First All-Private Astronaut Team Arrives At the ISS (gizmodo.com) 25
A SpaceX Crew Dragon safely delivered four private astronauts to the International Space Station this past Saturday. Gizmodo reports: SpaceX capsule Endeavor reached the ISS at 8:20 a.m. EDT on Saturday, April 9, following a nearly 21-hour journey. The crew of the Ax-1 mission -- Michael Lopez-Alegria, Larry Connor, Eytan Stibbe, and Mark Pathy -- launched atop a Falcon 9 rocket on Thursday from Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The ISS is currently orbiting at a height of 260 miles (418 km) above Earth. The docking would've happened 45 minutes earlier, had it not been for a problem having to do with ISS crew members not being able to receive video from the Crew Dragon's center line camera. Ground controllers remedied the problem by routing video from a SpaceX ground station, according to NASA.
The four crew members will stay on the orbital outpost for eight days, where they will perform some 25 experiments having to do with science, education, and commercial activities. Axiom Space is aiming to build the world's first fully commercial space station, the construction of which is slated to begin at the ISS in late 2024. The Ax-1 mission represents an important milestone in the ongoing commercialization of low Earth orbit. [...] Axiom said the first day was mostly about preparing equipment for what will be a very busy week. The team has just 100 hours to complete their respective tasks.
The four crew members will stay on the orbital outpost for eight days, where they will perform some 25 experiments having to do with science, education, and commercial activities. Axiom Space is aiming to build the world's first fully commercial space station, the construction of which is slated to begin at the ISS in late 2024. The Ax-1 mission represents an important milestone in the ongoing commercialization of low Earth orbit. [...] Axiom said the first day was mostly about preparing equipment for what will be a very busy week. The team has just 100 hours to complete their respective tasks.
Wasn't Axiom the name of the spaceship from Wall-E (Score:1)
What a coincidence!
Re: (Score:2)
After I heard that, I really wanted to see one of the astronauts be named Wally.
Re: (Score:2)
Eve!
Re: (Score:2)
A flight sponsored by the Buy-n-Large corporation ("Do your part, Fill your cart")
Did they have to license the name from Disney? (Score:2)
Can SpaceX keep ISS alive? (Score:3)
The SpaceX problems are money problems, and resource problems. It's accomplished astonishing things, and provided information we cannot obtain without a permanent presence in space. Is there a concrete plan, or even the start of one, Spacex to entirely replace the Russian launches it's needed until now? The maximum payload for the Falcon Heavy is comparable the Russian Soyuz payload, so I assume it can handle the larger payloads, though they could not be packaged quite the same way.
Re:Can SpaceX keep ISS alive? (Score:4, Informative)
Excuse me, I meant to say the _ISS_ problems are money problems. That must have seemed confusing.
Re: (Score:2)
Saying that the Italian Space Spaghetti has money problem is also confusing.
Re:Can SpaceX keep ISS alive? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Can SpaceX keep ISS alive? (Score:4, Interesting)
The SpaceX problems are money problems, and resource problems. It's accomplished astonishing things, and provided information we cannot obtain without a permanent presence in space. Is there a concrete plan, or even the start of one, Spacex to entirely replace the Russian launches it's needed until now? The maximum payload for the Falcon Heavy is comparable the Russian Soyuz payload, so I assume it can handle the larger payloads, though they could not be packaged quite the same way.
What? Falcon Heavy lifts about 64 metric tons to LEO. The ordinary Falcon 9 lifts 16 tons to LEO (22 tons with an expended first stage). Soyuz payload to LEO is about 7 metric tons.
What SpaceX does is in every way more capable than Soyuz, both for crews and cargo.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Can SpaceX keep ISS alive? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Um, that is actually the plan. Axiom is planning to add modules to the station and then eventually separate those modules into a separate station when the ISS needs to be de-orbited.
Just adding the possible source for your informative post: https://gizmodo.com/axiom-spac... [gizmodo.com]
Impatient readers that don't want to scroll through the article can just do a Firefox search for the phrase "begin in 2024". Concept art included.
Re: (Score:3)
The SpaceX problems are money problems, and resource problems. It's accomplished astonishing things, and provided information we cannot obtain without a permanent presence in space. Is there a concrete plan, or even the start of one, Spacex to entirely replace the Russian launches it's needed until now? The maximum payload for the Falcon Heavy is comparable the Russian Soyuz payload, so I assume it can handle the larger payloads, though they could not be packaged quite the same way.
The division of labor in the ISS was always a matter of politics. Once upon a time, royalty and nobility would often send their children to live at the courts of other royals and nobles. In theory they were there to be educated, learn about other kingdoms, socialize with their peers, etc. The less explicit, but maybe most important reason is that they were there in a sort of genteel hostage arrangement. The situation with the ISS is a bit like that. Critical functions have been left to the major powers part
Re: (Score:2)
Then there would probably need to be a battery pack to power the thrusters while in shadow.
There'd need to be a battery pack to power the thrusters, period. It would take on the order of 30,000 square meters of solar panels (over 10x what it has now) to generate 7MW. They'd do better to charge a battery slowly over a couple of orbits, then dump it all into the engines during the part of the orbit they needed the thrust at. Rinse and repeat over the course of several weeks.
Re: (Score:2)
They'd do better to charge a battery slowly over a couple of orbits, then dump it all into the engines during the part of the orbit they needed the thrust at. Rinse and repeat over the course of several weeks.
That's not really how ion/plasma engines work though. They provide very small amounts of thrust over a long period of time, with very efficient use of propellant. You get a much better thrust to mass ratio by running the engines continuously. The ISS is in a circular orbit. There's no particular point in the orbit where it needs to fire to maintain the orbit (consider that doing so would make the orbit elliptical, and another thrust event would be needed to circularize it again) If the engines can be made m
We are really struggling to find "firsts" in space (Score:3)
Not saying it's all been done. We have yet to see the first all-women crew, the first all LGBTQ crew, the first all-tax accountants crew, and, of course, the first Yorkshire Terrier in space.
Still...
Re: (Score:2)
Not saying it's all been done. We have yet to see the first all-women crew, the first all LGBTQ crew, the first all-tax accountants crew, and, of course, the first Yorkshire Terrier in space.
Still...
I'd say it's pretty significant. Space has been largely for governments until just the last few years.
Private space exploration is getting harder and harder to dismiss as just "damn rich people wasting money" ...
Canada, eh? (Score:3)
Whatever new space station we're building next, you can count on Canada to lend an arm [instantrimshot.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And poutine!