Slashdot Mirror


ISS May Have A Leak

Rio writes "The International Space Station is experiencing a slow, steady drop in air pressure, and American and Russian flight controllers are investigating possible causes of the leak. The Local 6 News report says Mission Control notified astronaut Michael Foale and cosmonaut Alexander Kaleri about the leak just before their bedtime late Monday afternoon. Mission Control first noticed the drop in pressure Jan. 1 and said the data showed a daily decline of about 2 millimeters of mercury. As of Monday, the pressure had declined a total of nine millimeters. That is equivalent to about one-quarter of a pound per square inch, said NASA spokesman James Hartsfield."

26 of 523 comments (clear)

  1. IIS May Have a Leak by DarkHelmet · · Score: 5, Funny
    Before I saw that the category was about space, I thought they were talking about the Web Server.

    Damn Slashdot... I was about to come out in my penguin outfit to show my Linux Pride.

    --
    /^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
    1. Re:IIS May Have a Leak by Joey+Patterson · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oddly enough, this Google search indicates that IIS may have a leak after all.

    2. Re:IIS May Have a Leak by iamplasma · · Score: 5, Funny

      Before I saw that the category was about space, I thought they were talking about the Web Server.

      I'd have thought the need to use the word "may" in the topic would be a giveaway that we clearly weren't talking about IIS.

    3. Re:IIS May Have a Leak by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You are right, the problem actually *is* Microsoft's web server software. They just installed it up there, and as everyone knows, that software just plains sucks. Hence the pressure drop.

  2. Toolkit by BasilBrush · · Score: 5, Funny

    Two spoons, chalk, washing up bowl, rubber patch, glue.

    1. Re:Toolkit by Penguinshit · · Score: 5, Funny



      Duct tape only worked on Mir (which, incidentally, is the Russian word for "duct tape").

  3. bump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, either they'll find out what went bump last November, or everyone will die and we'll be subjected to another Tom Hanks space movie.

  4. duct tape by potpie · · Score: 5, Funny

    they have duct tape, right? If they don't they'll REALLY be in trouble.

    --
    Esoteric reference.
    1. Re:duct tape by notyou2 · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's absurd... you can't fix a leak in a space station using duct tape.

      Such a job clearly requires silly putty.

    2. Re:duct tape by nacturation · · Score: 5, Funny

      Unfortunately, patching a leak in a space station is somewhat similar to taping a duct. And the only thing that duct tape is bad for is taping ducts.

      Now taping ducks on the other hand, is one of its greatest strengths.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  5. So .... what's their plan of action? by NightSpots · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They say "There are no immediate concerns for the safety or health of the crew", but what are they doing about it?

    When is it time to take action?
    Do they have a way to leave?

    They have a supply of Oxygen and Nitrogen to repressurize the station, but how long will that last?

    It would be nice to sit in on the decision-making, just to observe...

    1. Re:So .... what's their plan of action? by lone_marauder · · Score: 5, Interesting

      They say "There are no immediate concerns for the safety or health of the crew", but what are they doing about it?

      Looking for it.

      When is it time to take action?

      You mean, try to fix it, or abandon the station? Now for the former and when it gets about 1000 times worse and becomes a threat to life support for the latter.

      Do they have a way to leave?

      Yes. A Soyuz spacecraft is always docked to the station in the case of an emergency evacuation.

      My approach would be thus: if the leak cannot be located, start sealing off compartments (this means effectively turning them off, I believe) If it gets that bad, though, I think it means abandoning the affected compartment. This combined with the November event concerns me greatly, but it isn't time to panic yet.

      --
      who are those slashdot people? they swept over like Mongol-Tartars.
    2. Re:So .... what's their plan of action? by Mad+Marlin · · Score: 5, Informative
      1000 times? they don't have to wait that long .25psi is 1/58th of an atmosphere, in 30 days they would be down to .5 atmospheres, which seems like it would be getting pretty dangerous to me.

      They are losing 2 mmHg daily, which is 0.03867 psi daily. Normal atmospheric pressure is 760 mmHg, and 0.5 atm is 380 mmHg. If this leak is at a constant rate (which might not be true) then it will take 190 days to get down to 0.5 atm, which is about half a year. Also, I suspect that a healthy man could be subjected to well below 0.5 atm, especially if the pressure were reduced so gradually.

    3. Re:So .... what's their plan of action? by Wavicle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Also, I suspect that a healthy man could be subjected to well below 0.5 atm, especially if the pressure were reduced so gradually.

      When I was taking physics in college, one of the professors there was an ex-SR-71 pilot (it was a community college) and gave a talk about air pressure, air mix and breathing. (It was some years ago, so hopefully I remember the pertinent facts)

      At the altitude the SR-71 flew, the air pressure was something like 1 or 2 millibars (I forget exactly, but it was really close to zero) and for entirely practical reasons the cockpit could not be pressurized, so the pilots sat in a "space suit" (it wasn't an actual space suit, but pretty close). However the space suit couldn't be pressurized to 1 atm or it would be too stiff for the pilot to move.

      The obvious solution was to drop the pressure in the suit, but as it turns out if you drop the pressure too low, the partial pressure of CO2 in your lungs doesn't get high enough for it to send a signal to your autonomic nervous system to take a breath. It turns out that when the CO2 in your lungs reaches a partial pressure of about 5% of 1atm, your brain decides its time to take a breath.

      What this all boils down to is, as the pressure drops, the relative concentration of oxygen has to increase to keep the balance of the partial pressure of oxygen and CO2 in your lungs, or you will start suffering symptoms of oxygen deprivation.

      I believe in the case the prof was lecturing on, a pure oxygen mix at 3.5 psi was enough to keep you lucid while being low enough you could actually move around.

      --
      Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.
      Edward Everett (1794 - 1865)
  6. What!? by dominion · · Score: 5, Funny

    just before their bedtime late Monday afternoon

    Astronauts have a bedtime?!? Screw that, there's goes my plans for the future.

    1. Re:What!? by Dark_Nova · · Score: 5, Funny

      I imagine that they they didn't sleep well that night...

      MISSION CONTROL: "Hey guys, have a good night's sleep, and by the way, the Space Station is slowly depressurizing, and we can't work out why. Oh well, see you in the morning.".

  7. ok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just submerge it in water and look for the bubbles.

    Or in this case space and look for the air.

  8. So technically... by ErikTheRed · · Score: 5, Funny

    The leak... does that suck or does that blow...?

    --

    Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
    1. Re:So technically... by bonzomcgrue · · Score: 5, Funny


      It depends which side of the wall you're on. Sucks for the astronauts, blows for mission control.

  9. Re:Visible? by NightSpots · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There's even a cargo ship that's docked to the station ... they've been testing valves all night, I'm guessing they'll wait til that Russian ship leaves, and if the leak doesn't disappear, then they'll start to get concerned.

    If you assume that the more complex a seal is, the better chance it has of leaking, then the docking hardware might be a good place to start looking.

  10. Use the B-rate sci-fi movie trick: by Kymermosst · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just light a cigarette, and follow where the smoke goes to figure out where the leak is.

    Then, patch it with chewing gum, and have a beer (or shot of vodka) to celebrate the success.

    They do allow cigarettes, gum, and alcohol on the ISS, don't they? Of course! All of the movie space stations do!

    --
    "Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
  11. There is indeed a Soyuz for emergency by znode · · Score: 5, Informative

    You remember correctly.

    "A Soyuz capsule will always be docked at the ISS, capable of carrying two people in a medical emergency, or three people in other emergencies. A crew will take a fresh Soyuz capsule to the station every six months."
    http://science.howstuffworks.com/space-station11.h tm

  12. I'm an astro-nut by Dalroth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm an astro-nut. If I could control where most of my taxed income went, I'd almost certainly have it tunnelled off to Air Force black projects, NASA and science education.

    That being said, the ISS has long since become a turkey. It's time to cut that thing loose and build us something usefull. In particular, real telescopes that will let real science be done. This space station is nothing more than a big money black hole.

    I'd much rather have a space based inferometer placed at one of the Earth's lagrange points. We could learn a lot from something like that! What are we learning from ISS? Russia has no money... nobody else will cooperate with us... people can't stay up in space for a long time (hello mir?) and our space program is woefully inadequate. Great. Billions of dollars for this? I could've told you this years ago...

    Bryan

  13. Grow a brain you troll... by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 5, Informative

    God, your post is so ignorant that I have to wonder why you bothered composing it.

    1. No "international" = no "space station".

    If there hadn't been international cooperation, we wouldn't have a space station in orbit right now. Compared to the Russians, what NASA knew about space stations could be written on a postage stamp.

    Lest you forget, Skylab wasn't exactly a screaming success (heck, one of its solar panels failed to deploy: you could hardly call that an auspicious start). Its longest period of occupancy was 84 days and it was deployed as one unit and nothing like as modular as the ISS.

    On the other hand, Mir far outlived its operational life (and would have done so by an even greater margin if the bean counters hadn't tried to cut so many corners), and was occupied almost constantly for 15 years. During that time, docked with 31 spacecraft, 64 cargo vessels, 9 shuttle missions visited it and it was home to 125 cosmonauts/astronauts from 12 different countries. It was, of course, modular, like the ISS. Oh, and before Mir, the Russians also had the Salyut series of space stations up and running throughout the 1970s and 1980s.

    When Russia came on board, the ISS gained a lot of expertise; the sort of expertise that money just can't buy. If you think you can find one person at NASA who thinks that putting up a space station as complex and as expensive as the ISS could have been done by the US alone then you're deluding yourself.

    2. NASAs main partners in the ISS are Canada, ESA, Russia and Japan, but most of their modules have yet to be deployed.

    There is no "British" space agency involvement in the ISS. However, there is ESA (European Space Agency, of which Britain plays a very small role) involvement in the ISS. This involvement includes the Columbus Laboratory, the Automated Transfer Vehicle, Nodes 2 and 3, the European Robotic Arm, and the Data Management System for the Russian Service Module. However, most (if not all) of these elements have yet to be deployed, so I fail to see how they can be responsible for a pressure leak when they're sitting on the ground.

    The same is true for the Japanese involvement, the Japanese Experiment Module (JEM) also known as Kibo, which is currently undergoing testing at the Kennedy Space Centre prior to launch. Sorry to break it to you, but if their module isn't up there, I can't see how you can hope to "share the blame for this latest debacle" with the Japanese either.

    By the way, the single biggest contractor on the ISS is Boeing. Last time I checked, Boeing was an American company.

    3. A "sole space agency" is in charge. It's name is NASA.

    The ISS may be international, but NASA is its lead partner. All others play second fiddle to it and that's never been in doubt. If there's someone "in charge of making sure everything [runs] right" that someone is NASA.

    So that's D'oh!, D'oh! and thrice D'oh!

    Seriously, if you could get off your xenophobic high horse for a second (and get some basic facts right too) then perhaps you might have a point (ie, that someone screwed up, again) albeit a rather weak one. But trying to turn this story into a "USA rules, rest of you just suck" gloat is pathetic, particularly when you're so off-base.

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
  14. Re:Sounds like by Fryed · · Score: 5, Funny

    one small use for toothpaste...

    One giant leap for MacGuyver fans around the world

  15. No one is ever left aboard without a lifeboat by ikluft · · Score: 5, Informative
    You could say that this procedure is the Titanic's contribution to space travel. No one is ever left aboard without a lifeboat, not even for a few minutes.

    They plan around the lifeboat capacity. Even when they used to move the Soyuz between docking ports on Mir (i.e. to free up the only port that a shuttle orbiter could use) everyone had to go aboard the Soyuz for the maneuver, just in case they couldn't re-dock. If they couldn't, they'd abandon the station until another crew could be launched to re-man it.

    Of course, they've always able to re-dock so far. There hasn't yet been an unscheduled abandonment of a space station.

    The Soyuz-TMA spacecraft serving as the current lifeboat is the one that Foale and Kaleri were launched in. But a Soyuz has a finite shelf-life. Occasionally Russia launches a short-duration crew to bring up a new Soyuz (with fresh batteries and other supplies) and take back the old one. That's just part of sustaining the long-duration mission and its crew.

    ISS has more docking ports so they don't have to juggle them like they did on Mir. (And there are no scheduled shuttle orbiter arrivals before late this year anyway.) But if they had to move the Soyuz for any reason, it would still be the same thing - all aboard and leave no one behind.

    This is a procedure NASA learned from the Russians, among many things they learned from each other. Remember, when they started working together on the Shuttle-Mir dockings in the mid- to late 90's, NASA had the experience with big shuttle orbiters, but no long-duration platforms. Russia had the experience with space stations, but wasn't able to bring as much cargo up, and almost nothing (in comparison) back down. Each had what the other needed so that worked pretty well, besides all the symbolism it made for the end of the Cold War.

    So, what are they going to do now? My guess is the first thing will be to close all the hatches to try to isolate and identify the module (or docking port between modules) with the leak. They have a finite supply of gas with which to repressurize the station - so this can't go forever without becoming a danger of shutting off a module. In a worst case scenario (which can't be ruled out yet but also isn't likely yet either), they'd have to abandon the station and take the Soyuz on re-entry back to Earth. So they have to look for it and try to fix it ASAP.

    At any given time, if Foale is forced to make a life-and-death decision as commander, even he could initiate abandonment of the station. He was aboard Mir when the Progress collision occurred in June 1997. They had to close the hatch to the Spektr module (where all of Foale's on-orbit personal belongings were), losing that module and the power from its solar panels. He's seen worse than this. But I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't sleep well tonight.