Slashdot Mirror
How NASA Steers the Int'l Space Station Around Asteroids & Other Debris
willith writes "I got to sit down with ISS TOPO Flight Controller Josh Parris at the Houston Mission Control Center and talk about how NASA steers all 400 tons of the International Space Station around potential collisions, or 'conjunctions,' in NASA-parlance. The TOPO controller, with assistance from USSTRATCOM's big radars, keeps track of every object that will pass within a 'pizza-box'-shaped 50km x 50km x 4km perimeter around the ISS. Actually moving the station is done with a combination of large control moment gyros and thrusters on both the Zvezda module and visiting vehicles. It's a surprisingly complex operation!"
I don't really see how it's surprising that it's a complex operation to maneuver 400 tons of material, hurtling around the Earth ~8km/s, past various debris that may be no bigger than my fist.
surprisingly complex? im not in the slightest bit surprised - i cant imagine how difficult operations like this would be. the calculations must be staggering...
Is that because when something gets smashed up there, they say, "BUT it's not our fault!"
I would have been surprised if it wasn't complex, its a space station
Obligatory blog plug: http://www.caseybanner.ca/
They use GPS!
A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
Let's just hope the ISS never experiences conjunctivitis! Hahahaha. I'll be here all day.
How NASA Steers the Int'l Space Station Around Asteroids & Other Debris
If the ISS is anywhere near an asteroid, then Houston, we have a serious problem. (Likewise, if an asteroid is anywhere near LEO, we also have a serious problem.)
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conjunction
So.... you could say that the paths of an object like the ISS and one of these fist sized bits of junk meeting is.... them occuring at together in time and space; which would make them have the "least apparent separation" (none at all)....and would likely at least partially "conjoin" them (especially if the debris punched through the wall)
See, it works with 'and' too.
Letr's try 'or'...
"It was either space debris or the Chinese doing anti satellite weapons testing."
Yep, works with 'or' too.
Is there ANY conjunction that it doesn't work with?
One thing the article talks about is the various alert levels assigned to objects in that "pizza box" possessing a non-zero probability of collision with the ISS.
Yellow: greater than 1 in 100,000
Red: greater than 1 in 10,000
Brown: greater than 1 in 2
#DeleteChrome
no asteroids are going to come as close to the earth as the ISS orbit.
Sulu: "Z minus 1000m"
Solving Unix problems since 1989...
What would an asteroid be doing in a near-Earth orbit?
Never use a big word when a diminutive one will suffice.
Solving Unix problems since 1989...
Afterall, the ISS can be assumed to be a frictionless point masss, as can any objects up there. The odds of two point masses colliding is so infinitesmially small as it must never happen, and if it was looking likely, you just model all the thrusters as a single force vector on the sphereical evenly distributed point mass.... simple.
Sheesh, engineers always make things so complicated.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Alright, a stupid question, but what kind of thrusters does the ISS use? Excuse my limited imagination, but when I think of thrusters, I think of an engine burning something to move. Do the ISS's thrusters need constant refueling, in this case?
Don't just hit the "jump" button,eh?
Can we bring up and roll out a kevlar fabric style large mesh device that will orbit in front of the station at a far enough away distance so as not to obscure the field of view and act as an absorber of some of these floating objects?
The idea is that it could be unfurled, catch items and when it is degraded enough, it is deorbited and crashes down into an ocean.
- Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
because writing "International" or simply ISS was too mainstream
Complex, meh, I've got hours orbiting Kerbals successfully....lets just not talk about the staggering number of dead ones.....pretty amazing when you think about what we're doing up there...and folks wonder why maintaining ISS is so pricey, just think about how many people it takes to edge ISS around something.
neorush
Just time accelerate, and things will fly right through each other without damage. ;)
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Seriously, NASA needs to get a COTS out there for multiple tug/fuel depot. Considering the number of chemical and electric engines, they should be able to get 4 different ones produced. Perhaps allocate 100M or 250M per winner.
However, to make this useful, they need to use LIDs for the interface. With this approach, it allows docking and berthing. Berthing is a strong connection, which is good for moving things around. Docking is ideal for short term connections, such as to a fuel depot, or a satellite.
Ideally, with this approach, they could even build a multi-engine approach by simply putting in a base.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
... but lets ask google (GSS) ... or Apple (ASS ... how fitting), after all their new HQ will already look like an UFO, maybe it can also fly (who really read all the specs of that thing?)