Space Station Crew Prepare For Emergency Spacewalk 95
astroengine writes "After the discovery of an ammonia coolant leak supplying one of the solar arrays on Thursday (video), International Space Station managers have decided to plan for an unscheduled spacewalk on Saturday to repair the problem. The final decision about whether to go ahead with the extravehicular activity will be made late on Friday. 'Good Morning, Earth! Big change in plans, spacewalk tomorrow, Chris Cassidy and Tom Marshburn are getting suits and airlock ready. Cool!', tweeted the Space Station's Expedition 35 Commander, Chris Hadfield, on hearing the news an emergency EVA may be required of his crew. 'The whole team is ticking like clockwork, readying for tomorrow. I am so proud to be Commander of this crew. Such great, capable, fun people.'"
Howard (Score:4, Funny)
Good think Wolowitz isn't up there, or he'd be freaking out.
Re:Howard (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah he'd have an "ammonia leak" in his pants.....
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah he'd have an "ammonia leak" in his pants.....
Being Howard Wolowitz, yellow stains [shirtcity.us] in your pants can be pretty cool!
Live Footage! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad it's not a realistic depiction of how gravity works.
Re: (Score:2)
What really bothers me is the "IMax" symbol at the end of the preview which suggests this anti-knowledge will be shown at science museums. Incredible cultural poison.
Re: (Score:2)
What really bothers me is the "IMax" symbol at the end of the preview which suggests this anti-knowledge will be shown at science museums. Incredible cultural poison.
Yes, because Star Trek, Iron Man, Transformers, The Matrix and a hundred other feature films that are available in Imax are intended to be science documentaries ...
Re: (Score:1)
You mean Transformers aren't real? I'm so... I mean... my uh... son... will be so bummed.
Re: (Score:2)
From what I've seen of the trailer, it seems believeable enough. What gripes do you have, as I wasn't looking very closely?
Re: (Score:3)
To change the ISS's velocity that much in a single impact would destroy the entire station. I don't even think the ISS is capable of being deorbited without additional hardware; the Progress supply drones it currently uses to adjust its orbit carry very little thruster fuel. (Just enough to deorbit the Progr
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, it can be de-orbited ... the people on it just might not like the outcome.
I doubt it's got enough shielding and the like to do it in any controlled way. I doubt it was even designed to be landed.
Re: (Score:2)
Why? Planes are designed to be landed. The space shuttle is designed to be landed.
The ISS, not so much.
So any talk about 'de-orbiting' it in any sense which isn't a fiery splash into the ocean is pretty much a joke.
I'm sure it would have been possible to design the space station such that you could do a re-entry. But they didn't.
Re: (Score:2)
In order for the station to reenter, you'd have to change its orbital velocity by a substantial amount. The interwebs suggests that it's about 150m/s (that's about 300 mph for the metrically challenged).
To change the ISS's velocity that much in a single impact would destroy the entire station. I don't even think the ISS is capable of being deorbited without additional hardware; the Progress supply drones it currently uses to adjust its orbit carry very little thruster fuel. (Just enough to deorbit the Progress itself, plus some spare.)
Personally, the main bit which caused me to roll my eyes is right at the beginning, where the two astronauts admire the sunset, tumbling uncontrollably, while facing in entirely the wrong direction...
was there re-entering on the trailer? isn't the movie about them getting stranded in space. I thought the things burning in atmosphere lower were pieces of some asteroid or something. though I wasn't paying too much attention.
Re: (Score:2)
To change the ISS's velocity that much in a single impact would destroy the entire station.
That's of course right. Whatever hits the station would need to do so at a minimum of 150m/s velocity difference, and then only if it were much more massive than the station. Unless it had a big honking spring attached to it, that is :) 150m/s is half the muzzle velocity of many small firearms.
Re: (Score:2)
I really hope that by "small firearms" you mean "pistols"...
And if you mean "pistols", why didn't you just say so?
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't they small kinda by definition? :)
Re: (Score:2)
Alas, I didn't notice -- did the entire station actually deorbit, or was it only some collision debris that got deorbited?
Re: (Score:3)
Personally, the main bit which caused me to roll my eyes is right at the beginning, where the two astronauts admire the sunset, tumbling uncontrollably, while facing in entirely the wrong direction...
Don't be surprised if you find the scene and that bit of dialogue to be half-a-movie apart in the actual film.
Re: (Score:2)
In order for the station to reenter, you'd have to change its orbital velocity by a substantial amount. The interwebs suggests that it's about 150m/s (that's about 300 mph for the metrically challenged). To change the ISS's velocity that much in a single impact would destroy the entire station. I don't even think the ISS is capable of being deorbited without additional hardware; the Progress supply drones it currently uses to adjust its orbit carry very little thruster fuel. (Just enough to deorbit the Progress itself, plus some spare.) Personally, the main bit which caused me to roll my eyes is right at the beginning, where the two astronauts admire the sunset, tumbling uncontrollably, while facing in entirely the wrong direction...
i see bits and pieces of a shuttle re-entering, and a Soyuz capsule, but I don't see the ISS doing any re-entry... at least not the entire station. Mind you, I do see the station being cut in two by an impact.
If you look at the reflection in the suit's visor when he talks about the sunrise, you can see he is facing the right way for it. You can't really tell from a trailer, though. Adjacent scenes in a trailer may be far apart in the actual movie.
Re: (Score:2)
Midway through. Part of the station blows, and it appears to shift into a lower orbit (by a few hundred meters at most) and then zooms right on by like someone stepped on the gas pedal.
Issues:
1. What the hell caused it to suddenly drop orbit!? Someone fire the retros and we just didn't see it?
2. The difference in orbital velocity at an altitude difference of 100 meters is nowhere NEAR what is depicted.
Re: (Score:2)
I mostly agree, although you can certainly have whatever velocity difference you want if you are not in a circular orbit anymore. A single hit to ISS big enough to deorbit it would certainly not leave it in a circular orbit by definition. There's no solution, I think, for a single momentum transfer that would lower the instantaneous orbital altitude by 100 metres while still keeping the track somewhat parallel to the previous one -- if that's what the visuals implied.
Re: (Score:2)
It would take an extreme amount of energy to cause such a massive object to deviate so quickly from a stable orbit. (having played with such mechanics [youtube.com] a lot, at a smaller scale)
Re:Linux caused it (Score:4, Informative)
He's joking or trolling, but he is correct about ISS dropping XP on their laptops...
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/155392-international-space-station-switches-from-windows-to-linux-for-improved-reliability [extremetech.com]
Careful (Score:2)
Everything is hard in space (Score:5, Insightful)
You can't have regular solar panels; you need ammonia-cooled solar panels. You can't simply walk out and fix it, there's no air. You can't use a wrench, because conservation of momentum means you rotate around the bolt. And after all that and you fix it, a piece of junk from a Chinese satellite killer takes you and your new solar panel out.
This is why we're still whizzing around in LEO. Imagine doing this crap 100 million miles away when you can't "just" get more ammonia if you really needed it.
Re:Everything is hard in space (Score:5, Informative)
You can't use a wrench, because conservation of momentum means you rotate around the bolt.
Unless you have something to hold you, like the Canadarm [wikipedia.org], or hold onto something to stop your rotation. Using a wrench is space is more complex but not impossible.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You just made my point.
Re: (Score:1)
You just made my point.
So by "you can't use a wrench", you meant, "you can use a wrench if you have something to hold onto." Gotcha...
I see where you're going with this (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"Everything is hard in space"
Two things about that.
First, I would like to point out that while it may be hard, I would not call this, as OP does, an "emergency". The leak was already known, and there are backup systems in place. This is a precautionary measure, not an "emergency", unless by that you mean they will "emerge" from the airlock.
Second, the fact that "everything is hard in space" is precisely why we should establish a base on the moon. A gravity well makes a HUGE difference in how difficult it is to perform work. And t
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. NASA's definition of an emergency spacewalk is one that wasn't on the schedule a month in advance and that nobody has practiced for in the giant swimming pool. It's something that needs to be done quickly before they lose too much coolant, but it isn't an emergency in the sense of "Roll Engine Company 3 and 4 and bring the long ladder trucks"
Gee (Score:1)
I wish the mechanic would get as excited when he has to put some freon into my A/C...
Re: (Score:3)
Make the mechanic (and all his coworkers) lives depend upon fixing your A/C and see what happens :D
I know NASA needs the money but geeze... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
So some people are sent out within a few days which might be about as fast as you can step through all the checklists, from people only getting general training and not months of training for every single movement of this specific manevour, like they usually would. If that is not emergency then I do not know what a emergency is.
People think hyperspace persuit formulars are fun, but wait till mankind has the tech for that...
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Unscheduled != Emergency (Score:5, Insightful)
The point is, in an emergency there is no checklist
Hey Anonymous Coward, there sure as hell is. The whole point of a checklist is you remain calm and 'work the problem.'
If you're in the cockpit of a 747 and the engines flame out at 35K feet the first thing you do is grab your checklist.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
When you engage in the kind of planning NASA does, you typically only perform unscheduled activities in an emergency. This is especially true when in comes to EVA. If you want a good example of the level of planning, training, and rehearsal that typifies an EVA, check out a documentary of repairs on the Hubble Space Telescope.
Re: (Score:1)
They're going out tomorrow. Read that another time: TOMORROW. They found out about the problem Thursday.
You're talking about people who get years of training on every specific maneuver they have to perform in space, repeatedly, until they're so good they can do it in their sleep, blindfolded, with both their hands tied behind their back.
Keep being a stupid keyboard warrior though, it's cute.
Re:Unscheduled != Emergency (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, jklovanc is getting hammered by the mods, but he has a point. We really aren't ready for space until you can actually do that sort of thing without a three week simulator run.
This is EXACTLY why we need to keep going round and round in LEO until it's really, really boring and second nature*. If we plan on getting past the moon, we have to develop technologies and procedures that allow us to fix things promptly.
* This is not to imply that the ONLY thing we should be doing is the ISS. We should be funding lots of other space related programs.
Re: (Score:1)
Remember back in the pioneer days of settling North America? People crossed the ocean not because every part of the voyage was safe and comfortable and they were sure they could easily fix everything. They crossed the ocean because they'd rather die trying to find a better life than go on with their old lives.
Nothing's changed, perhaps you personally don't feel the need to take risks but space travel doesn't need to become safe, it just needs to become cheap. And as soon as that happens you'll have people q
Re: (Score:3)
When you have an emergency of such magnitude on ISS, you don't get to wear the spacesuits, you haul your ass into the Soyuz and head back to Earth.
To the braindead mods: The parent is not a troll, just uninformed about ISS procedures. That doesn't make him a troll.
Re: (Score:3)
In space.... (Score:1)
no one can hear ammonia scream.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
For a while now, but it's not actually stationary
Well that all depends entirely on your frame of reference.
Raw Egg (Score:5, Funny)
Videos from the ISS (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Chris Hadfield's personal mission is to communicate space to regular people and get them excited about it again. He's a hero even if just for that and everybody should watch his videos.
LaForge Maneuver (Score:3)
Didn't they solve this problem on TNG? All you need to do to cope with a coolant leak is have everybody roll energetically under the descending emergency door that's sealing the affected area off.
http://epicgeordi.ytmnd.com/ [ytmnd.com]
(in case it isn't obvious, that link is loud, obnoxious and on a loop.)
Re: (Score:2)
That link is... probably the lamest thing I have ever seen.
Time to worry! (Score:5, Funny)
Just a moment...just a moment...I've just picked up a fault in the AE-35 ammonia distribution unit. It's going to go a hundred percent failure within 72 hours.
P.R. (Score:3, Insightful)
I find it amusing that the best P.R. man NASA has had in recent years (Chris Hadfield) is not American.
Re: (Score:2)
I find it amusing that you care about such a thing.
What -I- find amusing is that we call it NASA, not USA. Though that would be hilarious too, because of the redundancy.
After all, AFAIK NASA does not envelope CSA or whatever Mexico calls their version.
Re: (Score:1)
...why wouldn't the US call its space agency the National Aeronautics and Space Administration...?
Re: (Score:2)
er, I thought it was North American. For some reason.
On any other day I would not have been a moron, here. Well played, AC, well played...
Re: (Score:2)
Makes sense to me. The best engineer NASA ever had was German.
Re: (Score:1)
You'd be amazed how many Americans are Canadian. ;)
(Most Americans are amazed to find out how many famous "Americans" they know are actually Canadians...)
In any case, it's NASA. They hire from around the world. It would be surprising to find any working group in the agency that was 100% American. It would be silly to assume someone's nationality based on the fact that they work for, with, or in NASA.
Re: (Score:2)
Hell, even some NASA facility tours are "citizen only", which is really ridiculous.
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly you are a subject matter expert.
Re: (Score:2)
How far in advance does NASA have to schedule a spacewalk for it to be a "scheduled" spacewalk? Isn't the fact that NASA is scheduling it today make it "scheduled" for tomorrow?
well it's going like clockwork at least!
it means it's unbudgeted for fiscal year 2013.
Re: (Score:2)
How far in advance does NASA have to schedule a spacewalk for it to be a "scheduled" spacewalk?
Far enough that all the needed tools and equipment are packed on the ground, and the astronauts performing the spacewalk have practiced in a "zero G" dive tank.
I read that differently (Score:2)
I read that as "Space Station Cow Prepares for Emergency Spacewalk" and was momentarily excited for pictures.
Why wait till tomorrow (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Can you explain why they need to pre-breathe pure O2?
Re:Why wait till tomorrow (Score:4, Informative)
Inflating a spacesuit with "normal" air at normal pressure would make it very
stiff and require big forces to bend, making for very expensive balloon animals
and not much work done by the astronaut contained within.
The "pre-breathing" is required to adapt the human physiology to such an atmosphere.
Just using normal air at very low pressure isn't an option, because the partial pressure
of Oxygen would be too low to breathe (same as very-high-altitude air on Earth).
Making a useable spacesuit is suprisingly hard. One of the challenges for example
is that the suits internal volume should always stay the same, even when bent.
Otherwise the pressure would change (and by quite a bit too) every time it is deformed,
annoying the hell out of or even injuring the astronaut.
Re: (Score:2)
The "pre-breathing" is required to adapt the human physiology to such an atmosphere.
Just using normal air at very low pressure isn't an option, because the partial pressure
of Oxygen would be too low to breathe (same as very-high-altitude air on Earth).
Thanks - very informative. Further googling indicates that this is to avoid decompression sickness (breathing pure O2 for a while flushes the nitrogen out of the body, preventing it forming bubbles when the astronaut is decompressed). Is there any reason to use an oxygen/nitrogen atmosphere on the space station, rather than oxygen/some-other-gas, such as helium? This would presumably avoid the decompression sickness problem, much like deep divers use oxygen/helium mixes.
Making a useable spacesuit is suprisingly hard. One of the challenges for example
is that the suits internal volume should always stay the same, even when bent.
Otherwise the pressure would change (and by quite a bit too) every time it is deformed,
annoying the hell out of or even injuring the astronaut.
Indeed, I hadn't considered that.
Re: (Score:2)
Is there any reason to use an oxygen/nitrogen atmosphere on the space station, rather than oxygen/some-other-gas, such as helium? This would presumably avoid the decompression sickness problem, much like deep divers use oxygen/helium mixes.
The problem with Helium is its very (very!) high diffusion rate through everything,
including solid steel etc., so the station would need a constant resupply of Helium just
to keep the internal pressure stable. They still do need air resupply, but with O2/N2, it's at
a much more manageable rate.
Re: (Score:2)
One of the things that the video seemed to imply is that they're simulating the expected procedure in their underwater tanks on the ground first, to make sure everything is reachable, and to know what tools they need to do the job.
The crew are not necessarily experts on every nut and bolt of the ISS. While they've certainly studied it, and have done the underwater sims themselves, the hands-on experience with each individual unit is quite rare compared to, say, a mechanic who works on cars every day for de
Emergency? (Score:2)