UK want ISS module

[bobblebob]

"A proposal for the UK to join the International Space Station (ISS) project has been put forward by a group of scientists and engineers. <br /><br />Their idea is for Britain to build and launch two modules that greatly enhance living conditions on the platform. <br /><br />The Habitation Extension Modules would increase meeting and bunk space; and allow the UK to fly some dedicated science experiments. <br /><br />The proposal is being supported by the British Interplanetary Society. <br /><br />Details of the suggested programme are carried in the society's Spaceflight magazine. "<br /><br />http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7174742.stm<br /><br />My first questions were - How they gonna build them before 2010 and what flight would they go on? Arent all the flights pretty much full now with payload. Also anything we build we run behind schedule and over budget. Fact<br /><br />

 

[MeteorWayne]

I agree, with the current STS manifest, I see no room for any transportation on US flights.<br /><br />The shuttle will be flying only 2 1/2 more years. <br /><br />If they are serious, they must be planning on another transportation method.<br /><br />And if the ISS is to be decomissioned in 2016 or so, that's barely enough time to get something designed, built and installed before then.<br /><br />Rather perplexing, IMHO. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[bobblebob]

What other transportation method is there, that can carry such a large payload? The cost will be a stumbling block aswell. You cant justify spending that much really. And it seems to me to be more about polictics than science. Just so we can say we have a part on the ISS

 

[bobblebob]

Oh, didnt notice it mentions the Soyuz-Fregat. Never heard of that before

 

[j05h]

Soyuz-Fregat is an excellent light-satellite launcher that uses the venerable Soyuz rocket and extremely capable Fregat upper stage. These proposed UK modules are probably small enough that it could handle their launch.<br /><br />Interesting point for the crew-bunk module is that each berth would be 3m^3 which is about twice the volume of standard ISS/Mir type berths, practically a state room. The other module serving as universal ward room/meeting space is really nice, too. It gives the Zarya/Zvezda modules a break and potentially pushes all food-related activity into a module that doesn't have critical hardware or experiments, but it is also at the other end of the station from shower, toilet, etc, which is a slight problem.<br /><br />Interesting concept, but the UK has never shown real interest in human spaceflight.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[aphh]

* Oh, didnt notice it mentions the Soyuz-Fregat. Never heard<br />* of that before<br /><br />Ariane V will soon lift a school-bus sized ATV spacecraft that has been built to human spaceflight spesifications. <br /><br />Edit: this is doable, IMO.

 

[space_dreamer]

This would have been cool 10 years ago, now it’s a bit too late, unless the next US president reverses the decision to abandon the ISS in 2016.<br /><br />I personally like to see the UK develop low cost Spaceplanes like envisioned by David Ashford of Bristol Spaceplanes.<br />

 

[aphh]

I think it's still cool idea. The world is only now awakening to the spaceflight again, thanks to China's recent progress and the relative success of ISS. <br /><br />Any initiative to further human spaceflight is a step to the right direction. 3 - 4 years of desing and manufacturing of the module(s) would leave 3 - 4 years to crank out results.<br /><br />3 - 4 years is a lifetime up there with a crew, who's only task is not just the upkeep.

 

[alpha_centauri]

This is a ridiculous idea.<br /><br />I'm all for the UK having a greater role in Human Spaceflight (and spaceflight in general) but this would be a waste of money. The modules would not be up there long by any account and can't really justify half the budget! <br /><br />If the UK wants to get in on the act there's little point being the "johnny come lately" on the ISS. It should start planning for post-ISS spaceflight.

 

[itsfullofstars]

To be honest, as a UK space geek, I don’t care if these proposed modules didn’t give any scientific benefits and I don’t care how long they would be in orbit (Although I do predict that the ISS will live quite a bit longer than it’s forecast de-orbit date). I would just be happy that we were making a contribution!<br /><br />For a long time I have been personally embarrassed by the fact that, out of all of the nations involved in ESA, our nation contributes the least, both in funds and expertise.<br /><br />We used to be world leaders, now we just have rosy cheeks and smell of pipe tobacco.<br /><br />Sorry bit carried away there.<br /><br />I think it is a great idea lets go for it!! Would be great to see some union flags up there.<br />

 

[bobblebob]

Its all well and good us having something up their of our own, but how many will know about it? As you will know living in the UK, i bet the average person doesnt know there even is an ISS as the media dont report it.<br /><br />Im still not sure they would know even if we did manage to have our own modules up there

 

[itsfullofstars]

“Its all well and good us having something up their of our own, but how many will know about it? As you will know living in the UK, i bet the average person doesnt know there even is an ISS as the media dont report it. <br /><br />Im still not sure they would know even if we did manage to have our own modules up thereâ€<br /><br />You are of course, unfortunately, absolutely correct bobblebob, most of the people I know don’t realise there is a permanently manned ISS up there and when I try to talk about it they go all glazed, its quite funny to watch. And when I talk about two little robots driving around on Mars……..<br /><br />But the thing is, its been a very, very long time since the UK did ANYTHING monumental. I think the last thing was Dolly the sheep and look how long that got milked for.<br /><br />If the government makes the decision to back this you can bet it (the government) will do its best to make sure everyone and his/her auntie/uncle knows about it. I’m sure the PM, cant quite recall his name at the moment, will have lots to say about it and will be scrambling to have an on orbit conversation with the first UK astronaut.<br /><br />It’s not just PR though, the knowledge and expertise gained from designing, manufacturing and launching the two habs’ will be priceless and infinitely useful for years to come.<br /><br />I still think it’s a great idea!!<br />

 

[holmec]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>I still think it’s a great idea!! <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />I agree. Britain has an advantage to try to start this at this point in time/history. They can use commercial space companies eager for customers, so they would not have to 'start from scratch' like China has.<br /><br />I think they should consider carefully their goals, if its science they are after then they should outsource the hardware. If its manufacturing their own modules, then it will cost them more. Making this hab module may be a necessary step, but I'm curious what is their long term human space exploration plan.<br /><br />IMO they should go after the science/exploration and become a space customer so to find their niche in the next phase of human space exploration. Historically science and exploration has been a strong point with Britain. Dr. Livingston, Captain Scott and Captain Cook come to mind among Britain's explorers. <br /><br />If Britain wants to really get thing rolling, I suggest they propose a manned trip to an asteroid. They could make the landing (or asteroid docking) module and take the CSTS (provided that is hashed out and built between ESA and Russia's Federal Space Agency) thus leading a mission and be the first humans to a Near Earth Object and pushing the range of where humans have been from Earth.<br /><br />Sure and manned asteroid mission was already suggested to NASA, but it seems to have gone by the way side in NASA. Britain may be able to study NEO's this way and make several trips. IMO asteroid missions are necessary for our planet's/society's well being and someone needs to champion the cause. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[alpha_centauri]

<font color="yellow"> I expect the ISS will be operational long after 2016. </font><br /><br />How? The US is having trouble enough getting Constellation off the ground so I really can't see NASA commitment extending all that long in the face of budgetary constraints. Russia has been grumbling about creating their own space station. ESA has been flying ideas for a post-ISS free-flyer based on the ATV. Tbh i think planning any new modules for the ISS now is a risk, and for such a small space industry as the UK that risk is too high.<br /><br /><br /><br />Besides, where are these modules going to come from? Thin air? The rather small UK space industry has little real experience in this field making me doubt the quoted development costs.<br /><br />As much of a fan of Human Spaceflight as i am, quite honestly i'd prefer an unmanned probe/lander with the same budget over this idea.<br /><br /><br />

 

[nibb31]

What is so wrong about simply joining ESA ? For years the UK have refused to participate in the joint ISS effort, and now they propose to go it alone, starting from scratch 8 years before the end of the program ? It would take that much time to simply build a prototype.<br /><br />Look at the joint effort required to build Columbus, which is a much simpler module, based on a common design. <br /><br />Any new module can't count on the shuttle to be taken up, so it would need it's own propulsion and docking system, like the russian modules, effectively it would be similar to an ATV, and look how long that took.<br /><br />

 

[Zipi]

Why it would need an own propulsion system? It can utilize a device like Parom or Space Systems/Loral space tug... And yes I know that these devices won't exist at the moment, but I would consider this kind of approach the best way to ferry new modules to ISS without using the shuttle. <br /><br />Or maybe they even can use Progress or ATV to dock with the new module and use it as a space tug to ferry the new module to the ISS... When the module is close enough, then just grab it with the robotic arm and undock the tug from it. If the tug is progress or ATV dock it to the ISS and after that dock the new module to the station... What comes to docking ports, if there are "male" and "female" docking ports there is always a possibility to create an adapter between progress/ATV and remove it before attaching the module to the ISS.<br /><br />I don't know how doable this is, but still... I have shared my idea.<br /><br />Afterall, I'm very keen to see UK's additions to be part of ISS. Thumbs up for these plans. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[bobblebob]

"But the thing is, its been a very, very long time since the UK did ANYTHING monumental"<br /><br />I guess the last space related achievement we did was Beagle 2. But that didnt exactly end too well, or get started really. I dont even trust us to build anything reliable anyway. Most of the major structures we build are late and over budget - latest example being Wembley Stadium which although complete many years later and over budget by a long way, has been a farce of a project from start to finish (although the contractors were Australians)

 

[bobblebob]

"You are of course, unfortunately, absolutely correct bobblebob, most of the people I know don’t realise there is a permanently manned ISS up there and when I try to talk about it they go all glazed, its quite funny to watch. And when I talk about two little robots driving around on Mars"<br /><br />I think its a real shame people in the UK dont know about the ISS. Maybe its due to us having little to do with its construction that people dont know about it, but its a shame. I dont care who built it, its still one of the greatest ever achievement by mankind and no one knows or cares. The ISS seems to pass overhead alot in the UK and i always try to spot it, but so many people are totally unaware that this great structure is flying right over their head

 

[aphh]

* The ISS seems to pass overhead alot in the UK and i<br />* always try to spot it, but so many people are totally<br />* unaware that this great structure is flying right over their<br />* head<br /><br />Last time I saw the ISS here in southern Finland I was on a public street near seashore. ISS showed up as expected, a huge ball of light flying on a nice arc.<br /><br />A woman walked past me, so I told her that now is the rare opportunity to see the ISS.<br /><br />"Yeah yeah" the woman said, didn't even raise her eyes and kept walking <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <br /><br />Edit: opportunities to spot ISS here are rare, because you need to be on a seashore as the ISS only rises a maximum of 15 degrees over the horizon. Still a very nice object to spot.

 

[holmec]

britain does participate is ESA<br />BNSC and ESA <br /><br />I think this is an effort for Britain go gain prestige as a nation and bring up their space industry by making a module. Note that several modules were built by the Italians for the US, and Italy participates in ESA. So countries are free to do their own space efforts while ESA is more of a common project effort amoung the members.<br /><br />[addendum]<br /><br />It does look like that Britain did choose not to participate in Columbus though. Perhaps its regretting the missed opportunity. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[BReif]

<font color="yellow">"I expect the ISS will be operational long after 2016."</font><br /><br />I agree with you shuttle_guy. There has been so much invested in this project, and with all of our international parteners just now getting their modules launched. I can see ISS being maintained for quite some time after 2016, though I suspect that ISS being maintained will have a detrimental effect on any subsequent program, like the Lunar program or the Mars program. Who knows, but if ISS is to be decommissioned in 2016, then what is the point. Finish the construction, then abandon it? It doesn't make sense, budget constraints or not. <br /><br />Now as far as the UK launching two of their own modules, I do not see how that will happen given the launch manifest for the shuttle, its 2010 retirement, and the gap between shuttle and CEV that is bound to occur. Even the USA is going to have to fly on Soyuz to get to the ISS for a span of several years, and Soyuz doesn't have the cargo capacity that the shuttle has. The only type of module that will work would be a automated module with its own propulsion system and automatic rendezvous and docking hardware and software.

 

[earth_bound_misfit]

I reckon they've left it a bit late. Unfortunately the horse bolted nearly ten years ago. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p><p>----------------------------------------------------------------- </p><p>Wanna see this site looking like the old SDC uplink?</p><p>Go here to see how: <strong>SDC Eye saver </strong>  </p> </div>

 

[pmn1]

Spaceflight has quite a good article on it from one of the people prosposing it.<br /><br />Here is one of the links to the article<br /><br />http://www.aer.bris.ac.uk/research/hem/hem.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[flynn]

This isn't going to happen, I'm affraid the BIS are in dreamworld on this one.<br /><br />British Politics will not support manned space flight at this time. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#800080">"All God does is watch us and kill us when we get boring. We must never, ever be boring" - <strong>Chuck Palahniuk</strong>.</font> </div>

 

[j05h]

<i>> This isn't going to happen, I'm affraid the BIS are in dreamworld on this one.<br />British Politics will not support manned space flight at this time.</i><br /><br />What if there were a commercial way to build this craft? A company such as BAE would be more than capable of creating the habitable component and integrating it with Soyuz/Fregat. The problem is of course who would pay for it. These modules have enough room to allow long-term visitors and potentially new partners helping pay for the modules. <br /><br />British politics never support human spaceflight, but their industry might.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>