Emergency Spacewalk Planned for Space Station (NASA) (ISS)

[Mbarton]

 

So let me summary whats going on, 

The robotic arm  in charge of grabbing cargo and docking it has gotten stuck 4" inches away from where its supposed to be able to grab the cargo.

“Cause is still being evaluated, but might be a stuck brake handle.” The problem is, is that progress 62 cargo vehicle is going to be arriving soon so they will need to have it fixed by then or --@Mbarton

"NASA and the Russians could face the twin dramas of the Progress countdown proceeding at the same time Kelly and Kopra are preparing to fix the transporter car."

 

But its not the end of the world --@Mbarton

"The ISS crew is in no danger of running out of supplies no matter what. A cargo vehicle did successfully get off the pad and into space on Dec. 6, and the station is always heavily provisioned precisely against the possibility of launch delays. Still, the current problem and the high-wire act that may be necessary to sort it out is one more reminder that even for an orbital outpost that has been continually occupied for 15 years now, space never has—and never will be—easy."

 

So at least there safe from running out of food.

 

Read mote at source:http://time.com/4155132/international-space-station-spacewalk-emergency/

 

(I know this isn't my usual posting way i usually put more quotes and summarize it better but apparently some people don't like when i do that) 

[AresKrieger]

Question does anyone know the specific project goal of the ISS because I don't really see the point of it (I think it might be to study effects of low gravity exposure? maybe), a moonbase would have been more useful imo,

[Interfectorem]

Question does anyone know the specific project goal of the ISS because I don't really see the point of it, a moonbase would have been more useful imo,

"The ISS serves as a microgravity and space environment research laboratory in which crew members conduct experiments in biology, human biology, physics, astronomy, meteorology and other fields."

 

Not to mention that a moon base would've been much resource intensive and cost a lot more to re-supply etc.

[AresKrieger]

"The ISS serves as a microgravity and space environment research laboratory in which crew members conduct experiments in biology, human biology, physics, astronomy, meteorology and other fields."

 

Not to mention that a moon base would've been much resource intensive and cost a lot more to re-supply etc.

Oh I'm aware it is more resource intensive, I think nasa actually plans to ignore the moon due to it highly abrasive dust that cuts through space suits like it's tissue paper, but the ISS needs constant intervention just to avoid crashing into the earth, my point is that maybe we should have at least gave it a stable orbit or some higher functionality (shuttle fuel resupplier idk) but I guess cost was the main factor.

[Mbarton]

Any one else keep reading ISS as ISIS? 

[ManWithBeard1990]

Question does anyone know the specific project goal of the ISS because I don't really see the point of it (I think it might be to study effects of low gravity exposure? maybe), a moonbase would have been more useful imo,

Mostly because no gravity. The idea was originally sold for crystallizing proteins in a zero-gravity environment to examine their structure through X-ray diffraction, but nowadays we have F@H for that. Another and much more useful goal is as a long-term experiment in survival in space, because some problems you can run into in new environments can't be predicted until you run into them. It's useful to have a base closer to home before going to, say, the moon or Mars because, well, if something does go wrong (Not like instant decompression but something less acute) a rescue mission is somewhat feasible. A moon base, you can't really get to to send help unless you have like a spare Saturn V rocket on standby, and even then the flight is measured in days, not minutes.

[AresKrieger]

Any one else keep reading ISS as ISIS? 

Nope those asshats go by a different name in my mind, which I'm not going to say as I like having 0 warning posts

[MrDynamicMan]

In summary- the biological waste hit the the proverbial air locomotive.

[That Norwegian Guy]

Oh look, they're manufacturing fake NASA crises so the US President have to sign CISA into law or else NASA won't have funding to fix it.

[dalekphalm]

Mostly because no gravity. The idea was originally sold for crystallizing proteins in a zero-gravity environment to examine their structure through X-ray diffraction, but nowadays we have F@H for that. Another and much more useful goal is as a long-term experiment in survival in space, because some problems you can run into in new environments can't be predicted until you run into them. It's useful to have a base closer to home before going to, say, the moon or Mars because, well, if something does go wrong (Not like instant decompression but something less acute) a rescue mission is somewhat feasible. A moon base, you can't really get to to send help unless you have like a spare Saturn V rocket on standby, and even then the flight is measured in days, not minutes.

Not to mention that the ISS usually has a Soyuz space capsule on stand-by as an emergency evacuation vehicle.

 

They can literally abandon ship if shit really goes down.

 

Unlike a Moon Base, where if they wanted an evac vehicle, it would have to be a launch vehicle, paired with a full-scale spacecraft in orbit, for them to be able to make it home.

 

While certainly doable, the ISS is a lot safer than any off-planet base would be (Be it Moon, Mars, Asteroid, etc).

[dalekphalm]

Oh look, they're manufacturing fake NASA crises so the US President have to sign CISA into law or else NASA won't have funding to fix it.

uhm... what?

Are you talking about the "Cyber Information Sharing Act" CISA? What does that have to do with NASA funding at all? And why would NASA have anything to do with fixing CISA?

 

Your post is a bit incoherent. Perhaps you can explain what you mean a bit more thoroughly?

[ZetZet]

Question does anyone know the specific project goal of the ISS because I don't really see the point of it (I think it might be to study effects of low gravity exposure? maybe), a moonbase would have been more useful imo,

research

 

Oh I'm aware it is more resource intensive, I think nasa actually plans to ignore the moon due to it highly abrasive dust that cuts through space suits like it's tissue paper, but the ISS needs constant intervention just to avoid crashing into the earth, my point is that maybe we should have at least gave it a stable orbit or some higher functionality (shuttle fuel resupplier idk) but I guess cost was the main factor.

we could put ISS higher up, but that is not efficient for resupply missions. Also it would still need to dodge around stuff so who cares. And I think they want to stay close for good photos.

[ICantThinkOfAnyGoodName]

Oh I'm aware it is more resource intensive, I think nasa actually plans to ignore the moon due to it highly abrasive dust that cuts through space suits like it's tissue paper, but the ISS needs constant intervention just to avoid crashing into the earth, my point is that maybe we should have at least gave it a stable orbit or some higher functionality (shuttle fuel resupplier idk) but I guess cost was the main factor.

If the reason why NASA doesn't have a moon base would be the dust, then the Apollo missions also wouldn't have worked. The reason why no one ever built a moon base is that it's hella more expensive and the crew is screwed if some shit goes wrong.

And putting the ISS into a more stable orbit would mean putting it into a higher orbit(and even then the orbit wouldn't be perfectly stable). While it would indeed lower the costs of maintaining its orbit, it would also increase the cost and complexity of resupply missions and crew exchanges. And it already has plenty of functionality. There have been a metric shit ton of experiments made on it. And using it to resupply fuel to shuttles would be utterly useless, because there is no scenario that I can think of where it would be useful.

[ShardZer0]

uhm... what?

Are you talking about the "Cyber Information Sharing Act" CISA? What does that have to do with NASA funding at all? And why would NASA have anything to do with fixing CISA?

 

Your post is a bit incoherent. Perhaps you can explain what you mean a bit more thoroughly?

 

I think he is referring to the Omnibus spending bill that was passed yesterday that has funding for NASA and CISA in the same bill.

[Swndlr]

Yay
I love this kinda stuff.

[BuckGup]

I think a bigger focus should be on Mars One as it can actually help us or our children as colonizing another planet is something that has to happen

[UnknownEngineer]

uhm... what?

Are you talking about the "Cyber Information Sharing Act" CISA? What does that have to do with NASA funding at all? And why would NASA have anything to do with fixing CISA?

 

Your post is a bit incoherent. Perhaps you can explain what you mean a bit more thoroughly?

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/508078-congress-passes-budget-bill-hidden-inside-was-the-cybersecurity-information-sharing-actupdated

 

All you need to read to know what he is talking about.

[ICantThinkOfAnyGoodName]

I think a bigger focus should be on Mars One as it can actually help us or our children as colonizing another planet is something that has to happen

Mars One is hugely flawed and their plan won`t work. Either the creators are knowingly ripping peole off or they are just stupid.

[dalekphalm]

I think a bigger focus should be on Mars One as it can actually help us or our children as colonizing another planet is something that has to happen

Mars One = biggest scam out there. If you want to support a mission to mars (lol bad movie - okay maybe not outright bad, but not amazing), then support the NASA initiative, or one by the ESA.

 

Mars One is hugely flawed and their plan won`t work. Either the creators are knowingly ripping peole off or they are just stupid.

[Bensemus]

If the reason why NASA doesn't have a moon base would be the dust, then the Apollo missions also wouldn't have worked. The reason why no one ever built a moon base is that it's hella more expensive and the crew is screwed if some shit goes wrong.

The Apollo missions were never never going to be permanent so they could handle the damage caused by the dust. For a permanent base the suites would need to be maintained which would be challenging to do away from Earth. 

[Beskamir]

Question does anyone know the specific project goal of the ISS because I don't really see the point of it (I think it might be to study effects of low gravity exposure? maybe), a moonbase would have been more useful imo,

Having played KSP, it's much easier to have an artificial satellite than a base on a natural satellite. Less stuff to worry about and it's closer.

[That Norwegian Guy]

uhm... what?

Are you talking about the "Cyber Information Sharing Act" CISA? What does that have to do with NASA funding at all? And why would NASA have anything to do with fixing CISA?

 

Your post is a bit incoherent. Perhaps you can explain what you mean a bit more thoroughly?

 

They snuck "new CISA" into the budget bill which includes billions in funding for NASA.

If it's not signed, no NASA money, and govt. shuts down for X amount of time.

[dalekphalm]

They snuck "new CISA" into the budget bill which includes billions in funding for NASA.

If it's not signed, no NASA money, and govt. shuts down for X amount of time.

The previous Canadian Government did the same thing quite frequently, where they snuck really shitty/shady/anti-democratic stuff through in budget "omni-bus" bills.

[Agent181]

well being an aerospace engineering student this happens and well there are always protocols that happen that are in place, otherwise rip

 

also if this does become an issue all we need is soyuz lv and send extra cargo and help if its needed 

[Gr0egercesg]

Are there livestreams of this stuff, and where's the best place to find them usually?