ISS mission extended to 2024

http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/...nding-to-2024/

Of course this depends on the next presidents funding it, but it's a good
sign and means more likely commercial investment will continue.

Provided some catastrophe does not occur. Listening to Mr Hadfield on TV
here in the UK last night he said that in the quieter parts of the statiion
you could hear things impacting the outside quite a lit and of course as
they were pretty small it did not cause any problems, but sooner or later
one supposed something a little bigger might come along despite all the
tracking.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Greg (Strider) Moore" wrote in message
...
http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/...nding-to-2024/

Of course this depends on the next presidents funding it, but it's a good
sign and means more likely commercial investment will continue.

In article ,
says...

Provided some catastrophe does not occur. Listening to Mr Hadfield on TV
here in the UK last night he said that in the quieter parts of the statiion
you could hear things impacting the outside quite a lit and of course as
they were pretty small it did not cause any problems, but sooner or later
one supposed something a little bigger might come along despite all the
tracking.

It's a possibility, to be sure, but so far it's not been an issue for
ISS or any prior LEO space station.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

Provided some catastrophe does not occur. Listening to Mr Hadfield on TV
here in the UK last night he said that in the quieter parts of the
statiion
you could hear things impacting the outside quite a lit and of course as
they were pretty small it did not cause any problems, but sooner or later
one supposed something a little bigger might come along despite all the
tracking.

It's a possibility, to be sure, but so far it's not been an issue for
ISS or any prior LEO space station.


Well, not entirely true. We do have at least one space station that was
definitely hit by something.

Of course it was manmade, but still was a very real issue.


Jeff

--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

Yes, There do seem to be quite a few places on the outside now where
astronauts on space walks are being told to be careful of sharp hazards due
to micrometeorite dings...

The risk must be hard to actually quantify, since nobody seems to know the
density and size of space rocks. I suppose it could just as easily be a bit
of debris instead, but one would imagine the energy levels of those would be
lower since most are in earth orbit, unless they are orbiting in the other
direction I guess.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

Provided some catastrophe does not occur. Listening to Mr Hadfield on TV
here in the UK last night he said that in the quieter parts of the
statiion
you could hear things impacting the outside quite a lit and of course as
they were pretty small it did not cause any problems, but sooner or later
one supposed something a little bigger might come along despite all the
tracking.

It's a possibility, to be sure, but so far it's not been an issue for
ISS or any prior LEO space station.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

Yes, but I'm still not clear whether that was due to a malfunction on the
craft, or human error. It would be best one supposes not to let folk control
vehicles close to the station without some kind of failsafe retreat from
area system on board.



Incidentally, have they still got viable spare gyros for the iSS? and what
of the race ring issue. I heard a rumour that the damage was basically due
to the thrust being set wrongly on that side in the first place, However
with that and the no doubt embarrassing problem with the boosting of the
station when it started to vibrate and bend, one wonders if they want to
keep it going, will they be able to avoid this sort of error?
It was interesting On UK TV two days ago, Mr Hadfield suggested that just
as twe expect fatalities when exploring Earth in the past, we really should
accept them when we start to go into deep space, as nothing can be totally
safe.
I do think there is a lot of truth in this, and as long as the gung ho
merchants are controlled, and make competent decisions on the known data, I
do not think we can not do something just bec ause its dangerous. We
accept that in a lot of sports, but politicians seem to be very twitchy
when we start to talk about space flight. Perhaps it is an attitude that
will change as commercial interests get involved in the same way it has in
Farming and Fishing etc.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Greg (Strider) Moore" wrote in message
...
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

Provided some catastrophe does not occur. Listening to Mr Hadfield on TV
here in the UK last night he said that in the quieter parts of the
statiion
you could hear things impacting the outside quite a lit and of course
as
they were pretty small it did not cause any problems, but sooner or
later
one supposed something a little bigger might come along despite all the
tracking.

It's a possibility, to be sure, but so far it's not been an issue for
ISS or any prior LEO space station.


Well, not entirely true. We do have at least one space station that was
definitely hit by something.

Of course it was manmade, but still was a very real issue.


Jeff

--
Greg D. Moore
http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

In article ,
says...

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

Provided some catastrophe does not occur. Listening to Mr Hadfield on TV
here in the UK last night he said that in the quieter parts of the
statiion
you could hear things impacting the outside quite a lit and of course as
they were pretty small it did not cause any problems, but sooner or later
one supposed something a little bigger might come along despite all the
tracking.

It's a possibility, to be sure, but so far it's not been an issue for
ISS or any prior LEO space station.


Well, not entirely true. We do have at least one space station that was
definitely hit by something.

Of course it was manmade, but still was a very real issue.

I was responding to the description of very small bits of meteorites and
debris hitting the ISS.

The incident to which you are referring was an operating Progress
(obviously large enough to be actively tracked by ground radar) which
was under manual control from Mir. They were testing a new docking
control system. There were several levels of human error that caused
that collision.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

In article om,
says...

While I do not wish any harm onto crewmembers, it would be interesting
to have an event where a small hole punctures the pressure vessel in a
module and see how easy it is to fix, as this would provide valuable
experience to help design next generation ships (such as expedition ship
to Mars) where abandonning the ship/module is not an option.

Consider the rapid initial decision on whether to close hatch and let
module slowly depressurise vs leaving hatch open to give crews
opportunity to find and fix the hole ASAP. Once depressurized, it
becomes really hard to find the hole without any sound giving audible
hints on location.

Do they have tools for this ? For instance, in a depressurized module,
pressurise it just a bit so crew in EVA suit can use some microphone to
locate leak ?

It was under development in 1999. Not sure if it was actually sent to
ISS.

KERMIt, a Kit for External Repair of Module Impacts...
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/iss-99s.html

October, 1999 - NASA Orbital Debris Program Office
http://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/ne...s/ODQNv4i4.pdf

Has NASA developped some sort of spray foam that can be applied and
rapidly set to seal a hole ? Or is the expectation that any such holes
would be fixed from the outside ? (since there would be tons of wiring
attached to pressure haul on the inside).

Does NASA/partners have precise metrics on air leak rate and other
aspects to decide whether to abandon module/close hatch or keep it open
and try to rapidly fix it ?

Or is that something that would be left to crews's judgement ?

Article with some info that you may find interesting:

Listening for leaks aboard the International Space Station with
ultrasonics
http://www.gizmag.com/iss-air-leak-detector/28133/

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer