I wasn't trying to say a suction cup, just using it as imagery. I know it would not work in space. Just something to hold the shuttle with no need for extra atachments while someone can go out in a emergency and check it out if there was a problem. Only to be used in a emergency. The shuttle would not need any extra anything, just ISS would.

This is not hindsight. I know Columbia could not do it, but future shuttle might have to.

Any flight with the shuttle RMS could "dock" to the station simply by grabbing a grapple fixture on the station. Conceivably a shuttle could have a docking fixture somewhere and the station RMS could grab that. That still leaves transferring crew as impractical. But the biggest problem is getting to the ISS. The orbits are significantly different, and the fuel required to change orbits is extreme. They probably wouldn't have enough, and if they managed to get to ISS, they still need fuel to deorbit.

[sarcastic voice]But according to armageddon they could refuel the shuttle from the station just by docking to is and opening the fuel tank!!! [/sarcastic voice]



Seriously. So what heppens if the shuttle is damaged so much by something that it will definitely burn up on re-entry? What cna they do?

__________________
GIYUL :-)
"It takes Thousands to fight a battle for a mile, Millions to hold an election for a nation, but it only takes One to change the world." - Dan Sandler 2002

What I was thinking of (and have seen i development) is a small sphere, less than 6 inches in diameter, perhaps tethered by a thin filament, and would only be equiped with a camera. It would only be used in emergencies.

From what I've read, it seems almost merciful that the crew was spared the knowledge of their fate. I've yet to see anyone propose a scenario that could have saved them if they'd known that the tiles were fatally damaged.

I'm sure that after the Congrssional Hearings are done, a rescue plan will be required for missions stranded in orbit.

Pray. That's about all anybody can do at that point.

In the 10:30pm (West Australian Time) news program NASA officials were shown making all the right statements about the ISS, it was also announced that a Progress rocket had been launched to the ISS.

The Russians are of course asking for more money, hopefully they will get it.

Here are a couple of links to stories on the above items.

"ISS to stay operating"

http://www.spacedaily.com/2003/03020....po94ibj9.html


"Russians launch new supply ship"

http://www.spacedaily.com/2003/03020....ql3mkne5.html

Unsure how long these will remain up so look before they are gone.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Graham2001 on 2003-02-03 10:39 ]</font>

A few facts....

Remaining US components of the ISS, as well as the Japanese and European components and the Russian Science Power Platform, simply cannot be launched by unmanned vehicles. They were designed to be carried by the Shuttle, which means their structures are designed with Shuttle launch criteria in mind, not Soyuz or Proton or Titan 4B or Ariane V or whatnot. (Shuttle has a somewhat gentler ascent than most vehicles.) These components also are not built to fit in the available payload shrouds, nor can they be mated to a propulsion package. They would have to be redesigned and rebuilt almost from scratch if the Shuttle is gone. Or cancelled altogether. For that reason alone, I would be extremely suprised if the Shuttle program were cancelled. NASA is going to do its best to avoid having to return the ISS crew on Soyuz TMA-1, but if they have to, they will.

The Russian Buran orbiter flew one unmanned test flight before the political bigwigs lost interest and cut its funding. It was placed into storage at Baikonur Cosmodrome along will all remaining flightworthy Energia booster hardware. These were all damaged beyond repair when the assembly hall containing them unexpectedly collapsed, killing seven workers. There are a few test articles on display around the world, but none are in a condition to be refitted as spacecraft without far more work than is worthwhile. (Meaning it would be simpler just to build a completely new vehicle.)

ISS does have a propulsion system. It is located in the aft portion of the Zvezda module. Zarya also has a propulsion module, but this is inactive. Zvezda is refuelled every time a Progress arrives. Progress also performs reboost maneuvers, using up extra fuel that it will not be needing.

As others have said, there is no capability to inspect the belly of the orbiter in flight. And Columbia could not have rendezvoused with ISS -- rendezvous maneuvers have to be planned out pretty much from liftoff or they cannot happen due to the enormous fuel required.

RMS cannot "dock" the shuttle to the station. It has certain load limits, and these would be exceeded by the torque produced by the Shuttle's own mass. The SSRMS could grapped the Shuttle, however, as SSRMS is built extremely tough. But normally Shuttles are not equipped with grapple fixtures for the simple reason that they are expected to grab objects -- not *be* grabbed! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: calliarcale on 2003-02-03 12:39 ]</font>

I'd also like to point out that on http://www.cnn.com there's an article indicating Bush is going to allot (or at least request) another .5 billion US for the space program...

It's now looking possible that a replacement crew will be sent to the ISS in late April or early May. Their job would be primarily to maintain the station until the future of the shuttle program becomes clearer. This fresh crew will travel up on the Soyuz capsule that had been intended for the next 'taxi flight'. If this plan goes ahead, the current Expedition Six crew will return to Earth on the Soyuz currently docked to the station. Concerns over the level of the ISS's drinking water supply, which was to have been topped up by the shuttle Atlantis in early March, may dictate that the next station crew consist of only two people.

Zvezda - the Service Module - doh! My brain shorted. Of course they can reboost. That's part of its purpose. The ICM was a temporary assist package flown because of delays the Russians had in completing the Service Module. Silly me.

Some ask is the Shuttle able to do this with 3 out of 15 recomendations still with questions above them, and no plan for a US cargo vehicle. Return to flight activities for the Shuttle program are funded at $4.3 billion. There are people who say Shuttle will have to be pushed a bit hard to catch up on the Space science left behind and finish the over due work on the ISS. People here on the BA forum said purchase of Soyuz flights might help ease pressure and we might not have to push shuttle so hard. Russia’s cash-strapped space agency said it would stop giving U.S. astronauts free rides into orbit in the future. Under the proposal, the United States would write off debts of man-hours that Russia owes for work carried out on the station in exchange for Russia launching its astronauts. Jules Verne is the Euro Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) and ex-admin O'Keefe had visited the ATV spacecraft during tests at the ESA site in Netherlands, the European ATV delivers tonnes of equipment, fuel, food, water and air for the crew.
http://esamultimedia.esa.int/images/..._array_low.JPG
Getting Russian crew to help more or ask the Euros to send European astronauts to do more work on the Spacestation, Shuttle costs can get very expensive per flight and there are always some safety risks. The USA's scientist must think of the correct needs and the safety and payload capacity, everything must be done very well.

The Russian MIR space station had its problems in its day, it had some leaks and power problem but Russia's MIR had a very long lifespan and outlived the Soviet Union. Some great space science has been done on MIR, Americans did great with Skylab but its also had problems, the Freedom station project might be the US roots of the ISS. On today's International space station Brazil promised to build special carriers, the ISS had a design to be 80 metres wide, ISS has been far more expensive than originally anticipated. It is thought that perhaps about 40 Space Shuttle flights will be needed to assemble parts and over 30 Progress Russian spacecraft flight, ESA were supposed to be sending up their astronauts by getting on USA's Shuttle and doing work on the ISS, the International Space station is suppoed to be 110 metres long, the Space station can not accommodate the expected crew and Canada is supposed to install sophisticated robotic systems, Japan announced that due to reduced funding and technical problems the Centrifuge Accommodation Module (CAM) would not be ready for delivery to ISS until 2008, 2 years behind schedule and back in 2002 Japan citing reduced government budgeting but not technical problems, announced delay of its Kibo Japanese Experiment Module (JEM) by one year to 2006, Japan's NASDA contributed into the project but the original plans expected that Japanese launch vehicles and mini-shuttle could support the program, but neither was ready and today the international station has a only a capacity for a crew of three it is thought it will have a mass of about 420,000 kilograms. Russia has announced the design of the Clipper spacecraft, the successor to the Soyuz TM/A manned spacecraft and on the USA's side Congress decided not to terminate the X-38/CRV program but to simply reduce its funding and Loss of the CRV would have meant that the crew sizes onboard ISS would not be able to increase beyond 3 so O'Keefe gave his assurances that "after 2007" a Crew Transport Vehicle (CTV ) along with a Habitation Module would be delivered to ISS and thereby allow for the expansion of permanent crew sizes onboard the space station.. The ISS is needed for many future sciences and the study of the long term survival of biology in outer-space, other future space telescopes also depend on being able to get service from the ISS crew. Research modules have not been installed, Russia have not added their docking compartment, the USA have yet to put in the other Thermal control systems, Russians have not put in SPP solar arrays, the Japanese economy is somewhat stagnant so they now have bad budget problems with the ISS and Japan JEM's may be years behind the timetable, Hope-X space vehicle with H2 launch is in trouble, ESA were supposed to send up European astronauts on Shuttle flights, NASA has been behind on adding the integrated truss structure and Brazil didn't put up the Express pallet. Europeans could be sending more ATV to carry up to tonnes of ESA cargo including provisions, future space telescopes had plans to be alongside the ISS design and to get service or upgrades from the International Space Station, a lot of work must be done. The future of NASA's work with the CTV or X38 could be very important, science labs and a free-flying platforms and the number of flights that Russia can add will help matters more, ISS is what is needed for long term space plans as it is the only current long-term orbiting laboratory.

Reminds some of a crazy video-game
"Project: Space Station". It was an old little computer simulation of managing NASA’s humans in space program,
http://www.the-underdogs.org/game.ph...+Space+Station
very hard to get a self sufficient station

Sadly the real ISS seems to have a budget that's even more crazy than the video game and the real ISS is way behind on the timetable

NASA downsizing its plans for space station

USA TODAY

NASA is scaling back its plans for the orbiting
International Space Station, a result of its goal of retiring the space shuttle and sending Americans back to the moon.

A centrifuge laboratory to study the effects of gravity on animals won't be added, NASA Assistant Associate Administrator Mark Uhran said Monday. Another laboratory and a compartment that would have held life-support equipment are also "at higher risk" of being left on the ground

Here's a link to the USA Today story...

__________________
Ken

Visit the BAUT Team Page
BOINCview: Network control
and a superior UI!

This has been the case for so long now that in all honesty it wouldn't break my heart to see it deorbited. I'd advocate reallocating funds on projects which would offer much better scientific return, but what do I know...

It would break mine (okay, not break, but cause a mild case of heartburn). Russia would lose its best tourist designation.

__________________
Fiction has to be plausible. Reality is under no such constraint.

The Senate looks to have mandated ISS completion. Now if they'd do the same fo the STS replacements.

The heads of the five space agencies in charge of the International Space Station (ISS) have held talks on the future of the facility

http://www.addict3d.org/index.php?page=viewarticle&type=news&ID=18802&titl e=ISS%20'to%20be%20completed%20as%20planned'

The agency chiefs from Canada, Russia, the US, Europe and Japan met at Nasa's Kennedy Space Center in Florida.


ISS 'to be completed as planned'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4768462.stm