ISS

So, what are the chances now of being able to finish
ISS before having to ditch ISS?

JazzMan
--
************************************************** ********
Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net.
Curse those darned bulk e-mailers!
************************************************** ********
"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of
supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to
live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry
************************************************** ********

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 20:06:02 -0500, JazzMan
wrote:

So, what are the chances now of being able to finish
ISS before having to ditch ISS?

Define "finish".

Brian

JazzMan wrote in :

So, what are the chances now of being able to finish
ISS before having to ditch ISS?

If by "finish" you mean "every station partner provides every station
component they promised to provide in the IGAs", the answer is "zero". Both
Russia and the US have already cancelled outright components that they
promised in those IGAs.

If by "finish" you mean "some compromise station configuration that the
partners can come to agreement on", the odds are fairly good, though
obviously not 100%.

As far as "ditch", many Americans are under the delusion that ISS will
magically become a coral reef in the South Pacific as soon as the US
"cancels" the program. In reality the program is no longer a US program to
cancel. They either don't know what the "I" means or they haven't been
listening to the clear signals from Russia and ESA that they intend to keep
the station going after a US withdrawal.

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

Brian Thorn wrote:

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 20:06:02 -0500, JazzMan
wrote:

So, what are the chances now of being able to finish
ISS before having to ditch ISS?

Define "finish".


The planned work at the moment that Discovery launched.

JazzMan
--
************************************************** ********
Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net.
Curse those darned bulk e-mailers!
************************************************** ********
"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of
supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to
live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry
************************************************** ********

Jorge R. Frank wrote:

JazzMan wrote in :

So, what are the chances now of being able to finish
ISS before having to ditch ISS?

If by "finish" you mean "every station partner provides every station
component they promised to provide in the IGAs", the answer is "zero". Both
Russia and the US have already cancelled outright components that they
promised in those IGAs.

If by "finish" you mean "some compromise station configuration that the
partners can come to agreement on", the odds are fairly good, though
obviously not 100%.

As far as "ditch", many Americans are under the delusion that ISS will
magically become a coral reef in the South Pacific as soon as the US
"cancels" the program. In reality the program is no longer a US program to
cancel. They either don't know what the "I" means or they haven't been
listening to the clear signals from Russia and ESA that they intend to keep
the station going after a US withdrawal.

We didn't have any problem forcing Russia to ditch MIR
complete with the brand new module, so I don't see that
we'll have any problem bringing down ISS too.

JazzMan
--
************************************************** ********
Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net.
Curse those darned bulk e-mailers!
************************************************** ********
"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of
supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to
live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry
************************************************** ********

"JazzMan" wrote
We didn't have any problem forcing Russia to ditch MIR
complete with the brand new module, so I don't see that
we'll have any problem bringing down ISS too.

I call this the 'argument from intellectual incapacity',
in which the arguer equates "I can't imagine" with "It's impossible".

JazzMan wrote in :

Jorge R. Frank wrote:

JazzMan wrote in
:

So, what are the chances now of being able to finish
ISS before having to ditch ISS?

As far as "ditch", many Americans are under the delusion that ISS
will magically become a coral reef in the South Pacific as soon as
the US "cancels" the program. In reality the program is no longer a
US program to cancel. They either don't know what the "I" means or
they haven't been listening to the clear signals from Russia and ESA
that they intend to keep the station going after a US withdrawal.

We didn't have any problem forcing Russia to ditch MIR
complete with the brand new module, so I don't see that
we'll have any problem bringing down ISS too.

We got Russia to ditch ISS by reminding them of the commitments they'd made
to ISS, and getting them to admit to themselves that they couldn't support
both stations simultaneously.

I seriously doubt that tactic will work with ISS, for what should be
obvious reasons.

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

JazzMan wrote:
Brian Thorn wrote:

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 20:06:02 -0500, JazzMan
wrote:

So, what are the chances now of being able to finish
ISS before having to ditch ISS?

Define "finish".


The planned work at the moment that Discovery launched.

Which time...

nmp wrote:
Op Thu, 18 Aug 2005 22:15:30 -0500, schreef JazzMan:

[...]
If the USA loses interest in the project: fine. But why not just leave it
at that, then.

Looking at it from purely pragmatic position wouldn't NASA have to make
sure that the rest of the partners are capable of maintaining the ISS
in the proper orbit once the US withdraws all of its support
infrastructure (and it is significant even without shuttle flights to
it: orientation, telemetry, comms (the tdrss?), CO scrubbers, power bus
control, most of the power generation, the ground operations, etc...)

....lest it comes down in uncontrolled re-entry onto a populated area?
Would the Europeans lease the TDRSS (the Russian comm capabilities to
the ISS are not that good I hear), the ground control equipment and
expertise that manages the American segment day-to-day operations,
etc... I'm sure I missed a lot. Big bucks and lots of specialized
knowledge.

Or, perhaps a 'solution' (from the US point of view) would be to break
up the ISS and safely de-orbit the American segment, I think the
Russians and Europeans would be happy to have a small but 100% tourist
hotel all to themselves? Lighter to boost too. Launch the modules
with Protons or Ariannes-5?

Surely, the whole situation is quite a pickle especially for the US who
should really ditch the ISS at this point with the VSE and all...
Frankly, I'm not really 'anti-ISS' I just don't see a role for it in
the proposed return to the Moon program.

nmp wrote:
Op Thu, 18 Aug 2005 22:15:30 -0500, schreef JazzMan:

[...]
If the USA loses interest in the project: fine. But why not just leave it
at that, then.

Looking at it from purely pragmatic position wouldn't NASA have to make
sure that the rest of the partners are capable of maintaining the ISS
in the proper orbit once the US withdraws all of its support
infrastructure (and it is significant even without shuttle flights to
it: orientation, telemetry, comms (the tdrss?), CO scrubbers, power bus
control, most of the power generation, the ground operations, etc...)

....lest it comes down in uncontrolled re-entry onto a populated area?
Would the Europeans lease the TDRSS (the Russian comm capabilities to
the ISS are not that good I hear), the ground control equipment and
expertise that manages the American segment day-to-day operations,
etc... I'm sure I missed a lot. Big bucks and lots of specialized
knowledge.

Or, perhaps a 'solution' (from the US point of view) would be to break
up the ISS and safely de-orbit the American segment, I think the
Russians and Europeans would be happy to have a small but 100% tourist
hotel all to themselves? Lighter to boost too. Launch the modules
with Protons or Ariannes-5?

Surely, the whole situation is quite a pickle especially for the US who
should really ditch the ISS at this point with the VSE and all...
Frankly, I'm not really 'anti-ISS' I just don't see a role for it in
the proposed return to the Moon program.