|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Whats nasa plan for this?
The station has a major problem, its damaged somehow and the crew
returned to earth during a emergency condition. so the station wasnt prepared in advance for unmanned operations. exactly what would nasa do? espically if it couldnt be intentially deorbited in the pacific........ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Whats nasa plan for this?
On Aug 30, 8:31*pm, bob haller wrote:
The station has a major problem, its damaged somehow and the crew returned to earth during a emergency condition. so the station wasnt prepared in advance for unmanned operations. exactly what would nasa do? espically if it couldnt be intentially deorbited in the pacific........ apparently nasa has no plan for such a event. thats a chilling thought. imagine our world littered with station modules coming down randomly over the ground track.......... that has the potential to do lots of damage, imagine a impact in a major city like new york plus it would likely fround most air travel for awhile till all parts are out of orbit..... ISS crashing on peoples heads might well start a war. or take out a nuclear facility. like a nuke power plant..... so is nasa prepared? a debris hit depressurizes the station the crew manages to get into soyuz and back home safely...... but now the uncontrollable station threatens the entire ground track. no doubt it would tumble and lose pieces for awhile, and depending on the tumble may litter low earth orbit for awhile too.......... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Whats nasa plan for this?
On Aug 30, 8:31*pm, bob haller wrote:
The station has a major problem, its damaged somehow and the crew returned to earth during a emergency condition. so the station wasnt prepared in advance for unmanned operations. exactly what would nasa do? espically if it couldnt be intentially deorbited in the pacific........ apparently nasa has no plan for such a event. thats a chilling thought. imagine our world littered with station modules coming down randomly over the ground track.......... that has the potential to do lots of damage, imagine a impact in a major city like new york plus it would likely ground most air travel for awhile till all parts are out of orbit..... ISS crashing on peoples heads might well start a war. or take out a nuclear facility. like a nuke power plant..... so is nasa prepared? a debris hit depressurizes the station the crew manages to get into soyuz and back home safely...... but now the uncontrollable station threatens the entire ground track. no doubt it would tumble and lose pieces for awhile, and depending on the tumble may litter low earth orbit for awhile too.......... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Whats nasa plan for this?
"bob haller" skrev i meddelelsen
... apparently nasa has no plan for such a event. thats a chilling thought. imagine our world littered with station modules coming down randomly over the ground track.......... that has the potential to do lots of damage, imagine a impact in a major city like new york plus it would likely fround most air travel for awhile till all parts are out of orbit..... ISS crashing on peoples heads might well start a war. or take out a nuclear facility. like a nuke power plant..... Pieces of Skylab lithobraked. It made headlines. So did pieces of Columbia. If this happened to pieces of the ISS it would likewise make headlines because it were pieces of the ISS doing it. The actual damage - if a piece were to hit people or property - would at worst be comparable to a bad traffic accident. But cars move naturally near people and property. If I have an accident in mine, chances are high that something else than my car is damaged too. If a bit of the ISS crashes into the ground the chances of that are far smaller. This is a very big world, and it seems crowded only because our resource consumption take up a lot more area than we do personally. Fearing an ISS crash is like fearing terrorism, or shark attacks. Spectacular ways to die, touching our imaginations; but far more people, even through no fault of their own, die in traffic. Jon Lennart Beck. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Whats nasa plan for this?
On Aug 31, 8:18*am, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote: On Aug 30, 8:31*pm, bob haller wrote: The station has a major problem, its damaged somehow and the crew returned to earth during a emergency condition. so the station wasnt prepared in advance for unmanned operations. exactly what would nasa do? espically if it couldnt be intentially deorbited in the pacific........ apparently nasa has no plan for such a event. thats a chilling thought. imagine our world littered with station modules coming down randomly over the ground track.......... that has the potential to do lots of damage, imagine a impact in a major city like new york *plus it would likely fround most air travel for awhile till all parts are out of orbit..... ISS crashing on peoples heads might well start a war. or take out a nuclear facility. like a nuke power plant..... so is nasa prepared? a debris hit depressurizes the station the crew manages to get into soyuz and back home safely...... but now the uncontrollable station threatens the entire ground track. no doubt it would tumble and lose pieces for awhile, and depending on the tumble may litter low earth orbit for awhile too.......... AND THE MOON COULD FALL AND KILL US ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to * * live in the real world." * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - fred posts trash but never factually addressed the issue...... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Whats nasa plan for this?
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:31:17 -0700 (PDT), bob haller
wrote: The station has a major problem, its damaged somehow and the crew returned to earth during a emergency condition. so the station wasnt prepared in advance for unmanned operations. exactly what would nasa do? espically if it couldnt be intentially deorbited in the pacific........ Russia brought back Salyut 6 from the brink. Hard to see ISS being in worse shape, given it has at least two independent control mechanisms (US side and Russian side) and if a Progress is docked, a third mechanism. Brian |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Whats nasa plan for this?
On 8/31/2011 6:32 AM, Raven wrote:
Pieces of Skylab lithobraked. It made headlines. So did pieces of Columbia. If this happened to pieces of the ISS it would likewise make headlines because it were pieces of the ISS doing it. The actual damage - if a piece were to hit people or property - would at worst be comparable to a bad traffic accident. If they had to, they could wait till it was quite low and then dock a Progress cargo ship to it, which could use its engines to bring the ISS into the atmosphere over the ocean, like they did with Mir. Pat |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Whats nasa plan for this?
On 8/31/2011 2:22 PM, Brian Thorn wrote:
exactly what would nasa do? espically if it couldnt be intentially deorbited in the pacific........ Russia brought back Salyut 6 from the brink. That was Salyut 7 that had the problems and needed the repair mission; Salyut 6 was a highly successful station. Pat |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Whats nasa plan for this?
On Aug 31, 11:11*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
bob haller wrote: On Aug 31, 8:18*am, Fred J. McCall wrote: bob haller wrote: On Aug 30, 8:31*pm, bob haller wrote: The station has a major problem, its damaged somehow and the crew returned to earth during a emergency condition. so the station wasnt prepared in advance for unmanned operations. exactly what would nasa do? espically if it couldnt be intentially deorbited in the pacific........ apparently nasa has no plan for such a event. thats a chilling thought. imagine our world littered with station modules coming down randomly over the ground track.......... that has the potential to do lots of damage, imagine a impact in a major city like new york *plus it would likely fround most air travel for awhile till all parts are out of orbit..... ISS crashing on peoples heads might well start a war. or take out a nuclear facility. like a nuke power plant..... so is nasa prepared? a debris hit depressurizes the station the crew manages to get into soyuz and back home safely...... but now the uncontrollable station threatens the entire ground track. no doubt it would tumble and lose pieces for awhile, and depending on the tumble may litter low earth orbit for awhile too.......... AND THE MOON COULD FALL AND KILL US ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! fred posts trash but never factually addressed the issue...... I gave the issue all the 'addressing' it merited. ISS doesn't float in orbit because it is full of air, you putz. -- "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is *only stupid." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - 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% proability 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. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Whats nasa plan for this?
On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 21:18:43 -0800, Pat Flannery
wrote: On 8/31/2011 2:22 PM, Brian Thorn wrote: exactly what would nasa do? espically if it couldnt be intentially deorbited in the pacific........ Russia brought back Salyut 6 from the brink. That was Salyut 7 that had the problems and needed the repair mission; Salyut 6 was a highly successful station. Poor Salyut 6, always getting blamed for things its younger brother did... :-) Brian |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Crazed astronuts...the NASA plan | Pat Flannery | History | 18 | February 27th 07 12:25 AM |
NASA looks at plan to blot out Sun | [email protected] | Policy | 5 | December 2nd 06 03:03 PM |
NASA to reveal moon plan | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 7 | October 4th 05 08:39 PM |
NASA releasing updated ISS plan | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | March 15th 05 05:52 PM |
Whats nasa thinking | bob haller | Space Shuttle | 28 | August 30th 04 01:52 PM |