NASA Says Russia is Still 'Moving Toward' Extending the Space Station Through 2030 (theverge.com) 29
Despite the United States and Russia's deteriorating relationship here on Earth, Russia is still considering extending its participation on the International Space Station through 2030, according to NASA. However, it could be a few months before there is a solid update on Russia's official stance. From a report: NASA and Russia's state space corporation, Roscosmos, have been the two largest partners on the International Space Station for the last three decades. The two organizations have agreed to work together on the ISS through 2024, but at the end of last year, the Biden administration announced its intentions to extend the space station program through 2030. Russia has not formally agreed to the extension yet.
Roscosmos's participation in the extension started to seem unlikely after Russia invaded Ukraine in February. In response to the war, the United States sanctioned Russia's major industries, which triggered outrage from the head of Roscosmos, Dmitry Rogozin. On Twitter, Rogozin made wild threats about the future of the ISS, insinuating that the station could come crashing down on the United States if Russia withdrew prematurely from the program. He has also hinted at revisiting the partnership with the US in light of the sanctions.
Roscosmos's participation in the extension started to seem unlikely after Russia invaded Ukraine in February. In response to the war, the United States sanctioned Russia's major industries, which triggered outrage from the head of Roscosmos, Dmitry Rogozin. On Twitter, Rogozin made wild threats about the future of the ISS, insinuating that the station could come crashing down on the United States if Russia withdrew prematurely from the program. He has also hinted at revisiting the partnership with the US in light of the sanctions.
Status quo (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not quite accurate (Score:1)
Keep doing the routine until the people on top orders you to do otherwise.
For most government agencies these days you do the routine regardless of what orders form above may be.
Re: (Score:2)
in soviet russia we extend you! (Score:2)
in soviet russia we extend you!
Re: (Score:2)
Jettison the Russian Modules (Score:2)
The solution seems obvious. Jettison the Russian modules. Clear out some of the rack spaces in Destiny to serve as crew quarters. Problem solved.
Re: (Score:2)
The solution seems obvious. Jettison the Russian modules. Clear out some of the rack spaces in Destiny to serve as crew quarters. Problem solved.
As is often the case, the obvious isn't viable.
First, IIS wasn't built with the intent that the US/Russian sides are redundant. For instance, the US side provides primary power to the station while the Russian side provides attitude control. Nobody launched twice as much hardware as was needed.
Second, there's a physical consideration. The structure wasn't designed for removing large portions of it.
Third - and this is speculation - do you really trust that there's nothing on that station set up as a
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Why? The only part of ISS that's falling apart is the Russian-build part (and only the older Russian parts at that). That's like tearing down an apartment complex because the roof leaks. :-)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Each part is owned by the country that built it, with the exception of the first Russian module, which is owned by the U.S. Russia has no more rights to the rest of the station than it does to Kyiv.
Re: (Score:2)
The solution seems obvious. Jettison the Russian modules. Clear out some of the rack spaces in Destiny to serve as crew quarters. Problem solved.
As is often the case, the obvious isn't viable.
First, IIS wasn't built with the intent that the US/Russian sides are redundant. For instance, the US side provides primary power to the station while the Russian side provides attitude control. Nobody launched twice as much hardware as was needed.
That's only partially true. Only one Russia-owned module, Zvezda, is a source of propulsion. However, most day-to-day ISS attitude control is done with gyros, not RCS thrusters, and because of the limited life of Zvezda's main engines, they are rarely used at all. Rather, most reboosting has been done by spacecraft docked with ISS. In fact ISS was in orbit for about eight and a half years before they fired Zvezda's main engines at all. And ISS reboosting has been done at least once by non-Russian ships
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even more obvious - build replacement modules for all the Russian units, loft them on Falconn9 Heavies.
Yes, but that's a long-term solution. What I'm proposing is more a temporary solution to rapidly remove the threat, should Russia continue to threaten to bring the ISS crashing to the ground.
Bear in mind that the first ISS module launched just two months shy of the 15-year mark from when ISS planning began. Planning started late in Reagan's first term, and the first module launched halfway through Clinton's second term. I'm not saying that it would take fifteen years to design a replacement module, but 2
Using it as a stepping stone? (Score:2)
I am curious why they couldn't just use the current space station as the stepping stone for a new space station. Basically add new modules and then discard any modules once they are past their useful period. It would certainly create some interesting logistics, but at least business could continue as usual?
I am sure this has been considered, so I am curious as to why it may be rejected.
Re: (Score:2)
That would have been a really interesting concept to build into the system prior to launch, but hard to retrofit to a complex, man-rated system that was not designed to be taken apart.
Re: (Score:2)
That would have been a really interesting concept to build into the system prior to launch, but hard to retrofit to a complex, man-rated system that was not designed to be taken apart.
If the ISS wasn't designed to be taken apart, how did they remove PIRS [nasaspaceflight.com]?
Back to normal means Russia retreats from Ukraine (Score:2)
That is from all of Ukraine, including Crimea and Donbas. And Russia must agree to forfeit assets held in other countries to pay for rebuilding Ukraine. THEN we can talk about slowly ramping up cooperation with Russia again. SLOWLY, over decades, because trust takes time.
Re: (Score:1)
You're funny, Russia will not do that and doesn't need to do that. They'll form business and military alliances in the world with China, India, Iran, some SA countries and SE asian ones.
Russia has things worth money that people will buy: food, fertilizer and fuel.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, sure. China is going to make Russia its bitch if they go that way. Putin may have signed Russia away into slavery with this war.
Re: (Score:1)
whether Russia ends up bitch or not, what is happening is USA stupidly causing creation of a new power bloc in this world of China, Russia, Iran, Pakistan etc.
This won't end well for USA
Re: (Score:2)
You're an idiot, so I don't expect you to understand this, but you'll lose your sovereignty. People who don't speak your language and don't know your culture will make decisions about everything in your life. Any country, even China, would be extremely foolish to trust Russia with any sort of power or decision-making for decades and generations to come. Russia may see itself as part of a "power bloc", but it's really just an idiot league, enslaved by China. You're headed straight for a Soviet Union remake,
You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the (Score:2)
Maybe it should be a law that all world leaders must have a week stay aboard ISS.
I don't know how what's gonna work. (Score:1)