On 2004-07-31, EAC wrote:
Next time, I.S.S. 2 or what ever its name will be should be build like
Mir.

Jim Kingdon wrote in message ...
Neither the ESA nor Japan is planning
a particularly robust flight rate.

Correct.

Russia would perhaps like to continue their flight rate
but there is the issue of money.

Well... The same thing probably be can said about N.A.S.A. (U.S.A.),
after the Space Shuttles were retired, will N.A.S.A. got the enough
money?

So I could see them *saying* they don't need the US,
but I'm not sure they would really mean it.

The Russian sure can said that they don't need the U.S.A. government,
considering there's no way that the U.S.A. government will pay for the
Russian space programs. Though obviously that the Russian no longer
have control of their own space program, considering that they can be
ordered to bring down Mir and then claimed that it was done with their
own will.

E.S.A. (Europe) and N.A.S.D.A (Japan) on the other hand are quite
dependant on N.A.S.A. for manned spaceflight.

The last Soyuz flew with an ESA crewmember, and this arrangement has
been not uncommon of late.

(Both are perfectly capable of developing a manned taxi re-entry
vehicle, with an indigenous launch capacity suficient to support it.
They've not made notable moves towards this - Hermes was cancelled
about the time ISS in its current incarnation was decided upon - but
the technical capacity is certainly there if the political will is...)

Betcha that any future space station probably will done by the
'private' industry without any participation from any current
government in the world.

There is China, remember; stated and perfectly credible plans are to
build a small space station, possibly utilizing Shenzou service modules,
in the medium-term future.

China is a lot more open than it was ten years ago, but I doubt it'll be
a private business.

Well, the question is whether returning samples/hardware
to earth is a requirement or a "nice to have".

Considering that many of the experiments conducted are probably secret
experiments labeled as something else, we really don't know on what
kind of samples they need to bring down.

Due the nature of their secrecy, the amount of the most important
samples that need to bring back are probably in small size, probably
big enough to be bring down using the Soyuz.

Hmm. So, you've theorised a previously unknown covert research
operation, and used that to extrapolate downmass requirements. I am
cynical... (If nothing else, a population of heavily ex-military people
from both sides, plus random foreign passers-through, would seem to be
militating against any effective secrecy)

Let's take a sample flight:

STS-113, the last pre-Columbia flight, brought back:

"Experiments (...) including protein crystals and zeolite samples."
"The Power Distribution and Conversion (PDC) box and one of the
Exchangeable Standard Electronic Modules (ESEM3) were removed from the
Microgravity Science Glovebox on-orbit and brought back on STS-113."
(for repair and relaunch)

http://google.com/groups?selm=FtFK9....0.che llo.com

"FE-1/SO Peggy Whitson and Lopez-Alegria removed the PCG-STES007
(protein crystal growth-single locker thermal enclosure system #7)
payload from EXPRESS rack 4 (ER4) and installed and powered it on in the
Shuttle middeck."
"Exp. 6 FE-2 Don Pettit is scheduled to transfer the PGBA (plant generic
bioprocessing apparatus) and the PGBA mufflers from the ISS to the
Orbiter middeck."
"Exp. 5 CDR Valery Korzun removed the European GCF-B (Granada
Crystallization Facility B) from its stowage location in the DC-1
module and transferred it, stored in the ARCTIC2 unit, to the Shuttle
for return to Earth."
http://google.com/groups?selm=tE%25G...0.c hello.com

"Approximately 2,203 pounds of equipment and experiments from the
International Space Station will also return home aboard Endeavour."
http://google.com/groups?selm=q3lH9....0.che llo.com

--
-Andrew Gray