Technically, one could claim that the first commercial or private lunar mission was the Asiasat-3 flyby (although it is pushing it a bit, since there was no science involved)
The story is that the rocket launching the communication satellite had a problem, and left the payload in a lower, usless orbit. But, by using the satellite's own, limited fuel reserves the ground controllers were able to swing it around the moon and back into a semi-useful orbit.
Some more details are here and here
It seems that they already have one prospective customer that wants to send more than a postcard. The Foundation for the International Non-government Development of Space (FINDS) made an agreement with transorbital last year to return scientific data, to test the Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) constellation at lunar distances to learn if it is possible to utilize GPS for navigation during a lunar trajectory or in lunar orbit.
Now, if there only was a market for earthlings sending postcards *home* from the lunar surface, space exploration would be a much more interesting place.
According to this article in the online version of New Scientist, Malaysia is about to introduce a compulsory national id card system, using smart cards with biometric information on them (fingerprints).
A neutron walks into a bar and orders a martini. When the bartender hands him the drink, the neutron asks, "How much do I owe you?"
The bartender replies, "For you... no charge."
Verizon have a website covering their disaster recover operations. They even have a few good picuures of their damaged building here, including one showing the fire department spraying water out one of their 7th floor windows!
With the International Space Station (ISS) running continiously over budget, NASA is more or less forced to shut down a lot of science missions. In other words, saving 5-10 mil on science data analysis in order to raise the 5 billion a year they need to build, launch and maintain the orbital tin cans that is the ISS. The ironry is that there will be insuficient money or crew in the ISS in order to do much significant science there anyway for the next five years, at least. But, those congrisional districts and big comapanies that make and launch the stuff will be happy. Those have a bigger lobby group than 20 or 30 scientists who dedicate their life to analysisng the data.
NASA has already pushed out the Mars exploration program by another two years this week. The trouble is, they do that every two years.
In fairness though, saying goodby to DS9 in these circumstances is acceptable. Running out of funding may be sad, but running out of fuel, which it has, is not something you can fix. Only for the fact that they overfilled it at launce got it this far.
Here is a good description of rotating space stations and the coriolis effect.
Basically, if you run 'with' the rotation of the station, you will get heavier, and if you run 'against' the rotation, you will get lighter. That can be a little confusing. It also makes ball games a little difficult, since the trajectory of a ball will change depending on which direction you throw it!
Another good site explaining the effect and its problems is here
Its easy to predict the weather from this: since it has so much processing power, once they turn it on, it will become self aware, declare war on all mankind, and launch the all missiles, thereby plunging the world into a nuclear winter that will last a 1000 years.
This is a russian module, paid for (hopefully/eventually!) by the russian space agency - so it dosn't effect the science budget, since the russians can't afford to do much space science anyhow.
The module was packed with cargo, so it's cost can be partially offset against that of a dedicated Progress supply mission. (Although Pirs dosn't carry a hugh amount of cargo other that itself, or any fuel for the station. It does have a Spacesuit and a crane for the outside of the station on board)
Two or three spacewalks are planned from the new module in October, to do some wiring and also to do a paid spacewalk (scientific/Advertising?) for the Japanese I think, so that might cover some more of the cost.
Incedently, that might mean that the first 'independent' EVA from the station will be in russian suits from the Russian Airlock.
(All other EVAs have taken place with the shuttle present, even the test EVA from the Quest airlock)
There was one independent spacewalk already, where they set up the docking port for Pirs to dock, but they didn't actually leave the station for that, even though they were in vacumn. Technically that is called an IVA, for Intra-Vehicular-Activity, as opposed to Extra-Vehicular-Activity
They need the extra soyuz docking port for several reasons. The main one is that there were only two ports on the Russian end that support the Soyuz/Progress docking system (The other ports are of a different design to allow heaver modules to dock permenantly - Pirs has one of these at it's top end)
There is generally a progress supply ship docked at the 'rear' or the station, and a Soyuz escape craft on the Nadir (earth facing) port. When they swap the Sozuz's every 6 months or so, they have to undock the progress, dock the new soyuz at the rear port, undock the old soyuz, (and then possibly move the new soyuz to the Nadir port and redock the progress). Having a spare Nadir port means they can leave the progress where it is, and just use the Nadir ports to handle the Soyuzs.
This will reduce the amount of dockings/undockings, and also reduce the amount of 'traffic' around the station. Remember the Progress Crash on Mir? That happened during a Progress re-docking.
Also, the new module will give a few meters extra clearance when a Soyuz needs to dock. This will also improve safety, radio communications and reduce the effect of rocket gas from the docking spacecraft hitting the station's solar panels.
Sorta true, the US airlock, Quest, is planned to support both types, but I believe that it currently only has the plumbing for the US suits. The russian valves/regulators will be installed at a later stage.
More satellite images
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Check out thespaceimaging web site for more satellite images, including 'before' and 'after' pictures of the WTC and the pentagon.
New satellite image
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Here is an IKONOS satellite image of the disaster area. (from yahoo news)
The image was taken on 11:43am EDT September 12.
A comet gives off gas which is fairly tenious and gets blown away more or less directly away from the sun. Its the dust and grit that is the risk, and that gets left behind in the vicinity of the orbital path, in the same region of space where DS1 will be. (same stuff also causes meteor showers when earth orbits accross the dirt trail)
The important thing from DS1's point of view is to keep the relative motion between the coment and the probe as small as possible, both to maximise encounter time and to make it easier to 'aim' the probe and its cameras at the comet. (this also saves fuel, which is a heavy, scarce and precious resourse in outer space)
In effect, the two objects are on almost on a parallel path, at slightly different speeds, not a perpendicular intersection as one would think.
Its like two veichicles on a slowly curving highway, one slowly overtaking the other. If the comet is an open dumpster truck in the slow lane, you will be showered with garbage for miles before you eventually pass it out! (even though you are only 'alongside' it for a few seconds)
Judging by the size of the mini space station core in the MirCorp picture, the module seems to be of the same class as the gamma free flying spacecraft, first proposed back in 1965 or so.
This craft would be small, weighing about 7 1/2 metric tonnes, and therefore light enough to be launched on one of the cheaper Soyuz family of rockets (as opposed to Proton). Habitable volume would be quite small though, about 4 meters long by 2.2 meters diameter
As a small, only temporary manned outpost, this station could actually be used to produce better science, at least in the area of migrogravity crystalography or metalurgy. The main requrement for this type of research is the best possible microgravity enviornment. MIR was ok, and the ISS will be better but the problem with these stations is that they are manned, and people make noise and vibrations. The crew have to excerise for hours each day, pumps have to run for the life support, thrusters have to fire to maintain a favourable orbit, and other ships are docking and undocking to bring supplies and take away trash. Not to mention astronauts/cosmonauts drifting into the walls and flushing the toilet!
However, this proposed small station would be unmanned for most of the year, hence no people moving around and less need for fans and pumps to be running to clean the muck out of the air. The station could be left in a 'free drift' mode for months on end, avoiding the need for thruster firings. If the solar panels are big enough and there are enough batteries, it wouldnt be as critical to keep grinding the solar panels around to catch the sun all the time.
So, what the scientists could do is give the 'visiting crew' some equipment such as a microgravity metalurgy furnace (or send it up beforehand in a progress cargo ship). The visiting crew would then spend their 2 week holiday or whatever looking out the window, then set up the equipment and experments and leave. Once they hade left (and moved to the ISS or back to earth or wherever), ground control would power down the nonessintial, noisy equipment on the station and activate the experment. It would be left running, quietly, for several months during which it would grow perfect crystals or whatever the experment was. The next visiting crew would then retrieve the results, and bring them away with them (possibly droping them off on the ISS for a smother ride home on the next space shuttle).
Incidently, the original plan for the european space station module, the Columbus Lab. was very similar to this. It would undock and dock to the ISS, so it could run its experments quietly well away from human noise. Of course, cutbacks and politics killed that idea.
Unmanned spacecraft will almost always give you a better science enviorment, once you have good remote control and robitic systems. They are also much cheaper. NASA knows this, but it's raison d^etre is manned spaceflight, nothing else really gets the tv coverage, and unfortunaly even that is minimal at the best of times.
This "mini station" could be actually be constructed quite cheaply, say $100Mil. The russians could even use some of the old Almaz station shells that they have stored in a warehouse somewhere. (They had hoped to sell them off as big, unmanned radar imaging stations, but that didn't come to much). There not as big, but since all they need are 3 bedrooms and minimal life support, that shouldn't be too much of a problem.
For short missions, they shouldn't need all that bulky excerise equipment either.
Since there wont be many things docked to them (unlike MIR), they can save money by only having 2 or 3 docking ports and mechanisms, instead of the 6 that were on the MIR core module.
Since they will only be used for short missions, (3 people at a time for less than 20 days), the life support systems can be fairly minimal. They won't really need water recyling systems since they can carry enough water with them. They can also bring their own oxygen supply (either compressed, or in perchorlate form), so a oxygen generator ("Electron") wont be needed. (Which needs a lot of power)
They can also bring enough Lithium Hydroxide Canisters with them to scrub the carbon dioxide, so they wont need the "Vosduka" C02 scrubbers either.
Since there wont be any power hungery science equipment on there, (or the "Electron" oxygen generator), the electrical drain will be lower, so there wont be as much need for acres of solar panels or huge heavy batteries.
So, Budget another $50Mil for a proton launch, and there's your economy size station.
The russians have already built the docking node that you refer to, and I very much doubt that is cost anywhere near $1billion.
Russia is planing to launch Piers, its own docking compartment on Sept 15. This will provide 3 things: a proper airlock (so they dont have to depres a main part of the ISS), a strela 'space crane' for moving other bits of russian space hardware around, and a docking port, so the russians will be able to keep 2 Soyuz escape craft and a Progress cargo craft docked to the ISS at the same time (currently there are only two Soyuz/Progress compatable docking ports - the others are for 'bigger', heavier modules.
The Docking Compartment will also help to keep docked soyuz craft in a 'better position' relative to approaching or docked shuttles. Besides, most of the time shuttles will be docking at the US 'end' of the station, well away from the russian side.
With the ability to keep two soyuz craft docked, the emergency crew return issue is solved, at least form a technicial point of view. Russia would still need to fund, build and launch two additional Soyuz craft each year. However, If they were allowed to collect $20mil every 6 months for flying either tourists or ESA/Canadian astronauts for example, that would probably cover it, But of course NASA still wants to spend $500Mil developing their own return craft, and another $500 mil to launch each on them on a shuttle.
I admit that the NASA CRV (crew return veichle) would be able to return 7, instead of 6 people in two soyuz, and the CRV can handle injured crew members better than Soyuz.
But also, I would think that two Soyuz is better than one CRV, from a redundency point of view.
Re:US suits incompatible with Ru airlock. STANDARD
on
ISS Airlock Installed
·
· Score: 1
There was a way of doing EVA's, but from the Russian side, and of course that dosn't count to NASA/USA, does it?. The russian module was launched with 2 russian space suits ready and waiting for use, and the 'spherical' docking compartment in Zeveda had all the plumbing etc to support EVAs. In fact, an EVA did take place, but they didn't need to leave the ISS, instead they just moved some docking equipment around. Besides, that was done by russians, so it didn't really count either! However, if an emergency required it, the ISS did have the means before now to conduct a full blown external EVA if necessary.
Also, Russia is planing to launch 'Piers', its own docking compartment on Sept 15. This will provide 3 things: a proper airlock (so they dont have to depres a main part of the ISS), a strela 'space crane' for moving other bits of russian space hardware around, and a docking port, so the russians will be able to keep 2 Soyuz escape craft and a Progress cargo craft docket to the ISS at the same time (currently there are only two Soyuz/Progress compatable docking ports - the others are for 'bigger' modules so to speak.
With the ability to keep two soyuz craft docked, the emergency crew return issue is solved, at least form a technicial point of view. Russia would still need to fund, build and launch two additional Soyuz craft each year. However, If they were allowed to collect $20mil every 6 months for flying either tourists or ESA astronauts for example, that would probably cover it, But of course NASA still wants to spend $500Mil developing their own return craft, and another $500 mil to launch each on them on a shuttle.
I admit that the NASA CRV (crew return veichle) would be able to return 7, instead of 6 people in two soyuz, and the CRV can handle injured crew members better than Soyuz.
But also, I would think that two Soyuz is better than one CRV, from a redundency point of view.
See here for more info on Piers.
Of course there was a way of doing EVA's, but from the Russian side, and of course that dosn't count to NASA/USA, does it?. The russian module was launched with 2 russian space suits ready and waiting for use, and the 'spherical' docking compartment in Zeveda had all the plumbing etc to support EVAs. In fact, an EVA did take place, but they didn't need to leave the ISS, instead they just moved some docking equipment around. Besides, that was done by russians, so it didn't really count either! However, if an emergency required it, the ISS did have the means before now to conduct a full blown external EVA if necessary.
Also, Russia is planing to launch 'Piers', its own docking compartment on Sept 15. This will provide 3 things: a proper airlock (so they dont have to depres a main part of the ISS), a strela 'space crane' for moving other bits of russian space hardware around, and a docking port, so the russians will be able to keep 2 Soyuz escape craft and a Progress cargo craft docket to the ISS at the same time (currently there are only two Soyuz/Progress compatable docking ports - the others are for 'bigger' modules so to speak.
With the ability to keep two soyuz craft docked, the emergency crew return issue is solved, at least form a technicial point of view. Russia would still need to fund, build and launch two additional Soyuz craft each year. However, If they were allowed to collect $20mil every 6 months for flying either tourists or ESA astronauts for example, that would probably cover it, But of course NASA still wants to spend $500Mil developing their own return craft, and another $500 mil to launch each on them on a shuttle.
I admit that the NASA CRV (crew return veichle) would be able to return 7, instead of 6 people in two soyuz, and the CRV can handle injured crew members better than Soyuz.
But also, I would think that two Soyuz is better than one CRV, from a redundency point of view.
See here for more info on Piers.
According to this article, when reusable launch vehicles become commonplace, MRO spending (maintenance, repair and overhaul) will eclipse the revenues from building the launchers.
Slashdot Mirror
Technically, one could claim that the first commercial or private lunar mission was the Asiasat-3 flyby (although it is pushing it a bit, since there was no science involved)
The story is that the rocket launching the communication satellite had a problem, and left the payload in a lower, usless orbit. But, by using the satellite's own, limited fuel reserves the ground controllers were able to swing it around the moon and back into a semi-useful orbit.
Some more details are here and here
It seems that they already have one prospective customer that wants to send more than a postcard. The Foundation for the International Non-government Development of Space (FINDS) made an agreement with transorbital last year to return scientific data, to test the Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) constellation at lunar distances to learn if it is possible to utilize GPS for navigation during a lunar trajectory or in lunar orbit.
Now, if there only was a market for earthlings sending postcards *home* from the lunar surface, space exploration would be a much more interesting place.
According to this article in the online version of New Scientist, Malaysia is about to introduce a compulsory national id card system, using smart cards with biometric information on them (fingerprints).
A neutron walks into a bar and orders a martini. When the bartender hands him the drink, the neutron asks, "How much do I owe you?" ... no charge."
The bartender replies, "For you
Verizon have a website covering their disaster recover operations. They even have a few good picuures of their damaged building here, including one showing the fire department spraying water out one of their 7th floor windows!
With the International Space Station (ISS) running continiously over budget, NASA is more or less forced to shut down a lot of science missions. In other words, saving 5-10 mil on science data analysis in order to raise the 5 billion a year they need to build, launch and maintain the orbital tin cans that is the ISS. The ironry is that there will be insuficient money or crew in the ISS in order to do much significant science there anyway for the next five years, at least. But, those congrisional districts and big comapanies that make and launch the stuff will be happy. Those have a bigger lobby group than 20 or 30 scientists who dedicate their life to analysisng the data.
NASA has already pushed out the Mars exploration program by another two years this week. The trouble is, they do that every two years.
In fairness though, saying goodby to DS9 in these circumstances is acceptable. Running out of funding may be sad, but running out of fuel, which it has, is not something you can fix. Only for the fact that they overfilled it at launce got it this far.
So this is how the mice are planning to get off the planet before the Vogons get here with their yellow ships and the poetry
Here is a good description of rotating space stations and the coriolis effect.
Basically, if you run 'with' the rotation of the station, you will get heavier, and if you run 'against' the rotation, you will get lighter. That can be a little confusing. It also makes ball games a little difficult, since the trajectory of a ball will change depending on which direction you throw it!
Another good site explaining the effect and its problems is here
Do these new blocks hurt just as much as those Lego 1x1s when you step on a floorfull of them in the dark? **ouch**
Its easy to predict the weather from this: since it has so much processing power, once they turn it on, it will become self aware, declare war on all mankind, and launch the all missiles, thereby plunging the world into a nuclear winter that will last a 1000 years.
This is a russian module, paid for (hopefully/eventually!) by the russian space agency - so it dosn't effect the science budget, since the russians can't afford to do much space science anyhow.
The module was packed with cargo, so it's cost can be partially offset against that of a dedicated Progress supply mission. (Although Pirs dosn't carry a hugh amount of cargo other that itself, or any fuel for the station. It does have a Spacesuit and a crane for the outside of the station on board)
Two or three spacewalks are planned from the new module in October, to do some wiring and also to do a paid spacewalk (scientific/Advertising?) for the Japanese I think, so that might cover some more of the cost.
Incedently, that might mean that the first 'independent' EVA from the station will be in russian suits from the Russian Airlock.
(All other EVAs have taken place with the shuttle present, even the test EVA from the Quest airlock)
There was one independent spacewalk already, where they set up the docking port for Pirs to dock, but they didn't actually leave the station for that, even though they were in vacumn. Technically that is called an IVA, for Intra-Vehicular-Activity, as opposed to Extra-Vehicular-Activity
They need the extra soyuz docking port for several reasons. The main one is that there were only two ports on the Russian end that support the Soyuz/Progress docking system (The other ports are of a different design to allow heaver modules to dock permenantly - Pirs has one of these at it's top end)
There is generally a progress supply ship docked at the 'rear' or the station, and a Soyuz escape craft on the Nadir (earth facing) port. When they swap the Sozuz's every 6 months or so, they have to undock the progress, dock the new soyuz at the rear port, undock the old soyuz, (and then possibly move the new soyuz to the Nadir port and redock the progress). Having a spare Nadir port means they can leave the progress where it is, and just use the Nadir ports to handle the Soyuzs.
This will reduce the amount of dockings/undockings, and also reduce the amount of 'traffic' around the station. Remember the Progress Crash on Mir? That happened during a Progress re-docking.
Also, the new module will give a few meters extra clearance when a Soyuz needs to dock. This will also improve safety, radio communications and reduce the effect of rocket gas from the docking spacecraft hitting the station's solar panels.
Sorta true, the US airlock, Quest, is planned to support both types, but I believe that it currently only has the plumbing for the US suits. The russian valves/regulators will be installed at a later stage.
Check out thespaceimaging web site for more satellite images, including 'before' and 'after' pictures of the WTC and the pentagon.
Here is an IKONOS satellite image of the disaster area. (from yahoo news)
The image was taken on 11:43am EDT September 12.
A comet gives off gas which is fairly tenious and gets blown away more or less directly away from the sun. Its the dust and grit that is the risk, and that gets left behind in the vicinity of the orbital path, in the same region of space where DS1 will be. (same stuff also causes meteor showers when earth orbits accross the dirt trail)
The important thing from DS1's point of view is to keep the relative motion between the coment and the probe as small as possible, both to maximise encounter time and to make it easier to 'aim' the probe and its cameras at the comet. (this also saves fuel, which is a heavy, scarce and precious resourse in outer space)
In effect, the two objects are on almost on a parallel path, at slightly different speeds, not a perpendicular intersection as one would think.
Its like two veichicles on a slowly curving highway, one slowly overtaking the other. If the comet is an open dumpster truck in the slow lane, you will be showered with garbage for miles before you eventually pass it out! (even though you are only 'alongside' it for a few seconds)
You should try reading the review of this software version
Judging by the size of the mini space station core in the MirCorp picture, the module seems to be of the same class as the gamma free flying spacecraft, first proposed back in 1965 or so.
This craft would be small, weighing about 7 1/2 metric tonnes, and therefore light enough to be launched on one of the cheaper Soyuz family of rockets (as opposed to Proton). Habitable volume would be quite small though, about 4 meters long by 2.2 meters diameter
As a small, only temporary manned outpost, this station could actually be used to produce better science, at least in the area of migrogravity crystalography or metalurgy. The main requrement for this type of research is the best possible microgravity enviornment. MIR was ok, and the ISS will be better but the problem with these stations is that they are manned, and people make noise and vibrations. The crew have to excerise for hours each day, pumps have to run for the life support, thrusters have to fire to maintain a favourable orbit, and other ships are docking and undocking to bring supplies and take away trash. Not to mention astronauts/cosmonauts drifting into the walls and flushing the toilet!
However, this proposed small station would be unmanned for most of the year, hence no people moving around and less need for fans and pumps to be running to clean the muck out of the air. The station could be left in a 'free drift' mode for months on end, avoiding the need for thruster firings. If the solar panels are big enough and there are enough batteries, it wouldnt be as critical to keep grinding the solar panels around to catch the sun all the time.
So, what the scientists could do is give the 'visiting crew' some equipment such as a microgravity metalurgy furnace (or send it up beforehand in a progress cargo ship). The visiting crew would then spend their 2 week holiday or whatever looking out the window, then set up the equipment and experments and leave. Once they hade left (and moved to the ISS or back to earth or wherever), ground control would power down the nonessintial, noisy equipment on the station and activate the experment. It would be left running, quietly, for several months during which it would grow perfect crystals or whatever the experment was. The next visiting crew would then retrieve the results, and bring them away with them (possibly droping them off on the ISS for a smother ride home on the next space shuttle).
Incidently, the original plan for the european space station module, the Columbus Lab. was very similar to this. It would undock and dock to the ISS, so it could run its experments quietly well away from human noise. Of course, cutbacks and politics killed that idea.
Unmanned spacecraft will almost always give you a better science enviorment, once you have good remote control and robitic systems. They are also much cheaper. NASA knows this, but it's raison d^etre is manned spaceflight, nothing else really gets the tv coverage, and unfortunaly even that is minimal at the best of times.
This "mini station" could be actually be constructed quite cheaply, say $100Mil. The russians could even use some of the old Almaz station shells that they have stored in a warehouse somewhere. (They had hoped to sell them off as big, unmanned radar imaging stations, but that didn't come to much). There not as big, but since all they need are 3 bedrooms and minimal life support, that shouldn't be too much of a problem.
For short missions, they shouldn't need all that bulky excerise equipment either.
Since there wont be many things docked to them (unlike MIR), they can save money by only having 2 or 3 docking ports and mechanisms, instead of the 6 that were on the MIR core module.
Since they will only be used for short missions, (3 people at a time for less than 20 days), the life support systems can be fairly minimal. They won't really need water recyling systems since they can carry enough water with them. They can also bring their own oxygen supply (either compressed, or in perchorlate form), so a oxygen generator ("Electron") wont be needed. (Which needs a lot of power)
They can also bring enough Lithium Hydroxide Canisters with them to scrub the carbon dioxide, so they wont need the "Vosduka" C02 scrubbers either.
Since there wont be any power hungery science equipment on there, (or the "Electron" oxygen generator), the electrical drain will be lower, so there wont be as much need for acres of solar panels or huge heavy batteries.
So, Budget another $50Mil for a proton launch, and there's your economy size station.
The russians have already built the docking node that you refer to, and I very much doubt that is cost anywhere near $1billion. Russia is planing to launch Piers, its own docking compartment on Sept 15. This will provide 3 things: a proper airlock (so they dont have to depres a main part of the ISS), a strela 'space crane' for moving other bits of russian space hardware around, and a docking port, so the russians will be able to keep 2 Soyuz escape craft and a Progress cargo craft docked to the ISS at the same time (currently there are only two Soyuz/Progress compatable docking ports - the others are for 'bigger', heavier modules. The Docking Compartment will also help to keep docked soyuz craft in a 'better position' relative to approaching or docked shuttles. Besides, most of the time shuttles will be docking at the US 'end' of the station, well away from the russian side. With the ability to keep two soyuz craft docked, the emergency crew return issue is solved, at least form a technicial point of view. Russia would still need to fund, build and launch two additional Soyuz craft each year. However, If they were allowed to collect $20mil every 6 months for flying either tourists or ESA/Canadian astronauts for example, that would probably cover it, But of course NASA still wants to spend $500Mil developing their own return craft, and another $500 mil to launch each on them on a shuttle. I admit that the NASA CRV (crew return veichle) would be able to return 7, instead of 6 people in two soyuz, and the CRV can handle injured crew members better than Soyuz. But also, I would think that two Soyuz is better than one CRV, from a redundency point of view.
There was a way of doing EVA's, but from the Russian side, and of course that dosn't count to NASA/USA, does it?. The russian module was launched with 2 russian space suits ready and waiting for use, and the 'spherical' docking compartment in Zeveda had all the plumbing etc to support EVAs. In fact, an EVA did take place, but they didn't need to leave the ISS, instead they just moved some docking equipment around. Besides, that was done by russians, so it didn't really count either! However, if an emergency required it, the ISS did have the means before now to conduct a full blown external EVA if necessary. Also, Russia is planing to launch 'Piers', its own docking compartment on Sept 15. This will provide 3 things: a proper airlock (so they dont have to depres a main part of the ISS), a strela 'space crane' for moving other bits of russian space hardware around, and a docking port, so the russians will be able to keep 2 Soyuz escape craft and a Progress cargo craft docket to the ISS at the same time (currently there are only two Soyuz/Progress compatable docking ports - the others are for 'bigger' modules so to speak. With the ability to keep two soyuz craft docked, the emergency crew return issue is solved, at least form a technicial point of view. Russia would still need to fund, build and launch two additional Soyuz craft each year. However, If they were allowed to collect $20mil every 6 months for flying either tourists or ESA astronauts for example, that would probably cover it, But of course NASA still wants to spend $500Mil developing their own return craft, and another $500 mil to launch each on them on a shuttle. I admit that the NASA CRV (crew return veichle) would be able to return 7, instead of 6 people in two soyuz, and the CRV can handle injured crew members better than Soyuz. But also, I would think that two Soyuz is better than one CRV, from a redundency point of view. See here for more info on Piers.
Of course there was a way of doing EVA's, but from the Russian side, and of course that dosn't count to NASA/USA, does it?. The russian module was launched with 2 russian space suits ready and waiting for use, and the 'spherical' docking compartment in Zeveda had all the plumbing etc to support EVAs. In fact, an EVA did take place, but they didn't need to leave the ISS, instead they just moved some docking equipment around. Besides, that was done by russians, so it didn't really count either! However, if an emergency required it, the ISS did have the means before now to conduct a full blown external EVA if necessary. Also, Russia is planing to launch 'Piers', its own docking compartment on Sept 15. This will provide 3 things: a proper airlock (so they dont have to depres a main part of the ISS), a strela 'space crane' for moving other bits of russian space hardware around, and a docking port, so the russians will be able to keep 2 Soyuz escape craft and a Progress cargo craft docket to the ISS at the same time (currently there are only two Soyuz/Progress compatable docking ports - the others are for 'bigger' modules so to speak. With the ability to keep two soyuz craft docked, the emergency crew return issue is solved, at least form a technicial point of view. Russia would still need to fund, build and launch two additional Soyuz craft each year. However, If they were allowed to collect $20mil every 6 months for flying either tourists or ESA astronauts for example, that would probably cover it, But of course NASA still wants to spend $500Mil developing their own return craft, and another $500 mil to launch each on them on a shuttle. I admit that the NASA CRV (crew return veichle) would be able to return 7, instead of 6 people in two soyuz, and the CRV can handle injured crew members better than Soyuz. But also, I would think that two Soyuz is better than one CRV, from a redundency point of view. See here for more info on Piers.
Hmm, mabey the pillars look like this
According to this article, when reusable launch vehicles become commonplace, MRO spending (maintenance, repair and overhaul) will eclipse the revenues from building the launchers.