|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Shuttle program extension?
On Sep 16, 11:14�pm, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:01:33 -0400, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" wrote: Remember, most Titantic boats didn't even carry a full complement of passengers. �So having even more lifeboats wouldn't have helped all that much. It would have helped enormously. Many hundreds died on deck for lack of lifeboats. Yes, a few lifeboats were launched half full, but that was made up for later by overloading the remaining boats after it was clear that seas were calm enough to safely do so and that the Carpathia (and the mystery ship which turned out to be the Californian) was only hours away. Even more could have been saved if all of the lifeboats had been overloaded, but the Titanic crew was slow to that realization. Brian there are those space balls to rescue crew stuck in difficult situations. |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Shuttle program extension?
Brian Thorn wrote:
Last I checked, dry-land facilities don't require lifeboats, no matter how remote. Ships universally do. The word can also be used figuratively ... |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Shuttle program extension?
On Sep 17, 8:43*am, bob haller safety advocate
wrote: there are those space balls to rescue crew stuck in difficult situations. They were never developed |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Shuttle program extension?
On Sep 16, 11:31*pm, John Doe wrote:
Perhaps the last shuttle flight to the station should install a modified PMA device on node2 which would allow a soyuz to dock (even if manually). This way, rescues would become possible once the shuttle is retired and the USA has nothing to replace it. No, that is where Orion docks |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Shuttle program extension?
On Sep 16, 11:16*pm, John Doe wrote:
1. Consider that PMA2 can possibly be used as an airlock. *If you have some primitive pressure suits stored in node2, then the stranded crewmembers could ingress PMA2, close the hatch to the station, then depressurise (equalise with the ship on other side which happens to be "vacuum" :-) and open hatch to outside and then move towards a waiting Soyuz ship and ingress through its airlock. (attach line to PMA2, then propell yourself towards the nearby soyuz, if you fail to latch on to the soyuz, you pull yourself back to station and try again). 2. If NODE2 has no spare suits, then someone in the soyuz would have to EVA *with spare suits, place them in an already depressurised PMA2, close the hatch, let the crew then repressurise it, put the suits on and then egress. 3. If a crewmember went from 14.7 to 5psi with only O2 pre-breathe for a few minutes+ whatevcer time it takes for a PMA2 to equalise to vaccum, how long before "the bends" symtoms would appear ? Could they go for say 30 minute at 5psi in pure O2 and then repressurise in the soyuz and be relatively OK ? 1. Not viable. The crew can't just "jump" to the Soyuz. 2. Not viable, it would take at least 2 Soyuz crew members and so where is the room for the 'rescued" crew 3. immediately. None of your ideas are viable |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Shuttle program extension?
wrote in message
... On Sep 16, 11:31 pm, John Doe wrote: Perhaps the last shuttle flight to the station should install a modified PMA device on node2 which would allow a soyuz to dock (even if manually). This way, rescues would become possible once the shuttle is retired and the USA has nothing to replace it. No, that is where Orion docks It does? Really, when was the last Orion docking? When is the next? Oh, that's right. That's where "Orion will dock if actually flies." |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Shuttle program extension?
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 23:08:38 -0400, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote: Last I checked, dry-land facilities don't require lifeboats, no matter how remote. Ships universally do. Really? Can you find a diagram of Los Angeles class submarines and tell me where the lifeboats are? They're inflatables. I'm sure Derek has all the details. Brian |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Shuttle program extension?
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message dakotatelephone... Jeff Findley wrote: ISS currently had many redundant systems and modules. With the US and Russian segments, you have completely separate systems for life support. Even if something catastrophic happened, it's not very likely to take out both sets of life support systems. Unless they close airtight hatches as they move from one module to the next, one meter hit that blew a foot-wide hole in the thing is going to vacuumate it in short order. In a situation like that, Soyuz isn't likely to save you anyway. The discussion is about the lunacy of requiring a "lifeboat" which takes the ISS astronauts all the way back to "port" on the ground as opposed to a "lifeboat" which would allow the astronauts to survive until rescued by a shuttle. Even if you were in a sealed-off module, it had better have spacesuits in it if you want to get to the escape Soyuz. Even a rescue Shuttle EVA would be a real problem...you'd have to repressurize the station before you opened the door to the module they were trapped in, or detach the module with them in it and return it to Earth. If a safe haven were a politically acceptable option, it would be relatively inexpensive to provide suits (or maybe a couple of suits and several of the old rescue balls) inside the safe haven module to handle this sort of evacuation once the shuttle arrives. Developing what amounts to a US Soyuz is extremely expensive by comparison. Jeff -- A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Shuttle program extension?
"Brian Thorn" wrote in message ... On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 10:53:06 -0400, "Jeff Findley" wrote: So did the Titanic. Now we have lifeboats for everyone. Tell that to the guys at the South Pole research station. Where's their lifeboats? Last I checked, dry-land facilities don't require lifeboats, no matter how remote. Ships universally do. Why do you think ISS is closer to a ship like the Titanic than it is to something like the South Pole research station? On top of that, evac from there in the middle of the winter is extremely dangerous at best. But not impossible. It has been done. Without a lifeboat on ISS, you're dead when the O2, the scrubbers, or the power die. True. My point is that evac from ISS using the shuttle is similar to evac from the South Pole during the middle of winter. It certainly woudln't be easy, but NASA already has plans in place for rescuing a stranded shuttle crew for the Hubble repair mission. At some point, your station grows so big you simply can't supply lifeboats for everyone. That's ridiculous. Why not? Common sense. A truly big LEO space station is far more like a remote research station than an ocean liner. What do you do for a Mars mission? We have to accept a greater risk for deep space exploration. That's a given. Without warp drive, you can't get back to Earth in a reasonable amount of time or expect a rescue ship in a reasonable amount of time. ISS has no such excuse. There are no fundamental physics that prevent a lifeboat for all ISS crew, it is simply a matter of cost. If an ISS crew dies because they have no lifeboat, the press, critics, and the crew's survivors will universally, and loudly, proclaim that the crew died because the government was too cheap to pay for a lifeboat when the technology was essentially off-the-shelf. And the government knows this, which is why, as I said, it is a political non-starter. So a Mars mission is "special", but a LEO station with a thousand people on it would need to have "lifeboats" to return everyone to earth in case of an emergency? That's just silly. Jeff -- A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Shuttle program extension? | Flyguy | Space Shuttle | 175 | September 22nd 08 04:18 PM |
No Shuttle launch, Shuttle program mothballed? | Widget | Policy | 1 | July 4th 06 03:51 PM |
The shuttle program needs some comedy!!! | Steve W. | Space Shuttle | 0 | August 9th 05 09:59 PM |
More Evidence The Shuttle Program Should Be Scrapped | John Slade | Space Shuttle | 7 | August 2nd 05 04:35 AM |
Question regarding the end of the Shuttle program | JazzMan | Space Shuttle | 23 | February 19th 04 02:21 AM |