angkor writes
"The date has been set. Space.com has the news. Mir will plunge into the Pacific Ocean on March 6, 2001. Farewell old friend!" It looks final this time.
Update: 01/13 03:32 PM by
michael : I swear we won't post about Mir anymore until the pieces start raining down. :)
Please (Score:1)
Re:Spectator Sport? (Score:1)
Re:Space fungus (Score:1)
Re:Space fungus (Score:1)
Don't worry about that. The extreme temperatures will most likely disenegrate the fungus.
Unless it's a super fungi!
What will probably happen (Score:1)
And of cource in the weeks following, we're bound to see a steady stream of people trying to eBay rusty bits of junk they dug up in their yard. Claiming that these are genuine Mir fragments.
Does it now? (Score:1)
*fails because it's been killed and resurrected roughly 1e6 times now*
I sure do hope it doesn't hit MY house! A-hyuck!
Cheers,
levine
Re:Why not re-use some parts from Mir on ISS (Score:1)
Combine this story with the Space Diving one... (Score:1)
Re:Uhm we had one up in the 70's (Score:1)
space shuttle mission was supposed to go up
and resupply it to keep it going
but unfortunately the shuttle was behind scheduale
Re:Spectator Sport? (Score:1)
Re:Space fungus (Score:1)
"And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning
as it were a lamp, and it fell upon a third part of the rivers, and upon the
fountains of waters;
"And the name of the star is called Wormwood; and the third part of the waters
became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made
bitter."
END Obligatory "end of the world" post
I think you're thinking of Chernobyl. (In Ukrainian, Chernobyl == Wormwood; in Russian, Mir == Peace or world)
Re:Space fungus (Score:1)
Re:the real reason they are de-orbiting (Score:1)
SWEET! (Score:1)
--buddy
How much (Score:1)
Re:HURRY! (Score:1)
Unless it means "how to get people to stop testifying against me."
realistically... (Score:1)
Apparently the world ecomomy thinks that there are far more important things han space exploration/colonization, like buying more rifles.
___________________________
http://www.hyperpoem.net [hyperpoem.net]
Re:What's next? (Score:1)
Re:Space fungus (Score:1)
What's that, the Russian Roulette theory? That's why (for example) people who have dared to drive drunk and not killed someone find it much easier to allow themselves to do it in the future. Same goes for many many bad decisions people make everyday.
The argument "we did it this way before and nothing bad happened" is a compelling trap, and should be given little weight in decisions.
I'm not trying to discount the value of experience here. What I'm saying is that if something seems dangerous, and you can come up with no better argument than "nothing bad's happened yet," then it's probably a good time to make sure your insurance is paid up.
Re:Uhm we had one up in the 70's (Score:1)
Skylab.
Re:Mir is a realic - and History (Score:1)
Maybe it'll hit your shift key.
Re:Spectator Sport? (Score:1)
It's going to be moving pretty damn fast.
Re:the real reason they are de-orbiting (Score:1)
Note: i think they meant to say altitude not attitude in the story...
So then you think they will be turning off the altitude?
death from above? (Score:1)
And what kind of ecological warfare are they going to be capable of given the comparatively unlimited resources available?
They should wait... (Score:1)
Moderating articles (Score:1)
Why not re-use some parts from Mir on ISS (Score:1)
-DVK
Re:Mir is a realic - and History (Score:1)
Good birthday present (Score:1)
Re:SWEET! (Score:1)
Anyone seen that Yahoo commercial? (Score:1)
On a slightly more serious note (just slightly), what do we do if part of the satellite happens to fall onto some boater or an important buoy or pipe? (I don't know much about the global positioning of our bandwidth pipes, but wouldn't it be horrible if the transatlantic pipeline were cut in two? Just a thought. And it won't happen, so dismiss the thought from your mind. Now.
Re:the real reason they are de-orbiting (Score:1)
Re:This is sad (Score:1)
Umm... Yeah. (Score:1)
Re:Spectator Sport? (Score:1)
I wonder what the possibility would be of getting in the vicinity of the splashdown to watch a first in a lifetime event? It would definitely be the coolest thing I've ever seen... Large glowing mass descending, hitting the ocean at ungodly speeds, causing the world's largest cannonball effect! What a rush...
its all fun and games until someone loses and eye :)
tdawg
Re:HURRY! (Score:1)
Re:HURRY! (Score:1)
Re:Space fungus (Score:1)
Spectator Sport? (Score:1)
Re:Space fungus (Score:1)
- Amon CMB
Grim Reaper rampant on /. (Score:1)
I am concerned over the recent fascination with death here on /. Look at these headlines, all of which appeared in the last 24 hours:
This is unhealthy. Maybe you should consider alternative, more PC and euphimistic phrasings?
Then I can let my little toddlers read /. again.
Might as well use their garbage collection (Score:1)
When the first American astronauts arrived at the Mir space station, they were shocked to see what a bunch of pack rats the cosmonauts were. The cosmonauts pointed out how expensive it was to bring anything up from Earth, and said that their experience had shown that it was foolish to throw anything away, regardless of how marginal its value seemed. In the end the Russians convinced the Americans that they were right.
Some biologists were surprised to discover that 98% (or something like that ) of the human genome are "junk". But imagine Mir after a few billion years of habitation. At current rates of accumulation, having 98% percent of the mass of the station being junk would not be surprising at all.
Since space was short the cosmonauts probably threw out the stuff they really couldn't use. So a universal toolkit of trash was probably evolving. That would be very useful in the ISS. Gives garbage collection a whole new meaning
Re:Uhm we had one up in the 70's (Score:1)
the real reason they are de-orbiting (Score:1)
its not because its old, its because it has bad attitude!
they dont make them like they used to!
Note: i think they meant to say altitude not attitude in the story...
Re:the real reason they are de-orbiting (Score:1)
i admit it
i was just trying to get moderated up for being funny
didnt work obviously, instead i showed my ignorance
Survivor (Score:1)
Heck, I'd even watch that one!
Re:This is sad (Score:1)
Daisy.. (Score:1)
Too bad (Score:1)
Re:They should wait... (Score:1)
Re:no surprise (Score:1)
When the Apollo astronauts entered the Soyuz in 1975 they were appalled at the state of the russian capsule and the lack of safety equipment.
NASA has to deal with regulations hundreds of times more strict than the Russians.
I'd say NASA did pretty damn well considering they had to deal with the Joe Q. Public, American, the biggest coward on the planet.
~y
--
j u l e s @ p o p m o n k e y . c o m
Re:no surprise (Score:1)
except for the french
--
j u l e s @ p o p m o n k e y . c o m
Re:A Mir Haiku. (Score:1)
Re:Why not push it into space? (not a good idea) (Score:1)
Again? (Score:1)
Re:SWEET! (Score:1)
Do you promise??? (Score:1)
Do you promise?
Cross your heart and hope to die?
Stick a needle in your eye?
Stab a dagger in your thigh?
Eat a botulism pie?
Well???
Getting my helmet (Score:1)
Re:Spectator Sport? (Score:1)
Then its just fun you can't see...
I cant Believe it! (Score:1)
Re:Space fungus (Score:1)
the usual? (Score:1)
<BR>can't you see the obvious?
<BR>-- MIR has to go, so that the PR focus is on ISS
<BR>-- Keeping MIR in storage will not make much money for the aerospace industry
<BR>-- Condemning MIR as old tech gives Americans {US'ians) the chummy feelinf of superiority
<BR>
<BR>Let's face it. Russian Space missions were always 'can-do' ventures, in which human readyness to self-sacrifice and improvisation as the superior form of trouble-shooting, beat the western 'safety through piles of cash' approach.
<BR>Only when Kennedy realized this and instructed US developers to mimmick the 'Russian way', did the Americans gain ground and won the cardboard race to the Moon.
<BR>
<BR>Since then the West is back in it's safety nets and doing everything to stiffle Russia's space programs. Did you know that the West pratically pressed Russia into the ISS program?
<BR>Russia would have preferred to go it's own way [with japanese financial backing being offered].
<BR>But as NASA and the Pentagon realized that even ESA was starting to reconsider if a deal with Russia might be better than the ISS alternative, the muscle flexing started.
<BR>Rumour has it that there were even threats to impose higher taxes on Eurotech imports if European governments didn't push ESA to fall back in line.
<BR>
<BR>To sum up, this whole, "go with us" approach is creating jobs in the US and ensures that NASA will decide who goes to Mars first.
<BR>
<BR>For the common good, we should have lobbied for MIR years ago and violently opposed billions of dollars to be wasted on a NASA pet project;
<BR>MIR was practically up for sale and projections about adding modules to it and gradually replacing older components, which showed that the same tasks that ISS may or may not achieve [at three times the original planning budget with no end in sight] at less than 30% of the original ISS budget were supressed.
<BR>
<BR>Question:
<BR>--------
<BR>"If three inferior satellites at a cost of $8M each [incl. launch and deployment]can do the job of one superior satellite that costs $50M and has a higher risk margin , shouldn't we go with inferior technology until superior technology becomes cheaper?"
<BR>
<BR>Answer NASA:
<BR>"No, superior technolgy is absolutely vital."
<BR>
<BR>Answer Common Sense:
<BR>"Go with the most cost-effective alternative, especially if it permits time savings, and use the surplus funds for further research and technology improvements"
<BR>
<BR>Argument NASA:
<BR>"Well, you know, it's not our money, really..."
oops (Score:1)
Re:How much (Score:1)
There are electrical conduits and ventilation tubing going through ALL intermodule hatchways, so there would definately need to be a person prepping the ship for descent, a remote controller couldn't just pop modules off by themself.
I'd sure like to see it happen...I wonder if any cruise lines would be interested?
-A6
Re:Spectator Sport? (Score:1)
Re:Please (Score:1)
Mir is dead. Long live Mir! (Score:1)
/me ducks
Do you Yahoo? (Score:1)
(If you don't get this visit AdCritic and find the ad I'm referring to before modding this down.
Reality of MIR (Score:1)
No, it's 100+ tons of junk. MIR is dead, it cannot be reused, reclaimed, or recycled. It's worn out and cannot be overhauled, upgraded, or repaired. It's *dead*. And all the wishing in the world won't change that.
If US export restrictions hadn't stopped MirCorp from exporting the METS electrodynamic tether to Russia for launch to the Mir, Mir could have been put into a high storage orbit.
Assuming the tether worked. (Don't forget, it's unproven, incompletely tested technology.) Even so, all it would have done is put off into the future the date that the problem would have to be dealt with.
Using this, Mir could be at 400 or 500 miles up now, safe from danger of atmospheric drag and all at the cost of one Progress launch (METS fits on one Progress).
*Could be*, if the tether worked..., if MIR's clapped out control system could hold together..., if the docking system worked (which the Russians have had problems with lately). Too many if's. (Not to mention *if* there was a rational reason for doing this in the first place..)
Re:This is sad (Score:1)
Not really. It's very difficult to get from ISS's orbit to MIR's orbit and vice versa. So you have to spend the money to build the orbital transfer vehicle, then risk an astronauts life on a dead and soon to be out of control MIR... Not to mention the need to boost a machine shop to ISS for the occasional chance you might need it...
Sorry, but it's easier to simply boost the part you need.
Sponsers of the Mir crash? (Score:1)
Smigs
Re:Why not re-use some parts from Mir on ISS (Score:1)
What about the splash (Score:1)
The topic is appropriate. (Score:2)
-Restil
This is news? (Score:2)
MirCorp dumps Mir station [slashdot.org] by michael on Tue Dec 12, '00 12:17 PM MST 34
At Last, Mir to be Ditched [slashdot.org] by CmdrTaco on Thu Nov 16, '00 07:45 AM MST 267
Mir To Crash Into Pacific [slashdot.org] by Hemos on Mon Oct 23, '00 08:48 AM MST 282
Mir Likely To Be Deorbited [Updated] [slashdot.org] by timothy on Tue Oct 03, '00 12:06 PM MST 321
For best times and locations to see Mir ... (Score:2)
Cheers,
Earl
The real pity (Score:2)
--
Remove the rocks to send email
Mir was a success in several ways (Score:2)
Re:Looks like MirCorp has approval for "Mir 2" (Score:2)
This is NOT an alternative to Mir, sadly. That, and since MirCorp is behind it, it's unlikely to see the light of day. They started strong w/ Mir, but they didn't use enough sense and oversold themselves before they got METS.
Re:Space fungus (Score:2)
Re:Why not re-use some parts from Mir on ISS (Score:2)
Actually the Russians wanted to have ISS at the same inclination but for political reasons a "compromise" inclination was chosen that is sub-optimal for everyone involved. Even as late as the launch of the first Russian module they were pushing to switch the inclination. If they did that, the stations could at least serve as lifeboats to each other and some modules and/or equipment could be moved over. Remember, much of Mir dates to 1995 when the "American" modules were launched. (Read Dragonfly if you have a chance, it's a great book, I'm surprised someone hasn't submitted a review yet)
Of course, Mir would need a substancial capital infusion if it were to return to operational status. That was the whole point of MirCorp, not to use a dying station, but to re-fit it & open it for commercial operations. Hopefully their latest plans will go smoother.
-Jay Thomas
http://www.uiuc.edu/~jthomas2 [uiuc.edu]
Re:Uhm we had one up in the 70's (Score:2)
Geek Cruise? (Score:2)
A Mir Haiku. (Score:2)
As it'were, and twas, it tiss and twill be.
Thusly spake, the word of Bob.
Re:Space fungus (Score:2)
"And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning
as it were a lamp, and it fell upon a third part of the rivers, and upon the
fountains of waters;
"And the name of the star is called Wormwood; and the third part of the waters
became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made
bitter."
END Obligatory "end of the world" post
Well, someone had to post it
Re:For best times and locations to see Mir ... (Score:2)
Make sure you select from the other tools in the top frame to find viewing times of many objects from various earthbound locales.
Mir is a realic - and History (Score:2)
If they'd just wait a few more years! (Score:2)
If the Russians could just wait a few more years, I promise them, I will do my best to retrieve the 'Mir' space-station for them, returning it safely so that they may stick it in a museum. Considering certain advances in RLV technology [nasa.gov], a heavy lifter shuttle-barge is sure to be developed soon- and I'm going to buy one. I will gladly swing by and pick it up for them. Can someone please suggest they park it in a libration point [findarticles.com], someone that knows a powerful Russian politico personally?
:)Fudboy
Re:Spectator Sport? (Score:2)
But today, in the 21st century, I wonder if some new network, maybe CNN, or heck, maybe even NASA could have a high altitude plane attempt to film any or all of the re-entry and subsequent shower of hardware?
You can kill the revolution, but first you have to kill all the revolutionaries.
Re:This is sad (Score:2)
It's 15 year old equipment. Technology has change a lot in 15+ years. (The equipment was probably obsolete at launch time anyway.) Moving equipment from one orbit to another probably exceeds the value of launching new equipment. Not to mention reliability issues. People to strip off old equipment, etc.
It would cost significant money to try to "save" MIR. The fungus would continue growing. One of the modules is currently depressurized and uninhabitable. So what would be the point of spending even more money to make it just one more piece of orbiting space junk?
One idea that springs to mind is to salvage smaller parts of equipment. But it's still all "used" and "obsolete" equipment. Who wants "used" parts in space where everything must work. You can't just call up a repairman because one of your CRT's just quit working.
Now to try "Think Different"...
In fact, one of the several reasons to abandon MIR is because it is just too dangerous for Americans. Other reasons include, not establishing a second-hand market for used space junk -- thus decreasing the amount of money congress sends to needy space contractors. Bringing that fungus back down to earth is a neato experiment to see what will happen. If Russia were to keep MIR, it would potentially reduce the fighting over control of the ISS. As you can see from this paragraph, there are lots of reasons to bring down MIR.
You can wound the revolution, but first you have to kill all the revolutionaries.
Re:Why not re-use some parts from Mir on ISS (Score:2)
It probably would cost as much to "save" some of MIR's parts as to launch new shiny, up to date equipment. Add it up. Cost to launch a salvage crew. Cost to keep MIR operational. Cost to transfer equipment between two different orbits. Cost to return salvage crew to earth, possibly including a trip to ISS. Then you still end up with an empty useless shell of MIR in orbit as yet another (large) piece of space junk.
Reliability? Who wants to have used, obsolete, space junk in an environment where your life can depend on the reliability of equipment?
Fungus problems. Why even remotely risk bringing any fungus to ISS from MIR. It's bad enough bringing fungus from earth.
Part of MIR is uninhatibable and depressurized.
You can kill the revolution, but first you have to kill the revolutionaries.
Finally the marvel-station goes... (Score:2)
What's next? (Score:2)
Looks like MirCorp has approval for "Mir 2" (Score:3)
There is a link here [spacedaily.com].
Sounds like they are building a free-floater that will co-orbit & can dock w/ ISS so it can use the same re-supply mechanisms as ISS but yet be completely independent so you don't have to fill out 7 kg of paperwork before you can dock w/ it.
It also seems as if Titov has approval to go on ISS in April. We'll see how it all works out though. Should be interesting.
-Jay Thomas
http://www.uiuc.edu/~jthomas2 [uiuc.edu]
no surprise (Score:3)
Space fungus (Score:3)
Is this now a new species?
and as such, is it subject to the endangered species act?
(Waitaminute - they're russians!)
or is this going a bad movie version of the Andromenda Strain?
I imagine that this fungus problem will be something that they will have plenty of time to sort out on the new space station.
That may be the ultimate problem to long distance space travel.
Avoiding being consumed by space fungus.
This is sad (Score:4)
METS uses an electrical cable that's deployed a few kilometers towards the earth that has an electrical charge run through it to act against the Earth's magnetic field and push whatever it's attached to upwards. Using this, Mir could be at 400 or 500 miles up now, safe from danger of atmospheric drag and all at the cost of one Progress launch (METS fits on one Progress).
Sigh....