RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,165
Posts: 5,434,953
Members: 24,937
Currently online: 495
Newest member: bryanb2014

TrekToday headlines

Two Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Oct 22

Pine In New Skit
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

Stewart In Holiday Film
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

The Red Shirt Diaries #8
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

IDW Publishing January Comics
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Yelchin In New Indie Thriller
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Saldana In The Book of Life
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science and Technology

Science and Technology "Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." - Carl Sagan.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 30 2011, 12:20 PM   #31
Ensign_Redshirt
Commodore
 
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

YellowSubmarine wrote: View Post
Dukhat wrote: View Post
Mark_Nguyen wrote: View Post
...And be half as proud, to be sure.
Seeing the ISS does not make me proud. Seeing photographs of alien objects in the solar system, galaxy and universe makes me proud.
The fact that people have found a way to live for long periods of time in a place where no living thing can survive doesn't make you proud? I look back at the times where a harsh winter was enough to make you worry for survival, and then I look at the station, and hell yeah, I am proud.

Constant human presence in such inhospitable and deadly environment is amazing, and the experience gained there helps us to do the next step.

Photographs of alien objects done by robots would do little to bring you close to a self-sustaining off-world colony. Not that the station has done a lot, but it has done something.
I think the ISS is also the largest man-made object ever to orbit the Earth (and certainly the largest object to be constructed in Earth orbit so far). Definitely a mile-stone in engineering. Which results in valuable experience if we ever going to build further or even larger space stations in the future.

(In a way, the Chinese plans are a step backwards because they're not planning anything which had already been achieved by the Soviet Union and the United States with Salyut/Skylab during the 70s.)

Last edited by Ensign_Redshirt; July 30 2011 at 12:38 PM.
Ensign_Redshirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2011, 12:34 PM   #32
Ensign_Redshirt
Commodore
 
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

Saquist wrote: View Post
It is. The project just became a waste of tax payer dollars if the station doesn't accomplish it's goal. To have to construct another one to properly and effectively set up bases on the moon and Mars is exactly the kind of pork-barrel spending that was mentioned that killed NASA in the first place.
It isn't the goal of the ISS to set up bases on Moon or Mars. Its goal is to conduct scientific experiments in an microgravity environment (which admittedly sounds far less sexy, but that's how it is).

Politically, the ISS had also the purpose of tying the Russian space program to the American one after the end of the Cold war.
Ensign_Redshirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2011, 02:00 PM   #33
Saquist
Commodore
 
Location: Starbase Houston
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

Ensign_Redshirt wrote: View Post
Saquist wrote: View Post
It is. The project just became a waste of tax payer dollars if the station doesn't accomplish it's goal. To have to construct another one to properly and effectively set up bases on the moon and Mars is exactly the kind of pork-barrel spending that was mentioned that killed NASA in the first place.
It isn't the goal of the ISS to set up bases on Moon or Mars. Its goal is to conduct scientific experiments in an microgravity environment (which admittedly sounds far less sexy, but that's how it is).

Politically, the ISS had also the purpose of tying the Russian space program to the American one after the end of the Cold war.
Lets not pretend Mars wasn't on the table.

http://www.exploremars.org/issmars-1-press-release/

http://news.discovery.com/space/mars...on-110421.html

http://www.friends-partners.org/part...t/spaedock.htm



But before then, the multinational partnership overseeing how the ISS will be used discussed plans for missions that could extend beyond low earth orbit, with an eye toward Mars, the Moon, or to an asteroid.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2389241,00.asp

That's not the first time either. My books dated 1990 that depict the full version of the ISS or Freedom and the Space Dock frame the Station as a crucial component for Mars transit and return for a low consumption voyage significantly cutting cost for the Mars and Moon Projects. I never said anything more than this..

The misconception is that I made some sort of statement on the ISS's Mission. Reiterating: prejudices against negative comments about NASA and the legitimacy of it's projects are usually not well received. But I give you credit for going further than Maxwell did not deriding what you didn't understand. That's how conversation works.

Last edited by Saquist; July 30 2011 at 02:17 PM.
Saquist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2011, 07:05 PM   #34
sojourner
Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

^The ISS as built was never intended to help "setup bases on the moon or mars".

Your first link is by a private organization with no say in the ISS.

Your second link refers to simulating the effects on the astronauts of a journey to mars - physiologically.

Your third link is from 1988 of a concept that was never built.

My books date back to the Apollo program and none of them depict the ISS as built to be a crucial component for a Mars or moon mission.
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2011, 11:40 PM   #35
Saquist
Commodore
 
Location: Starbase Houston
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

sojourner wrote: View Post
^The ISS as built was never intended to help "setup bases on the moon or mars".

Your first link is by a private organization with no say in the ISS.
Didn't say it had to be official.

Your second link refers to simulating the effects on the astronauts of a journey to mars - physiologically.
That's not the point on this one. This is dated Apr of this year. They haven't done this yet and their mind set is that Station could help with the this research aswell.

Your third link is from 1988 of a concept that was never built.
Aside from being obvious it doesn't contradict the intent for which I posted. NASA (among others) was the primary consultant for the entire series. And this sort of derails your objections because if all the station was meant to do is provide as a research platform and not be the gateway to solar system and beyond then then it really is step down from what NASA accomplished in the 70's. A joke in other words. Billions of dollar just to do research that could have been done by a space shuttle.

Regardless of the technologies and methods learned (which are few) this is the epitome of "pork barrel spending". And I sense you guys don't know what that is. Pork barrel is a derogatory term referring to appropriation of government spending for localized projects secured solely or primarily to bring money to a representative's district.

Connect the dots.
1.Canceled X-Planes: X-30, X-33-, X-34,X-37, X-38, X-40, X-43, Delta Clipper

2. 2 Shuttle Disasters

3. Cancellation of the Shuttle program without a replacement.

4. In 2002, the aerospace industry accounted for $95 billion of economic activity in the United States, including $23.5 billion in employee earnings dispersed among some 576,000 employees

5. 790 Billion dollars of expenditure over 50 years and one miles stone of manned exploration.

It seems NASA is strictly a Conservative National Employment effort. That gets little done with an excessive amount of money (whether or not its their fault or the administration)

My books date back to the Apollo program and none of them depict the ISS as built to be a crucial component for a Mars or moon mission.
...and that invalidates NASA's concept drawings that are more updated? Your point is vague, please explain the significance of your opposition to NASA's own perceptions.
Saquist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2011, 04:22 AM   #36
throwback
Captain
 
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

If our country continues along its projected trajectory into a debt-laden, despotic backwater, a Burkina Faso with cable (Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone Magazine), I think the ISS will be seen as the last great construction project of our country by future historians.

In my home state of California, the eastern span of the Bay Bridge, damaged by the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, is being replaced. This replacement span was built in China, shipped on a freighter ship, and, like a Lego set, assembled here. If we can't even build a portion of a bridge, how are we going to build a space fleet, let alone a space station? And if we continue to alienate our friends with our idiocy, and our currency does become crap, who will want to enter into a partnership with us?
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2011, 04:54 AM   #37
sojourner
Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

Saquist wrote: View Post
sojourner wrote: View Post
^The ISS as built was never intended to help "setup bases on the moon or mars".

Your first link is by a private organization with no say in the ISS.
Didn't say it had to be official.
It does in the context of your argument that the ISS was intended to be used as a stepping stone and crucial part of a mars mission.

Your second link refers to simulating the effects on the astronauts of a journey to mars - physiologically.
That's not the point on this one. This is dated Apr of this year. They haven't done this yet and their mind set is that Station could help with the this research aswell.
So, then it is contributing to mars research? that goes against your argument then.

Your third link is from 1988 of a concept that was never built.
Aside from being obvious it doesn't contradict the intent for which I posted. NASA (among others) was the primary consultant for the entire series. And this sort of derails your objections because if all the station was meant to do is provide as a research platform and not be the gateway to solar system and beyond then then it really is step down from what NASA accomplished in the 70's. A joke in other words. Billions of dollar just to do research that could have been done by a space shuttle.
So, your changing your argument from the ISS not living up to it's role "as a crucial step in a mars mission" to "NASA is a joke"? Fine, we can change subjects if you like.
Regardless of the technologies and methods learned (which are few) this is the epitome of "pork barrel spending". And I sense you guys don't know what that is. Pork barrel is a derogatory term referring to appropriation of government spending for localized projects secured solely or primarily to bring money to a representative's district.
Soryy, me am stupid. not know what prok barrel mean.

Saquist, don't be insulting. You're not the only person that has read a newspaper.

Note, the following "dots" follow the "NASA is a joke" argument and share no context with th ISS's mission
Connect the dots.
1.Canceled X-Planes: X-30, X-33-, X-34,X-37, X-38, X-40, X-43, Delta Clipper

2. 2 Shuttle Disasters

3. Cancellation of the Shuttle program without a replacement.

4. In 2002, the aerospace industry accounted for $95 billion of economic activity in the United States, including $23.5 billion in employee earnings dispersed among some 576,000 employees
The above "dot" relates to the entire aerospace industry and is not indicative of NASA spending.

5. 790 Billion dollars of expenditure over 50 years and one miles stone of manned exploration.
Only one?? Really? You have a poor memory.

It seems NASA is strictly a Conservative National Employment effort. That gets little done with an excessive amount of money (whether or not its their fault or the administration)

My books date back to the Apollo program and none of them depict the ISS as built to be a crucial component for a Mars or moon mission.
...and that invalidates NASA's concept drawings that are more updated? Your point is vague, please explain the significance of your opposition to NASA's own perceptions.
The significance in this case refers to the depth of knowledge on the subject. My collection starts in the 70's and has continued to grow.
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2011, 11:58 AM   #38
Saquist
Commodore
 
Location: Starbase Houston
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

sojourner wrote: View Post
It does in the context of your argument that the ISS was intended to be used as a stepping stone and crucial part of a mars mission.
The intent was already proven through NASA's projections of future ventures.

So, then it is contributing to mars research? that goes against your argument then.
No it's in favor of your argument that research apparently worthy of loose spending practices. But it does confirm that this has not happened yet and EVEN THIS GOAL for Mars research hasn't occurred and was INTENDED. GOAL not achieved.

So, your changing your argument from the ISS not living up to it's role "as a crucial step in a mars mission" to "NASA is a joke"? Fine, we can change subjects if you like.Soryy, me am stupid. not know what prok barrel mean.
The arguement has always been the same.
NASA is not getting the job done.

Saquist, don't be insulting. You're not the only person that has read a newspaper.
That was not my intent. I was merely setting the definition for the sake of accuracy as is my practice.

Note, the following "dots" follow the "NASA is a joke" argument and share no context with th ISS's missionThe above "dot" relates to the entire aerospace industry and is not indicative of NASA spending.Only one?? Really? You have a poor memory.
Reitteration: The Argument (or more properly: The CLAIM is that NASA represents a meandering, financially, superflous organization that has done little or nothing at excessive cost for the last 40 years.

The ISS Mission:

As a product of NASA's excess spending the de-orbiting of the station would represent a massive loss to tax payers. It's has been and will be thoroughly criticized for it's high cost in assembly and maintenance and then of course having to eventually build another later.

4th "DOT" as it were:

NASA has shared joint research on all of these projects. The aerospace firms shared a partnership in the research in order to shoulder the financial burden. NONE of those projects to progress space travel or stream line space travel have come to practical application in 40 years. One miles stone... Scrutiny is inevitable.

The significance in this case refers to the depth of knowledge on the subject. My collection starts in the 70's and has continued to grow.
Congratulations?
Saquist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2011, 02:18 PM   #39
Deckerd
Fleet Arse
 
Deckerd's Avatar
 
Location: the Frozen Wastes
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

These are opinions, not facts. You need to be honest about that.
__________________
They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance.
Deckerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2011, 02:34 PM   #40
YellowSubmarine
Rear Admiral
 
YellowSubmarine's Avatar
 
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

Whether the station has been a massive waste of money or not, using that to find a fault in de-orbiting it would be a sunk cost fallacy.

Even if the mission didn't fulfil its stated goals, its intended goals, somebody's fantasy goals, even if we did not take advantage of its inherent utilities, that doesn't mean that the mission hasn't been worthwhile, doing wonders for human experience in space and showing what a human is capable of doing. You don't have to do everything you intend, everything you can and everything you want to say something has been worth it.

We can do more with less, and NASA isn't the most effective thing out here, but you can also do less with less, and I somehow prefer to do more with more.
YellowSubmarine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2011, 04:58 PM   #41
Ensign_Redshirt
Commodore
 
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

Some thoughts regarding space stations and manned missions to Moon and Mars:

While early concepts had seen the primary purpose for space stations to serve as a gateway to the Moon and other planets, this has never actually materialized in practice. No space station ever built (Skylab, Salyut 1 through 7, Mir, ISS) had a interplanetary gateway function. They were space laboratories in low earth orbit.

On the other hand, the Apollo moon landings were achieved without having any space station to serve as a "gateway". A manned Mars mission could (and probably will) be conducted without any direct involvement of a space station too. So the presumed connection between space stations and manned missions beyond LEO by von Braun and the likes simply didn't hold water in reality.

That being said, there are two possible applications of ISS program experience for future "deep space" missions. First of all, a manned Mars ship will probably be put together in Earth orbit and "launched" from there. Through building the ISS we know how something like this is done exactly. Second, the ISS helps in gaining experience with long-term space habitation and what effects it has on the human body and mind (although Mir had already served in that function as well).
Ensign_Redshirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2011, 05:09 PM   #42
Ensign_Redshirt
Commodore
 
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

Saquist wrote: View Post
Billions of dollar just to do research that could have been done by a space shuttle.
Space Shuttle missions are limited to two weeks. Scientific experiments on the ISS can be conducted for months or even indefinitely. You can't really do anything long-term with the Shuttle. Not to mention that it had only one laboratory module (Spacelab) and the ISS has several.
Ensign_Redshirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2011, 05:15 PM   #43
YellowSubmarine
Rear Admiral
 
YellowSubmarine's Avatar
 
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

I don't see how this gateway to Mars or the Moon could be useful. In the current situation, this will always increase the price. A space dock could only be useful in two cases:
1. If you're building a big spacecraft which can't be lifted in one piece.
2. You're launching to and from that space dock multiple times, without going back to the Earth.
3. You're building in space from materials taken from asteroids.

Arguably, you can build the bigger spacecraft without help from the station – a station as we can build it now doesn't provide that much help, and nobody is launching interplanetary spaceships on regular basis.

What am I missing?
YellowSubmarine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2011, 07:37 PM   #44
sojourner
Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

Saquist wrote: View Post
sojourner wrote: View Post
It does in the context of your argument that the ISS was intended to be used as a stepping stone and crucial part of a mars mission.
The intent was already proven through NASA's projections of future ventures.
Then post a link to that. not some third party's dream of what the ISS should be used for.

So, then it is contributing to mars research? that goes against your argument then.
No it's in favor of your argument that research apparently worthy of loose spending practices. But it does confirm that this has not happened yet and EVEN THIS GOAL for Mars research hasn't occurred and was INTENDED. GOAL not achieved.

The arguement has always been the same.
NASA is not getting the job done.
Yeah, I think if I remember, we were going on this comment:
It is. The project just became a waste of tax payer dollars if the station doesn't accomplish it's goal. To have to construct another one to properly and effectively set up bases on the moon and Mars is exactly the kind of pork-barrel spending that was mentioned that killed NASA in the first place.
And the goal in that second link hasn't happened yet. You're right. But then again, it was just a proposal. Not INTENDED. GOAL not achieve because, derrrr, GOAL NOT ASSIGNED. Yep, I can capitalize words too.

That was not my intent. I was merely setting the definition for the sake of accuracy as is my practice.

Note, the following "dots" follow the "NASA is a joke" argument and share no context with th ISS's missionThe above "dot" relates to the entire aerospace industry and is not indicative of NASA spending.Only one?? Really? You have a poor memory.
Reitteration: The Argument (or more properly: The CLAIM is that NASA represents a meandering, financially, superflous organization that has done little or nothing at excessive cost for the last 40 years.

The ISS Mission:

As a product of NASA's excess spending the de-orbiting of the station would represent a massive loss to tax payers. It's has been and will be thoroughly criticized for it's high cost in assembly and maintenance and then of course having to eventually build another later.
NASA is not the sole owner of the station and does not make the decisions on the future of the station on it's own.

4th "DOT" as it were:

NASA has shared joint research on all of these projects. The aerospace firms shared a partnership in the research in order to shoulder the financial burden. NONE of those projects to progress space travel or stream line space travel have come to practical application in 40 years. One miles stone... Scrutiny is inevitable.
Name "these projects" that #4 is referring to for cost figures. Because as stated you are insinuating that NASA has it's finger in every dollar spent in aerospace. ooo! Sounds like a conspiracy!
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 1 2011, 01:24 PM   #45
Saquist
Commodore
 
Location: Starbase Houston
Re: International Space Station to be decommissioned in 2020?

Ensign_Redshirt wrote: View Post
Some thoughts regarding space stations and manned missions to Moon and Mars:

While early concepts had seen the primary purpose for space stations to serve as a gateway to the Moon and other planets, this has never actually materialized in practice. No space station ever built (Skylab, Salyut 1 through 7, Mir, ISS) had a interplanetary gateway function. They were space laboratories in low earth orbit.

On the other hand, the Apollo moon landings were achieved without having any space station to serve as a "gateway". A manned Mars mission could (and probably will) be conducted without any direct involvement of a space station too. So the presumed connection between space stations and manned missions beyond LEO by von Braun and the likes simply didn't hold water in reality.

That being said, there are two possible applications of ISS program experience for future "deep space" missions. First of all, a manned Mars ship will probably be put together in Earth orbit and "launched" from there. Through building the ISS we know how something like this is done exactly. Second, the ISS helps in gaining experience with long-term space habitation and what effects it has on the human body and mind (although Mir had already served in that function as well).
Experience is always great but it's not effectively cost productive to gain it at this sort of budget and then throw it away. That's ludicrous. I will always have a problem with throwing away money like this to the space program to get squat done when there are veterans not getting proper treatment, schools closing and infrastructure crumbling across the nation. Zero progress is never going to justify such neglect.

Ensign_Redshirt wrote: View Post

Space Shuttle missions are limited to two weeks. Scientific experiments on the ISS can be conducted for months or even indefinitely. You can't really do anything long-term with the Shuttle. Not to mention that it had only one laboratory module (Spacelab) and the ISS has several.
The shuttle could easily be augmented to the task.
Very few of the stations research was so long term (from what I understand)

sojourner wrote: View Post

The intent was already proven through NASA's projections of future ventures.
Then post a link to that. not some third party's dream of what the ISS should be used for.

Sorry. Not everything is on the web. The Book is named (I believe) Outbound.
Those images came from NASA artist and engineer ideas of what the station would be WHICH is why they are so similar to what the station is now.

Yeah, I think if I remember, we were going on this comment: And the goal in that second link hasn't happened yet. You're right. But then again, it was just a proposal. Not INTENDED. GOAL not achieve because, derrrr, GOAL NOT ASSIGNED. Yep, I can capitalize words too.
You don't get it, do you.
You're arguing semantics. You're trying to win a debate. If that's what you want, then I'll hand you the victory ...right now. You win. But untill you understand...that de orbiting that station after all the cost, man power, know how and time just to have to build another one later on...for the Mars Lunar missions is a colosal waste and in terms of progressing man space travel ...that's failure. Nothing accomplished.

Did they learn something from the effort? Of course
Was the research beneficial, Maybe.
Was it practical: No


NASA is not the sole owner of the station and does not make the decisions on the future of the station on it's own.
...aye que malo (WHOOOSH)
Name "these projects" that #4 is referring to for cost figures. Because as stated you are insinuating that NASA has it's finger in every dollar spent in aerospace. ooo! Sounds like a conspiracy!
Conspiracy? No.
Stupidity? Yes.
I listed those projects above. The one that disturbed me most was the Delta Clipper/X-33 competition that was going on. It seemed so ridiculous...I really have no words for what I've read on this subject.
Saquist is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
iss, space station, spaceflight

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:03 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.