Chinese "Mir" type station

Bad photo of a interesting concept; a Chinese multi-module space station
with a core module that looks like Salyut 7 with a multiple docking port
on the front, and a aft docking port also:
http://nasawatch.com/archives/2009/10/chinas-mir.html
BTW, NASA has apparently floated the idea to the Chinese of docking a
space station module or two to the ISS.

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote:
Bad photo of a interesting concept; a Chinese multi-module space station
with a core module that looks like Salyut 7 with a multiple docking port
on the front, and a aft docking port also:
http://nasawatch.com/archives/2009/10/chinas-mir.html
BTW, NASA has apparently floated the idea to the Chinese of docking a
space station module or two to the ISS.

Well, hey, why not use Sino-US relations as a pretext for running the
ISS for a while longer.

It's as good a reason as any.

Sylvia.

Sylvia Else wrote:

Well, hey, why not use Sino-US relations as a pretext for running the
ISS for a while longer.

It's as good a reason as any.

The questions then would become crew size, lifeboat availability, and
resupply of consumables.
Increasing crew to over six means you now need three Soyuz/Shenzhou
spacecraft permanently attached in case you need to abandon it.
AFAIK, China hasn't yet developed something along the lines of a Russian
"Progress" automated cargo supply spacecraft variant of Shenzhou, so the
extra crew are going to have to be supplied via some other means. (if
they went with fairly short crew stays, they could bring their supplies
up in the orbital module of the Shenzhou along with the replacement crew).
But the whole concept sound like it might get pretty involved when you
got down to the compatibility specifics of the docking gear and
atmospheric systems. the Chinese modules might end up being physically
attached to the ISS, but not really fully integrated into it.
Then there's the whole aerodynamic shape in regards to air drag as it
orbits, as it might end up asymmetrical in that regard, and the shift in
center of mass in regards to the stabilizing of the ISS via its gyrodynes.
If they were going to do it, the place to put the modules would be back
on the Russian section where some of the canceled Russian equipment was
scheduled to go.

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote:
The questions then would become crew size, lifeboat availability, and
resupply of consumables.
Increasing crew to over six means you now need three Soyuz/Shenzhou
spacecraft permanently attached in case you need to abandon it.

You seem to be presuming the US would maintain a presence - perhaps we
would simply swap the US modules for Chinese-held U.S. Treasury
securities and run before something else broke up there?-)

rick jones
--
web2.0 n, the dot.com reunion tour...
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

Rick Jones wrote:
You seem to be presuming the US would maintain a presence - perhaps we
would simply swap the US modules for Chinese-held U.S. Treasury
securities and run before something else broke up there?-)

Oh, I like that... :-D


Pat

On Oct 16, 2:38�am, Pat Flannery wrote:
Rick Jones wrote:
You seem to be presuming the US would maintain a presence - perhaps we
would simply swap the US modules for Chinese-held U.S. Treasury
securities and run before something else broke up there?-)

Oh, I like that... :-D

Pat

the drywall in the chinese modules will make the entire station
uninhabitable