|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
ISS may be abandoned in november
|
#52
|
|||
|
|||
ISS may be abandoned in november
"David Spain" wrote in message ... Rick Jones wrote: etc etc I was going to work the chorus but the most obvious thing to be jingling as the Soyuz didn't rhyme with "bells" though it differed only by a vowel. rick jones See a few lyrics down: http://www.lyricsmania.com/jinglebellslyrics.html ------------------------------------------------------------------- OT: Does anyone know why this is considered to be a Christmas song when it has absolutely nothing to do with the holiday? It's a song about WINTER. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
ISS may be abandoned in november
is it better to have a unmanned station with no control dropping
modules all along its ground track. or 1 or 2 astronauts marroned at station thats still under control? Leaving the station unmanned for a period of time is surely safer, at least for the ISS crew. Jeff for the crew surely safer to be on the ground, but what of all the people along its ground track? |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
ISS may be abandoned in november
On Aug 31, 10:37*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Jeff Findley wrote: In article d7254a2a-bb4a-444f-89e5-4ebc21969a76 , says... NASA always looks at contingencies like this. Hopefully it won't be necessary to leave ISS unmanned, but it's preferable to leaving astronauts on ISS without a way to get back. Marooned is the term for this, and it's not a good thing deliberately put yourself in that situation. nasa never planed for a shuttle stuck at station till after columbia disaster........ so they didnt look at that contigency. is it better to have a unmanned station with no control dropping modules all along its ground track. or 1 or 2 astronauts marroned at station thats still under control? Leaving the station unmanned for a period of time is surely safer, at least for the ISS crew. It'll be safer (or at least no more dangerous) for everyone. *If ISS 'goes out of control' it will be because one or more reaction wheels are broken or saturated and there is no fuel left aboard to desaturate them or because it needs a reboost (which it can't do on its own). Having people aboard in these eventualities accomplishes nothing other than to put those people at direct risk, since there is bugger all the crew can do about any of those eventualities. Bobbert, as usual, is just, well, bobberting. -- "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is *only stupid." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - theres lots of systems that can fail without human intervention. someone just rebooting a system can sometimes fix a system....... lack of pressurization would likely make any problem worse. lots of systems may overheat without cooling air. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
ISS may be abandoned in november
for the crew surely safer to be on the ground, but what of all the
people along its ground track? Certainly no less safe for them, since if it goes out of control and reenters there's bugger all a crew on board can do other than ride it in and die. having a couple astronauts onboard may help keep the station under control... oh well if ISS is lost it will save lots of money once damage claims are paid |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
ISS may be abandoned in november
On Sep 1, 7:39*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote: for the crew surely safer to be on the ground, but what of all the people along its ground track? Certainly no less safe for them, since if it goes out of control and reenters there's bugger all a crew on board can do other than ride it in and die. having a couple astronauts onboard may help keep the station under control... So might prayer, but it's pretty bloody unlikely. -- "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is *only stupid." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine astronauts onboard spend most of their time fixing things. if moose had been built this wouldnt be a issue |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
ISS may be abandoned in november
NASA officials are hopeful Russia will return the venerable Soyuz
booster to service in time to avert such a circumstance, which would put the space station at increased risk in the event of serious equipment malfunctions. Engineers are analyzing what's needed to keep the station alive in case astronauts have to pull out of the international laboratory, according to Michael Suffredini, NASA's space station program manager. "There is a greater risk of losing ISS if it were unmanned than if it were manned," Suffredini said Monday. "The risk increase is not insignificant |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
ISS may be abandoned in november
If the grounding of Soyuz rockets forces crews to abandon the
International Space Station even temporarily, the chances of losing the facility outright skyrocket the longer it goes unmanned, Florida Today reports. NASA International Space Station Program Manager Mike Suffred says evacuation is a distinct possibility in mid-November if Russian Soyuz rockets are not flying, writes Florida Today's Todd Halvorson. Past NASA risk assessment shows a one in 10 chance of losing the station within six months if there is no crew aboard to handle critical system failures. That soars to a 50% probability if it remains crewless for a year, the newspaper says. The International Space Station has been continuously staffed since the first expedition crew opened the outpost in November 2000. In a worst-case scenario, station systems could fail, making it impossible for engineers on the ground to maintain remote control of the 1 million-pound outpost. In that case, the station eventually would make an uncontrolled re- entry, potentially showering flaming wreckage on populated areas, says Florida Today, USA TODAY's sister publication. The issue is acute as Russian experts try to figure out why a Soyuz rocket failed last week, sending an unmanned Progress supply ship crashing into Siberia. Russia's Soyuz rocket is the only means of ferrying supplies and crew to the station now that the U.S. space shuttle missions have ended. Plans to send a fresh crew to the station Sept. 21 have been postponed indefinitely, and the return of three crewmembers Sept. 8 has been delayed for at least week. Complicating the problem is the imminent "expiration date" for the two Soyuz spacecraft docked with the station. They are not certified to stay longer than 200 days in space. By juggling schedules, a crew could remain onboard until late December, although that would mean a landing during brutally cold weather in Kazakhstan around Christmas. yeah fred abandonmg ISS is no safety issue at all |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
ISS may be abandoned in november
|
#60
|
|||
|
|||
ISS may be abandoned in november
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Abandoned Spaceships | [email protected] | History | 96 | July 23rd 05 09:43 PM |
Abandoned Spaceships | [email protected] | News | 0 | July 12th 05 12:45 AM |
Hubble to be abandoned | Michael Gallagher | History | 577 | February 29th 04 04:09 PM |
Station to be abandoned? | Jorge R. Frank | Policy | 56 | September 3rd 03 02:55 AM |
Station to be abandoned? | [email protected] | Policy | 2 | August 25th 03 04:49 AM |