WFTV: "Mysterious Object Floats Away From International Space Station"

"JimO" wrote in
:


We now have seen two objects leaving the station, during the very
brief intervals when the crew is actually eyeballing the outside (and
only about a tenth of the departure trajectories, at that). Maybe an
hour or two per week, at most -- perhaps 1% of their time.

Can we extrapolate that dozens if not hundreds of objects have
actually come off, of which only 1% were observed?

I don't know if 1% is the right number, but it is fairly obvious that not
all ISS debris-shedding events have been observed.


--
JRF

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

JimO wrote:

We now have seen two objects leaving the station, during the very brief
intervals when the crew is actually eyeballing the outside (and only about
a tenth of the departure trajectories, at that). Maybe an hour or
two per week, at most -- perhaps 1% of their time.

Can we extrapolate that dozens if not hundreds of objects have actually come
off, of which only 1% were observed?


Could it be shedding insulation blanket/micrometeor protection material,
like Hubble did?
Do the objects appear to have come from any particular part of its
structure, such as the U.S. or Russian modules, truss, or solar arrays?
This, combined with the air leak and unexplained "bang" are more than a
little disturbing.

Pat

Jorge R. Frank wrote:

I don't know if 1% is the right number, but it is fairly obvious that not
all ISS debris-shedding events have been observed.


Why do I get the feeling that this is related to the mysterious "bang"
sound somehow?

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote:
This, combined with the air leak and unexplained "bang" are more than a
little disturbing.

I am not worried. Does anyone have any background on if this sort of stuff
happened on Mir ?

Also, remember that they have experienhts outdoors to expose various materials
to space to study their effects. It could simply be some of these things
coming loose.

What we also do not have in terms of information is how much of a shock the
progress dockings generate. It could very well be stuff from Progress.

BTW Sasha is smoking !!!! This morning, while working behind a panel, he kept
tripping the smoke alarm in that cavity ! First one was taken seriously by
both US and russian ground controllers, but once Foale noticed the detector
was right next to Shasha's head, they realised what was happening.

"John Doe" wrote in message
...
BTW Sasha is smoking !!!! This morning, while working behind a panel, he
kept
tripping the smoke alarm in that cavity ! First one was taken seriously by
both US and russian ground controllers, but once Foale noticed the
detector
was right next to Shasha's head, they realised what was happening.

About what time was that? I want to follow up on this with PAO.

You can email me privately at joberg at houston.rr.com

Pat Flannery wrote in
:

Jorge R. Frank wrote:

I don't know if 1% is the right number, but it is fairly obvious that
not all ISS debris-shedding events have been observed.


Why do I get the feeling that this is related to the mysterious "bang"
sound somehow?

Because humans are naturally adept at "connecting the dots", whether or not
they are actually connected.


--
JRF

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

On 08 Feb 2004 20:06:53 GMT, (Hallerb) wrote:


Ah, but in another twenty or thirty years, after all the repairs and
kludges and refits, after cobbling together a collection of modules
from whatever countries will pay

What makes you think it will last anywhere near that long? Isnt its end of life
due about 2015 or so?

Dunno... ask me again in 10 years. The 2015 date would make it darned
hard to finish the station before abandoning it.
And of course, if NASA needs an exit strategy, we could sell our half
to the Russians for a dollar, and sell their half back for another
dollar.

By then we'll probably be reduced to buying Shenzhou knock-offs from
Viet Nam anyway.

SCO delenda est.
adress is partially sdrawkcab.

rk wrote:


Foam logic.

I would be concerned about any unexplained bangs and "debris shedding" on
general principles.

"It could by X" or "it could be Y" is not the type of engineering rigor needed
for safety.


....And the concept that it's "as safe as Mir" doesn't really reassure me....

Pat

Jorge R. Frank wrote:

Because humans are naturally adept at "connecting the dots", whether or not
they are actually connected.


Well, let's hope that they aren't in this case. Because that could imply
that the thing either has been damaged to an unknown degree by a impact,
and things are still falling off from the damaged area; or is
structurally unsound, and has begun to shed things- some of which make
sounds as they leave.

Pat

In article , JimO wrote:

We now have seen two objects leaving the station, during the very brief
intervals when the crew is actually eyeballing the outside (and only about
a tenth of the departure trajectories, at that). Maybe an hour or
two per week, at most -- perhaps 1% of their time.

Can we extrapolate that dozens if not hundreds of objects have actually come
off, of which only 1% were observed?

Maybe.

Bear in mind that 50% (g) of our datasets were close to an external
event - the Progress docking - which may well have caused it, so it's
not automatic to assume that they're both typical... but it is a valid
assumption we've missed a lot.

Thought for a future resupply mission (ie, one without 'construction'
EVAs) - send a two-man EVA to study a representative part of the
station; part of a module and truss, say, in great detail; compare this
to the known "pristine" state, and try to extrapolate "wastage" rates
from that?

--
-Andrew Gray