|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Chinese Space Station News
skylab was somewhat under control/
the last crew left a solar powered receiver on. when nasa realized it was going to re enter. they contacted skylab and ordered it to charge its batteries. without stable power they had blown some controls, and were on the backup. they kept skylab in a low drag attitude, to get it as low in the atmosphere as possible, then ordered it to tumble to dig into the atmosphere over a low popuation area came down over the ocean and australia the chinese station appears they cant control or communicate with it at all....... now lets assume A ISS failure where the crew abandons the station or is unable to control it.... once the station begins tumbling modules will probably come off one at a time, all along its ground track once a disaster occurs rules will be tightened its not a matter of if...... only when. so far we have been lucky...... |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Chinese Space Station News
In article ,
says... On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 6:31:14 AM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote: In article , says... On Tuesday, September 20, 2016 at 2:27:20 PM UTC-4, jacob navia wrote: Le 20/09/2016 à 05:02, a écrit : China's Tiangong-1 space station has been orbiting the planet for about 5 years now, but recently it was decommissioned and the Chinese astronauts returned to the surface. In a press conference last week, China announced that the space station would be falling back to earth at some point in late 2017." Problem is: The chinese controllers have lost the command over the ship that will fall incontrably to earth somewhere. I find it preposterous that space ships fall somewhere, maybe over someone's head... The chinese (americans russians whatever) should ensure that the ship is disposed in a controlled manner, over an empty area of the planet! this will be a problem untill the situation fixes itself........ a major part comes down in a city and kills a bunch of people. Very unlikely given the percentage of the surface of the earth covered by "city". they are playing the odds, and have been successful so far, but it will eventually happen And the odds are clearly in their favor. very unlikely means its still possible.. It's also very unlikely that it will snow tomorrow here in Ohio. You could place a bet against snow tomorrow and be nearly certain to win. The odds of the *single module* Chinese space station hitting "in a city and kills a bunch of people" is very, very low. rocket owners have been playing the odds forever. its assured one day they will come back to bite them So what? People die every day from all sorts of accidents. You act like space is "special" in this regard. It's not. the most likely event. a failure on iss leads to loss of control. station is big heavy complex and in low orbit..... You've said this many times before, but it was b.s. then and it's b.s. now. Where is your analysis? If it is someone else's analysis, where is your cite? when station begins to enter modules will break off, scattering debris, many of which will survive rentry, all over our world. No Bob, that's *not* *at* *all* how orbital mechanics and reentries work. Your paranoid delusional fantasies are getting the best of you again. Look at the debris pattern of Skylab. It wasn't "all over the world", despite the fact that it too was made up of several pieces. The debris pattern was, in fact, in a fairly narrow path below what would have been its next orbit of the earth, had it had the kinetic energy to keep going. Causing a world wide panic.. B.S. Global thermonuclear war would cause a world wide panic. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Chinese Space Station News
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Chinese Space Station News
"bob haller" wrote in message
... skylab was somewhat under control/ For a very loose definition of under control. the last crew left a solar powered receiver on. when nasa realized it was going to re enter. they contacted skylab and ordered it to charge its batteries. without stable power they had blown some controls, and were on the backup. they kept skylab in a low drag attitude, to get it as low in the atmosphere as possible, then ordered it to tumble to dig into the atmosphere over a low popuation area came down over the ocean and australia the chinese station appears they cant control or communicate with it at all....... Right, but let's compare. For one thing: Mass of Taingong -1 8,506kg Skylab - 77,111kg Hell, Space shuttle ETs were over 26,000kg. To give you perspective, a full Soyuz weighs in at about 7,150 kg. This thing is barely bigger than a Soyuz. Now, while one can't draw a linear relationship between the mass of an object and how much will re-enter, as a first order guess, one can guess the bigger and more massive something is, the more likely a portion of it will hit the ground. (ignoring details like something like the Soyuz re-entry module which IS designed to reach the ground). In fact, NASA has software (developed before Columbia, but unfortunately refined further from data from Columbia) that given the design of a satellite/craft can give an idea of what will reach the ground. And hell, worst case scenario, there are ABM systems that have been demonstrated in the past. Taingong is NOT something I'm going to lose sleep over! So Skylab was about 9 times more massive. now lets assume A ISS failure where the crew abandons the station or is unable to control it.... once the station begins tumbling modules will probably come off one at a time, all along its ground track once a disaster occurs rules will be tightened its not a matter of if...... only when. so far we have been lucky...... -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Chinese Space Station News
lets not forget how heavy and complex ISS is. plus its getting old. things like the stress of so many obits cycling its temperature.......with so many modules , never before has anything that large and complex been in orbit
hey o ring erosion isnt hazardous. its never caused a real problem.............. hey foam loss isnt hazardous its just a maintence issue. and ISS is in a ever increasing debris field. space junk is probably one of its biggest enemies........ |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Chinese Space Station News
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Chinese Space Station News
On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 9:48:48 PM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says... lets not forget how heavy and complex ISS is. plus its getting old. things like the stress of so many obits cycling its temperature.......with so many modules , never before has anything that large and complex been in orbit That's all babble. Temperature cycling would only be an issue for bits that aren't covered by MMOD protection /insulation. Hint: All the pressurized bits are protected. hey o ring erosion isnt hazardous. its never caused a real problem.............. You can't summarize the Challenger disaster like that. There is a *huge* report on what went wrong and why. Perhaps you should actually read it. hey foam loss isnt hazardous its just a maintence issue. You can't summarize the Columbia disaster like that. There is a *huge* report on what went wrong and why. Perhaps you should actually read it. and ISS is in a ever increasing debris field. space junk is probably one of its biggest enemies........ Yes, but that's like saying since I live in the Midwest tornadoes are one of my house's biggest enemies. Note that chances are slim a tornado will actually hit my house. Space is big. Mid bogglingly big. ISS still hasn't been it by an MMOD strike big enough to punch a hole in pressurized module after all these years. Yes it could happen. Yes there are contingency plans (similar to tornado drills here in the Midwest). Yes the hatches on ISS close quickly (unlike on Mir) to isolate a leaky module. There is risk, but you CONSISTENTLY overestimate the risk. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of. yep everything is just dandy. the challenger and columbia loss occured because nasa accepted hazardous problems to become ok. ...... hopefully elon musk and space x can get us to mars. nasa isnt capable of that anymore, just look at it SLS..... |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Chinese Space Station News
bob haller wrote:
hopefully elon musk and space x can get us to mars. nasa isnt capable of that anymore, just look at it SLS..... Ask mr Musk why he evaporated AMOS-6 instead of launching it to orbit! |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Chinese Space Station News
In article ,
says... On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 9:48:48 PM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote: In article , says... lets not forget how heavy and complex ISS is. plus its getting old. things like the stress of so many obits cycling its temperature.......with so many modules , never before has anything that large and complex been in orbit That's all babble. Temperature cycling would only be an issue for bits that aren't covered by MMOD protection /insulation. Hint: All the pressurized bits are protected. hey o ring erosion isnt hazardous. its never caused a real problem.............. You can't summarize the Challenger disaster like that. There is a *huge* report on what went wrong and why. Perhaps you should actually read it. hey foam loss isnt hazardous its just a maintence issue. You can't summarize the Columbia disaster like that. There is a *huge* report on what went wrong and why. Perhaps you should actually read it. and ISS is in a ever increasing debris field. space junk is probably one of its biggest enemies........ Yes, but that's like saying since I live in the Midwest tornadoes are one of my house's biggest enemies. Note that chances are slim a tornado will actually hit my house. Space is big. Mid bogglingly big. ISS still hasn't been it by an MMOD strike big enough to punch a hole in pressurized module after all these years. Yes it could happen. Yes there are contingency plans (similar to tornado drills here in the Midwest). Yes the hatches on ISS close quickly (unlike on Mir) to isolate a leaky module. There is risk, but you CONSISTENTLY overestimate the risk. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of. yep everything is just dandy. the challenger and columbia loss occured because nasa accepted hazardous problems to become ok. ..... Repeating your assertion doesn't make it completely true. Again, read the reports. It's clear you have not. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Space Shuttle and International Space Station News for Thursday 10 July 2014 | NASA via sci.space.tech Admin | Space Station | 0 | July 10th 14 03:58 PM |
Space Shuttle and International Space Station News for Wednesday 9 July 2014 | NASA via sci.space.tech Admin | Technology | 0 | July 10th 14 12:24 AM |
Chinese Space Station | T.B.[_2_] | History | 7 | October 1st 11 02:39 AM |
European and Chinese space cooperation highlighted by visit of Chinese Prime Minister | Jacques van Oene | News | 0 | December 10th 04 03:29 PM |
Chinese space station | Dr. O | Policy | 23 | October 20th 03 07:57 PM |