EVE Search - International Space Station to be junked by 2016

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

International Space Station to be junked by 2016

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
BlackDragonShadow Caldari	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:14:00 - [1] This is bull**. This is a bunch of crap. We're human beings all we've ever known is exploration. When we came out of the caves we found fire, we crossed an oceans to see what was on the other side, we pioneered flight, and have gone to the deepest parts of the sea, and we went to the moon. Decommissioning the International Space Station is a step in the completely opposite direction. We should be funding space technology like crazy. We should be making permanent bases on the moon, making the first manned missions to Mars, and starting the transforming process while we're over there! God damnit this **es me off.
THE L0CK	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:17:00 - [2] Edited by: THE L0CK on 15/07/2009 17:18:26 NEEEEEERDRAAAAAAAAAAGE Edit: In other news, its an international space station, doesn't anyone else have a say over this? Originally by: Whitehound If I think, but I do not.
Culmen Caldari Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:19:00 - [3] 100 billion + all for nothing this is ****ed I hope its just a scare tactic to get more cash, but if it isnt, it would be the greatest waste of human potential in the history of mankind and further more why do i even need a sig?
Abrazzar	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:21:00 - [4] Guess bailing out failures of banks is more important than the progress of the human race towards new frontiers. -------- Ideas for: Mining
Atomos Darksun Damage Incorporated.	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:22:00 - [5] Edited by: Atomos Darksun on 15/07/2009 17:24:37 Yes, and by dropping the ISS on our heads we can actually afford to be able to do any of those things. You think it's just pennies to keep it stable in low Earth orbit? It's not for anything but research, and couldn't help with any of those things you listed. It's not designed for that. I don't like it when people with absolutely no knowledge of the subject at hand try to barge in on it. It's why our government is so **ed as it is, because we listen to raving lunatics who don't have a clue instead of the experts who do. This isn't even NASA's project, it's the "INTERNATIONAL" space station, and the other countries maintaining it (Namely Russia) said they would oppose any attempt to de-orbit the station as early as 2016. Originally by:** Amoxin My vent is talking to me in a devil voice... Linkification, Baby.
Zyck Dark-Rising	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:25:00 - [6] Can't blame NASA for the government's complete ****ation and lack of funding. Because sending those billions of dollars to some ** country we don't even like and who doesn't like us is obviously more important than space travel and exploration.
BlackDragonShadow Caldari	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:26:00 - [7] Originally by: Atomos Darksun Yes, and by dropping the ISS on our heads we can actually afford to be able to do any of those things. You think it's just pennies to keep it stable in low Earth orbit? It's not for anything but research, and couldn't help with any of those things you listed. It's not designed for that. One of the main reasons they are decommissioning the ISS is because of the decommissioning of the shuttle program. So like I said we should be funding space like crazy. And the ISS can help us out in those area's. In fact I would say it's critical that it stays up there as it is the only research station humanity has in space.
Atomos Darksun Damage Incorporated.	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:30:00 - [8] Originally by: BlackDragonShadow Originally by: Atomos Darksun Yes, and by dropping the ISS on our heads we can actually afford to be able to do any of those things. You think it's just pennies to keep it stable in low Earth orbit? It's not for anything but research, and couldn't help with any of those things you listed. It's not designed for that. One of the main reasons they are decommissioning the ISS is because of the decommissioning of the shuttle program. So like I said we should be funding space like crazy. And the ISS can help us out in those area's. In fact I would say it's critical that it stays up there as it is the only research station humanity has in space. Read the rest of my post. The decommissioning of the shuttle program has NOTHING to do with the decommissioning of the ISS. One of the primary reasons for the Orion program is to go to the ISS - or was. After the decom. of the shuttle program we were going to (and still are) need to rely on the Russians to take us to our space station. Originally by: Amoxin My vent is talking to me in a devil voice... Linkification, Baby.
Iasius Mercurialis Inc. Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:34:00 - [9] What a waste. A $100 billion firework. Like similar nerdy folk i am all for space exploration. But its still very very expensive to get stuff and people into orbit using chemical fuel rockets. We still use a mode of transport that 85% of its weight is fuel. I so hope space elevator technology develops to the point where we can make carbon nanotubes that have the required tensile strength. Another problem in our market driven world is that their is very little direct economic benefit in space exploration. I think future fusion reactors, that are still a long way away, would need gases from our solar system. Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. ~Saint
BlackDragonShadow Caldari	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:35:00 - [10] Originally by: Atomos Darksun Originally by: BlackDragonShadow Originally by: Atomos Darksun Yes, and by dropping the ISS on our heads we can actually afford to be able to do any of those things. You think it's just pennies to keep it stable in low Earth orbit? It's not for anything but research, and couldn't help with any of those things you listed. It's not designed for that. One of the main reasons they are decommissioning the ISS is because of the decommissioning of the shuttle program. So like I said we should be funding space like crazy. And the ISS can help us out in those area's. In fact I would say it's critical that it stays up there as it is the only research station humanity has in space. Read the rest of my post. The decommissioning of the shuttle program has NOTHING to do with the decommissioning of the ISS. One of the primary reasons for the Orion program is to go to the ISS - or was. After the decom. of the shuttle program we were going to (and still are) need to rely on the Russians to take us to our space station. Here is an excerpt from the article you didn't read in the beginning of my post: "Budget constraints and the lack of a shuttle program, which is set to retire in 2010, may have persuaded NASA to end the space station program."
Atomos Darksun Damage Incorporated.	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:37:00 - [11] Originally by: BlackDragonShadow Originally by: Atomos Darksun Originally by: BlackDragonShadow Originally by: Atomos Darksun Yes, and by dropping the ISS on our heads we can actually afford to be able to do any of those things. You think it's just pennies to keep it stable in low Earth orbit? It's not for anything but research, and couldn't help with any of those things you listed. It's not designed for that. One of the main reasons they are decommissioning the ISS is because of the decommissioning of the shuttle program. So like I said we should be funding space like crazy. And the ISS can help us out in those area's. In fact I would say it's critical that it stays up there as it is the only research station humanity has in space. Read the rest of my post. The decommissioning of the shuttle program has NOTHING to do with the decommissioning of the ISS. One of the primary reasons for the Orion program is to go to the ISS - or was. After the decom. of the shuttle program we were going to (and still are) need to rely on the Russians to take us to our space station. Here is an excerpt from the article you didn't read in the beginning of my post: "Budget constraints and the lack of a shuttle program, which is set to retire in 2010, may have persuaded NASA to end the space station program." :facepalm: Originally by: Amoxin My vent is talking to me in a devil voice... Linkification, Baby.
Jin Nib	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:41:00 - [12] Originally by: THE L0CK Edited by: THE L0CK on 15/07/2009 17:18:26 NEEEEEERDRAAAAAAAAAAGE Edit: In other news, its an international space station, doesn't anyone else have a say over this? I imagine the international community gets a say when they start footing the majority of the bill. In other news space exploration will continue regardless of what happens with the space station. It will just be set back a little. It may even add incentive to come up with some new techs and way in which to do so. Quite frankly that 100 billion dollars is a waste whether or not they bring it down, if its not a waste then it would'nt be a waste when/if they do junk the thing. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
Clearshot6245	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:42:00 - [13] so i guess eve will never be reality? we are going back to axes... not again
Zakarazor	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:48:00 - [14] Edited by: Zakarazor on 15/07/2009 17:48:17 well...its official. everyone in space will speak chinese and as soon as they get far enough into space to start moving asteroids around, so will we.
TRD 2371	Posted - 2009.07.15 17:56:00 - [15] Edited by: TRD 2371 on 15/07/2009 18:07:47 i think iss may be just a show to confuse the masses... seriously a piece of metal with rocket boosters attached thats so 1930.... what is far more amazing then even a freaking ufo (no ive never seen one except youtube lols) is YOUr - self- which is open ended depth explore inside open up outside we have already everything explored except maybe parts of deep sea and uboots are expensive YOU on the other hand is already here now just waiting for YOU
Irida Mershkov Gallente War is Bliss	Posted - 2009.07.15 18:07:00 - [16] Originally by: TRD 2371 Edited by: TRD 2371 on 15/07/2009 18:06:04 i think iss may be just a show to confuse the masses... seriously a piece of metal with rocket boosters attached thats so 1930.... what is far more amazing then even a freaking ufo (no ive never seen one except youtube lols) is YOUr - self- which is open ended depth explore inside open up outside we have already everything explored except maybe parts of deep sea and uboots are expensive YOU on the other hand is already here now just waiting for YOU ...What?
TRD 2371	Posted - 2009.07.15 18:10:00 - [17] Edited by: TRD 2371 on 15/07/2009 18:11:14 Originally by: Irida Mershkov Originally by: TRD 2371 Edited by: TRD 2371 on 15/07/2009 18:06:04 i think iss may be just a show to confuse the masses... seriously a piece of metal with rocket boosters attached thats so 1930.... what is far more amazing then even a freaking ufo (no ive never seen one except youtube lols) is YOUr - self- which is open ended depth explore inside open up outside we have already everything explored except maybe parts of deep sea and uboots are expensive YOU on the other hand is already here now just waiting for YOU ...What? you like the chicken in egg that eating all the things in the egg until you meet YOU which is when the shell breaks thats kinda the constant missing in this society which makes it what it is
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.15 18:11:00 - [18] They just launched (or at least were planning to, dont know if it went ahead), another part of the ISS, made by the japanese. I seriously doubt they would be happy to launch something which costs billions just to destroy it for no good reason a few years later. Why would you destroy it when you also can jsut let it orbit? (Dunno exactly how stable its orbit is, but it wont require much fuel to keep it going). Meanwhile much of the stuff is brought anyway by the russians, so space shuttle program has nothing to do with it. I call BS, there is just no reason to destroy it and they would **** of many people.
Gone'Postal Void Engineers Mass - Effect	Posted - 2009.07.15 18:18:00 - [19] TBH, Humans as a race, won't do jack with space until we stand united as a Planet. No single country has the Research, Funding, Manpower nor the will to carry it out. Originally by: masternerdguy Officer mods arent spread out because the bpos are innacesible to 99% of eve.
Jin Nib	Posted - 2009.07.15 18:23:00 - [20] Originally by: Furb Killer They just launched (or at least were planning to, dont know if it went ahead), another part of the ISS, made by the japanese. I seriously doubt they would be happy to launch something which costs billions just to destroy it for no good reason a few years later. Why would you destroy it when you also can jsut let it orbit? (Dunno exactly how stable its orbit is, but it wont require much fuel to keep it going). Meanwhile much of the stuff is brought anyway by the russians, so space shuttle program has nothing to do with it. I call BS, there is just no reason to destroy it and they would **** of many people. Um how bout the staggering amount of debt the current US government is amassing. That seems like a good reason for them to consider cutting back their expenses. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
Atomos Darksun Damage Incorporated.	Posted - 2009.07.15 18:26:00 - [21] Originally by: Furb Killer Why would you destroy it when you also can jsut let it orbit? (Dunno exactly how stable its orbit is, but it wont require much fuel to keep it going). Doesn't require a lot of fuel??? The thing is hanging up there at 350km, and drops 2km a month. The amount of fuel it takes to move 300,000kg is NOT small, and it is NOT cheap to get up there. What none of you seem to understand is that this is a research station. It can NOT be used for any staging of intrasolar missions - and it could very well have exhausted it's research capabilities by 2016. Originally by: Amoxin My vent is talking to me in a devil voice... Linkification, Baby.
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.15 18:26:00 - [22] Edited by: Furb Killer on 15/07/2009 18:27:13 The entire problem is that throwing the ISS into the atmosphere wont help anything against the us debth. When the US pulls back i have little doubt other countries would happily pay the 2.50 dollar that thing uses to keep its orbit stable. (Sure maintenance costs more, but it just isnt a reason to throw it in the atmosphere). The russians have easily enough capacity to transport fuel to it to keep it in stable orbit, the americans are not needed for it. And i want to bet when asked the chinese would also want to participate. (and enough research left).
Amataras Minmatar Rule of Five The Junta	Posted - 2009.07.15 18:37:00 - [23] Is it a complete waste? A lot of technologies that exist today are based on what was learned during the Apollo space program (not least, it helped NASA plan for the Constellation program). I'm sure NASA and industry in general have learned a fair bit from their experiences with the ISS, so it can't be ALL bad. But look on the bright(er) side - Virgin Galactic is up and running, Japan is designing a space elevator, and some guy wants to launch inflatable kevlar space hotels into low orbit. Don't give up just yet --------
Jin Nib	Posted - 2009.07.15 18:39:00 - [24] Originally by: Furb Killer Edited by: Furb Killer on 15/07/2009 18:27:13 The entire problem is that throwing the ISS into the atmosphere wont help anything against the us debth. When the US pulls back i have little doubt other countries would happily pay the 2.50 dollar that thing uses to keep its orbit stable. (Sure maintenance costs more, but it just isnt a reason to throw it in the atmosphere). The russians have easily enough capacity to transport fuel to it to keep it in stable orbit, the americans are not needed for it. And i want to bet when asked the chinese would also want to participate. (and enough research left). Are you even aware of the current financial state the world is in? If other world bodies were so interested in funding it, they would be funding it. It may very well be a task that another agency may pick up... wait... oh, thats right no one else has space shuttles. Yeah, I thought so. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
Krystal Vernet Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2009.07.15 18:43:00 - [25] Originally by: Atomos Darksun it could very well have exhausted it's research capabilities by 2016. I very much doubt that. In any case, there's too much involved with it for any deorbiting to happen by 2016. I'm unhappy to hear any NASA official talk of doing any such thing. Maybe if the government hadn't been strangling the NASA budget for so long, we wouldn't be in this position.
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.15 18:55:00 - [26] Edited by: Furb Killer on 15/07/2009 19:02:38 Originally by: Jin Nib Originally by: Furb Killer Edited by: Furb Killer on 15/07/2009 18:27:13 The entire problem is that throwing the ISS into the atmosphere wont help anything against the us debth. When the US pulls back i have little doubt other countries would happily pay the 2.50 dollar that thing uses to keep its orbit stable. (Sure maintenance costs more, but it just isnt a reason to throw it in the atmosphere). The russians have easily enough capacity to transport fuel to it to keep it in stable orbit, the americans are not needed for it. And i want to bet when asked the chinese would also want to participate. (and enough research left). Are you even aware of the current financial state the world is in? If other world bodies were so interested in funding it, they would be funding it. It may very well be a task that another agency may pick up... wait... oh, thats right no one else has space shuttles. Yeah, I thought so. Now lets add some common sense and a bit less nationalism: 1. Deorbiting the thing in 2016 isnt going to help anything against the current financial crisis. 2. You dont need the space shuttle to supply it. The russians rockets do fine too 3. Allready commercial companies have contracts to start supplying the ISS, there is really no need for space shuttles Another slight problem might be that the module required for a controlled deorbit is russian. With the alternative being european. And the russians have allready said when the ISS is decomissioned in 2020 (which was the original schedule), at least part of their modules will be detached to form the basis of a new space station.
ceaon Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.15 18:57:00 - [27] this remember me that in '90 Russia directly move 50% of money from the alcohol tax for the space program and ppl drink like usual but happy to help the space program US should do the same Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist EvE FTW
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.07.15 19:08:00 - [28] I assume this is just a way for nasa to secure more funding.
Ivana Drake Caldari Liberi Fatalius Exalted.	Posted - 2009.07.15 19:20:00 - [29] isn't even complete yet and they're already talking about scrapping it?
Jin Nib	Posted - 2009.07.15 19:32:00 - [30] Originally by: Furb Killer Now lets add some common sense and a bit less nationalism: 1. Deorbiting the thing in 2016 isnt going to help anything against the current financial crisis. True enough, it's a result of the space shuttle program being shut down acc. to the source. The current financial crises does have to do with other countries willingness to pick up the tab though. Quote: 2. You don't need the space shuttle to supply it. The Russians rockets do fine too One would imagine that they are even more inefficient then the shuttles. They may get the job done, but saying it is 'fine' seems a bit of a stretch. Quote: 3. Already commercial companies have contracts to start supplying the ISS, there is really no need for space shuttles Indeed, as I said before it might add incentive to get moving in other areas. However, one has to wonder what these contracts for supplying the station consist of, I doubt they are to transport the goods through the atmosphere and are rather the goods themselves. Quote: Another slight problem might be that the module required for a controlled de-orbit is Russian. With the alternative being European. And the Russians have already said when the ISS is de-commissioned in 2020 (which was the original schedule), at least part of their modules will be detached to form the basis of a new space station. And the Russians are among the few that can manage to keep their **** up there without the help of the US. 4 years hardly seems like a huge imposition. You should note that I am Canadian, and while I wish the US well don't have much of an emotional investment in it. But then it's always easier to marginalize someone then simply stick with the argument. -Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.