot links to everyone, but the actual source. The Washington Post, which broke the story has an article as well as a followup on how the ISS crew reacted to the news. The reporter also gave an interview.

    --


    So close and yet so far from the world's perfect ID number
  11. Re:Russians by fuzzybunny · · Score: 4, Insightful


    Pretty simple, I'd guess. Look up any information on MIG-25 development. Shortages of titanium led them to basically rivet the thing together out of steel plates; the air-to-air radar was powered by a bunch of massive vacuum tubes.

    Remember the story of how the US spent $5 million to develop a space pen, which would work in vacuum, under water, in massive heat, etc? (The Fisher space pen, I have one, they're pretty nifty)

    The tale goes, the Russians brought a pencil. Different design philosophies. I've been inside a reconstruction of MIR--the thing's pretty massive,
    and you definitely get the feeling that some of the engineers had a blacksmithing background...

    --
    Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
  12. Re:Rotates for Artificial Gravity by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 5, Informative

    As I write, I'm in the computer lab where we're
    testing the software for the "Centrifuge Module",
    which is in the queue to be attached to the
    station eventually. The centrifuge will be
    able to spin lab animals at various levels of
    gravity so that we can learn what happens to
    them beween 0 and 1 gee.

    So far we know that at 1 gee, everything is
    normal, and at zero gee your body figures it
    doesn't need bones anymore, so they atrophy.
    What we need to find out is what happens at
    1/6 gee (Moon), 0.38 gee (Mars), and various
    levels of gravity up to 1 gee spinning (because
    that might be different in its effects than
    1 gee not spinning here on Earth).

    With this knowledge we will have some idea
    how to design for lunar bases, mars bases,
    and long duration travel (mars and asteroids).

    Daniel