NASA wants new 'deorbit tug' to bring space station down in 2030

Personally I think it a great shame that this splendid historical artefact (ISS) will be plunged into destruction in the ocean. Far better, but probably more costly, would be to deorbit the structure to the surface of the moon where it can be used for future study and may eventually provide a tourist attraction - just think what would happen if the Egyptians proposed destroying the pyramids.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrCrewof10+
Mar 14, 2023
1
0
10
Visit site
I have always hoped NASA would have a second thought regarding this whole deorbiting nonsense. I have to agree with you Steve_foston it just seems wrong.
I think we have many options regarding what and how we can utilize this resource, because that's what we have here with the I.S.S a massive mobile orbiting multi billion dollar resource. It is not a liability like THEY are playing it out as. Even if we just open the hatch and purge the "stink" out into the vacuum of space, while placing it out even if just into a sleeping orbit somewhere any where in the solar system. It has all the potential of being adapted to be a framework "bus" for other future missions if even just to be a mount with solar capabilities. Think of the experiments we could do off of it still from telescopes and communication applications all with the ability to camp up inside while having human interaction with the platform.
We should call this out.... Based on the lack of accountability to the dollars spent and to the future generations but also to the resources garnished from mother earth (total footprint of project" in the first place to put the I.S.S.
 
Last edited:
Aug 5, 2021
5
1
515
Visit site
Personally I think it a great shame that this splendid historical artefact (ISS) will be plunged into destruction in the ocean. Far better, but probably more costly, would be to deorbit the structure to the surface of the moon where it can be used for future study and may eventually provide a tourist attraction - just think what would happen if the Egyptians proposed destroying the pyramids.
Deorbit to the moon? To get the ISS anywhere near the moon would take a pretty enormous delta-V... and then again to place it into lunar orbit. A non-starter...
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrCrewof10+
Mar 14, 2023
3
0
10
Visit site
I've been thinking about this since they talked about deorbiting the Hubble. They should push the International station and Hubble when necessary to a geostationary orbit. Somewhere it could become a space museum where all future significant space vehicles could be placed. When space tourism becomes common it would become a designation . For future peoples of earth, moon and mars.
 
ISS cannot survive without humans to operate the systems. It would lose orientation, move in random directions, overheat, destroy itself. Once abandoned it will come down and we want to dictate where that occurs.

ISS will reach its service lifetime around early 2030's. Heat, cold, micrometeorites and radiation will have rendered it too expensive to repair.

Moving it to GEO from LEO would require another 6,000 m/s delta V. Each current boost accounts for about half a meter per second. Twelve thousand such boosts would be required.

There is zero science that could be obtained by boosting it to GEO and leaving it there.

Bottom line: No one is interested in saving it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unclear Engineer
Mar 14, 2023
3
0
10
Visit site
ISS cannot survive without humans to operate the systems. It would lose orientation, move in random directions, overheat, destroy itself. Once abandoned it will come down and we want to dictate where that occurs.

ISS will reach its service lifetime around early 2030's. Heat, cold, micrometeorites and radiation will have rendered it too expensive to repair.

Moving it to GEO from LEO would require another 6,000 m/s delta V. Each current boost accounts for about half a meter per second. Twelve thousand such boosts would be required.

There is zero science that could be obtained by boosting it to GEO and leaving it there.

Bottom line: No one is interested in saving it.
 
Mar 14, 2023
3
0
10
Visit site
I was not talking about it being kept operational. Just as other items in Museums are not in their original operational condition. Simply as a piece of science for future space tourist to visit. Where all space items, vehicles could be placed for the future. It would require something similar to a space tug to keep it in position. We have 7 years to figure it out, or longer as they kept extending the Hubble mission.
 
It must be kept operational or it would wander around and become a hazard. It will not stay put without attitude control. The large solar arrays get pushed by sunlight and it would move uncontrollably. You cannot have attitude control without humans occupying it. Humans cannot occupy it due to it would be too far away, outside the Van Allen Belts, too dangerous due to excessive radiation and component failures.
No one could visit the inside of it in the future due to being too dangerous.
No one is interested in spending untold billions of scarce NASA budget dollars developing it as a tourist destination.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unclear Engineer
Mar 15, 2023
1
0
10
Visit site
This is an incredible waste of money! If a cargo Progress capsule can do this, a SpaceX cargo capsule can do it better, outfit it with more thruster fuel or a couple added thrusters and you got your tug. We won't need these vehicles anymore without the station ..
 
Dec 6, 2019
10
1
4,515
Visit site
How about the cost to deorbit large space junk (¿the ISS becoming 'junk'?) by sending it into the Sun? Same for ridding the earth of nuclear waste? (Ref: Pink Floyd - "Set the Controls for the Heart of the Sun")
 
It would take but a few meters per second delta V in order to lower ISS enough that the Earth's atmosphere would bring it down to a planned location. Anything in orbit around the Earth has a velocity relative to the Sun of about 30 km per second. It would take maybe 15,000 such boosts to negate its 30 Km per second velocity relative to the Sun and allow it to drop into the Sun. Figure maybe $10M per boost, the total cost would be around $150B, about 6 times the yearly NASA budget.
 
Sep 25, 2023
1
0
10
Visit site
Considering all the current craziness about returning to the Moon, isn't there anything of the ISS that can be reused in this regard or used directly on the Moon?

It feels like a waste of resources to just let it all burn on reentry simply because it's "expensive" to maintain.
 
There are tremendous uncertainties about any component used in ISS. Wear and tear is hard to predict. It would be very expensive to take pieces off of ISS as spacewalks would be needed. The various pieces are designed for LEO, not interplanetary travel. Not enough shielding. The people who are responsible for the success of the Moon effort want nothing to do with second hand equipment, I am quite sure.
 

Latest posts