Space Stations: Past, Present, And Future

[Old Koreelah]

Crickey, I hadn’t realised our neighbourhood was so crowded!
 

Elon Musk presumably realises that his colonies on Mars won’t have the magnetic field and atmosphere which protect our planet.

[onetrack]

I often wonder why more satellites aren't taken out by asteroids or space debris. It only takes a tiny particle to do a lot of damage.

[willedoo]

NASA has set the date for the ISS end of life at 2030. By 2031 it will be brought down. The plan for the next nine years is to transition to commercial services. Russian space agency Roscosmos has said they will stay on until then. Their current status has put an end to all other space cooperation with the US, and also with their partnership with the European Space Agency.

[Jerry_Atrick]

24 minutes ago, willedoo said:

Their current status has put an end to all other space cooperation with the US, and also with their partnership with the European Space Agency.

Wow! Who would have thought that one?

[willedoo]

3 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

Wow! Who would have thought that one?

Jerry, I was just trying to provide some information. The main effect it will have is on the internet satellite launches from French Guyana. Probably not a big effect in the long term as there will be alternative launch vehicles they can use. As far as NASA's Atlas V goes, I think NASA has enough stockpiled engines they've bought to last until the rocket's retirement.

[Jerry_Atrick]

@willedoo - Sorry - Was meant to mean, that it wasn't a surprise... (it's been a long night)..

Edited February 28, 2022 by Jerry_Atrick

[willedoo]

It's looking like as far as space goes, Russia and China are isolated and on their own from now on, ISS excluded. Could be more opportunities for Spacex and others.

[willedoo]

Roscosmos have commented on changes of plans due to sanctions. They say they will shift focus to development of defence satellites, and other short to medium term plans will go ahead as Russia increases it's ability to domestically produce electrical components. They also said they will no longer supply rocket engines to the US. This won't worry the Atlas V programme, as they have enough RD-180 engines stockpiled for the remaining launches until retirement. The Antares rocket also uses Russian engines Rd-181.

 

The head of Roscosmos asked the Americans how they would operate and maintain the ISS if they sever ties with Russia, and NASA reiterated that it was staying in touch with Roscosmos to keep the International Space Station operational. The Russians also announced that joint experiments with Germany at the ISS will cease. Normally politics doesn't compromise ISS operations, but this is an exceptional circumstance.

[Marty_d]

This is interesting.  Wonder if they'll ever make a go of it?

 

https://youtu.be/TGO4LtCctTk

[onetrack]

The actual release and launch of the pod could provide for some interesting major cock-ups. I cannot see how they can manage the release timing and centrifugal forces upon launch with such millisecond timing needed, and a need to readjust the forces between spinning and straight flight. It's not exactly the same as launching a shotput.

[Marty_d]

10 hours ago, onetrack said:

The actual release and launch of the pod could provide for some interesting major cock-ups. I cannot see how they can manage the release timing and centrifugal forces upon launch with such millisecond timing needed, and a need to readjust the forces between spinning and straight flight. It's not exactly the same as launching a shotput.

I assume there'd be a lot of testing and simulations to ensure the release process could meet the exact timing required, before they attempt a full size throw.  One thing's for sure, on the first few launches (maybe all launches) there wouldn't be a human within a kilometer of the launch site!

[octave]

Interesting video from the Mars helicopter of landing debris.   This YouTube channel puts out weekly short videos detailing the  last weeks activity.

 

 

 

Mars helicopter flies over spacecraft wreckage

[facthunter]

Incidentally. Moons are not Planets. Moons orbit Planets which orbit Suns. Nev

[nomadpete]

Octave, thanks for that link. Interesting to see the results of our early attempts to spread litter around the universe.

[octave]

28 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

Octave, thanks for that link. Interesting to see the results of our early attempts to spread litter around the universe.

 

I see it more like historic shipwreck sites.  Do we consider Shackleton 's recently discovered ship the Endurance to be littering or an artifact of the human races curiosity about what is in the next valley or continent or planet.  I suspect that if the human race loses its curiosity then it will ossify and die out.  I do believe that if life on Mars is discovered, no matter how simple, we should leave the planet alone.

[nomadpete]

I understand your point. However, the human race might benefit from collectively shouldering responsibility for our discarded trash. For example, fortunately Exxon Valdez was not left as a testamant of capitalist adventure (sarcastic comparison). And at the time, Shackleton's ship was abandoned like an empty Coke can. I guess it could serve to remind us of the importance of proper prior planning.

But the picture of the amazing amount of space trash left orbiting our own planet certainly is an example of disregard for consequences of our collective carelessness.

Edited April 29, 2022 by nomadpete

[facthunter]

I'm sure Shackletons ship was not abandoned lightly as it was their only way of getting back to the more habitable parts of our Planet , and Captains don't like losing their ship as a matter of Pride and professionalism. The forces of nature dwarf our puny attempts to cope at times. It would be a shipwreck of some significance  by any measure.  Nev

[octave]

I don't think the debris from the landing of the Perseverance rover was wanton littering.    I guess the choice to be made is do we explore the solar system or not?     Perhaps we wait until we can recover everything we send.    Were the Pioneer and Voyager litter?   Are Apollo sites on the Moon just rubbish dumps.       There is no way of landing on Mars without leaving something.

[nomadpete]

I don't disagree Nev.

My point is that humans have an 'out of sight, out of mind' outlook.

So the ocean (and outer space) is used as a endless waste bin. Once we can no longer see a discarded item, in our collective minds it ceases to exist. Same applies whether it is a broken spaceship, expensive broken expedetion ship. Just look what our oceans have become because of our entitled attitude to waste

 

Shackleton's ship is still an interesting artefact.

Spacecraft are approaching reusability, so hopefully we will cut down on our litter.

Edited April 29, 2022 by nomadpete

[facthunter]

IF there is life on Mars and we bring it to here, we have no way of knowing it's effect. There's no place on earth as hostile to life as Mars is..  The Earth is a unique place as far as suitability for human (and other forms of life) is concerned. We should show it the respect due. People who trash it are anti life. The health of our planet and ours are intertwined. .Nev

Edited April 29, 2022 by facthunter

[nomadpete]

Nev, the reverse is also true.

If there is life on Mars, we have no idea what impact (accidental pun) human landings might have on it.

[pmccarthy]

We have had an experiment in which hundreds of ships including many oil tankers were sunk in the world's oceans. It was World War Two. There seems to have been no serious lasting damage to the environment.

[nomadpete]

Good point, PM.

So I went down the google rabbit hole in search of data. There isn't much.

This quote came from the International Oil Spill Conference Proceedings in 2005, but I couldn't find any follow-up of their findings.....

 

".... .global marine pollution threat from over 7800 sunken WWII vessels worldwide, including over 860 oil tankers, corroding for over 60 years at the bottom of the worlds oceans...... "

 

It gives an idea of the size of the WW2 polluting event, buteven so, the actual environmental impact iisperhaps just a drop in the ocean.

Edited April 29, 2022 by nomadpete

[nomadpete]

Thread drift, but it is interesting.... Until now I was only thinking about oil spills.

 

" Current estimates indicate over 300,000 tonnes of chemical warfare agents in the waters around  
Europe alone, mostly dumped deliberately after the war (Plunkett 2003a, Kaffka 1996). Over  
4900 tonnes of CWA was dumped off Japan after instructions from the US occupation forces  
and over 21,000 tonnes of CWA disposed in Australian waters (Plunket 2003b)"

 

They call this 'our cultural heritage' from the period!

 

 

Edited April 29, 2022 by nomadpete

[octave]

Polluting our atmosphere and water is obviously a bad thing.  Most human activity has  costs and benefits.   We put satellites in orbit and use our shiny new GPS.    There are many environmental problems we face of varying degrees. I have trouble understanding why leaving the decent stage of the lunar module on the moon is so much worse than driving our cars or flying our little airplanes.  

 

The parachute and backing shell on Mars are not there because engineers are being total dicks or don't give a toss.    There is no way it could have been done any better with the technology we have at the moment.  It would be a reasonable point of view to say we should not engage in space exploration until we can assure that we leave no trace.   I don't believe this, I believe we do are best until we can do better.   I believe the moon landings, Voyager, Pioneer Hubble Telescope, various Mars rovers etc. are a net benefit.   If we draw up a table for example of what we have gained scientifically and technologically from the moon landings on one side and the damage caused to the Moon on the other side, I feel the balance tips toward exploration and I a not even sure how you quantify damage to the Moon.

 

When it comes to environmental concerns  I think the tens of thousands of words I have written on this forum indicate I am very pro environmentalism.    As individuals we strike a balance between living our lives and trying not cause too many adverse affects.    For many years I flew little aircraft often just in circles around an airfield.   It is all too easy justify or not notice what we ourselves do, but be pretty keen to point out what others do. 

 

In the far future, perhaps when humans no longer exist some other intelligent civilization may land on Mars and study what our civilization has left behind.  Perhaps some civilization will discover Voyager or Pioneer floating through space, will they consider it trash or examine and learn from it?   This is like when archeologists excavate the detritus of ancient civilizations.    When archeologist locate and ancient midden or ruins of a building they are excited and curious.  I don't suppose any archeologist has ever lamented on "how untidy these people were"   or "these awful people painting graffiti on these cave walls, its just vandalism"

 

I don't see the picture of his family that Charlie Duke left on the Moon as being a wanton act of littering nor the numerus experiments.   We can still measure the changing distance of the moon from the earth by bouncing a laser beam  from reflector left during the Apollo years.

 

I posted the Mars clip because I thought people would be interested in the technological achievements especially of the Ingenuity helicopter being that we are all interested in flying.  I have no problem with the observation that there are many "bits of the planet Earth" on Mars but this seems to be all people are interested in. I might hold off on posting the little doco on the Webb Telescope (more junk!)  Perhaps this is the wrong forum for this subject.