Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

One hull crack located in ISS, another one suspected

tass.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 330 posts

Re: One hull crack located in ISS, another one suspected

#311

Post by sgtnoodle »

jldugger wrote: post #294
sgtnoodle wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since there's virtually no drag between the planets, the distance doesn't linearly determine the amount of fuel. What matters is velocity changes. It's about 10km/s to get into orbit, and 5km/s or so to transit to Mars. Coming back is a lot easier because Mars has less gravity and atmosphere, and you don't need to bring as much stuff back. So maybe let's call it 20km/s total? Fuel has mass, so it takes fuel to bring…

.... Did you factor in the fuel you need to actually stop? I'd prefer not to be the next martian crater.

I assumed aero-braking and parachutes would work out.

Re: One hull crack located in ISS, another one suspected

#312

Post by WalterBright »

sudosysgen wrote: post #309
WalterBright wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US free economy produced a better military and plenty of high quality consumer goods.

While that is true, the USSR produced a better military and more, higher quality consumer goods than most nations of it's size. That said, it is certain that the soviet system was suboptimal in a great many ways. But, crucially to the fact at hands, 1960s' USSR produced better rockets to send people to the ISS, at a lower cost, than 2021's USA, so there something beyond the free market in this particular case.

Government contracting is not indicative of a free market.

Re: One hull crack located in ISS, another one suspected

#313

Post by WalterBright »

jccooper wrote: post #304
WalterBright wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Space craft are run at much less than 1 atm.

The ISS and all spacecraft that dock with it run at 1 atm. Which is nearly all currently flying spacecraft. (And probably Shenzhou does too, since it's basically a Soyuz.)

I'm surprised. I read somewhere that Apollo etc. were at fractions of an atm.

Re: One hull crack located in ISS, another one suspected

#314

Post by exporectomy »

nine_k wrote: post #303
HenryKissinger wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have we invented a material that is resistant to these thermal cycles indefinitely, or at least within a range of temperatures of several thousand degrees? I'm never going to have my own Star Destroyer if we continue to use subpar materials.

I would suggest a thin, non-load-bearing, and easy to replace insulation / reflection layer above the pressurized hull. It could reflect much of solar energy back to space, and much of the hull's radiation back to the hull, keeping the difference of temperatures on the hull much lower. I wonder if it's already implemented.

Yes, it already uses a reflective blanket. https://www.scienceabc.com/nature/universe/is-it-hot-or-cold...

Re: One hull crack located in ISS, another one suspected

#315

Post by geoduck14 »

MisterTea wrote: post #62
ChuckMcM wrote: post #2

Materials aging in space is a pretty deep subject. That it is the Russian Zvevda module that is leaking/cracking is likely related to the fact that it is also the oldest module in the ISS. The ISS is/was scheduled to be retired in 2024 (aka 3 years from now) but there are calls to keep it going. My fantasy would be to have SpaceX move it into the Lunar L1 Lagrange point which would keep it in use but it would have to…

> Parking it in L4 or L5 could keep it for future generations but it would be even more of a challenge to go visit. "If your planet has one or more broken down space stations on its lawn, you might be a redneck colony." (Sorry.)

If your space station leaks more than your grandpa, you might be a redneck.

Re: One hull crack located in ISS, another one suspected

#316

Post by exporectomy »

lsllc wrote: post #42
ChuckMcM wrote: post #2

Materials aging in space is a pretty deep subject. That it is the Russian Zvevda module that is leaking/cracking is likely related to the fact that it is also the oldest module in the ISS. The ISS is/was scheduled to be retired in 2024 (aka 3 years from now) but there are calls to keep it going. My fantasy would be to have SpaceX move it into the Lunar L1 Lagrange point which would keep it in use but it would have to…

I think we need a "Space New Deal", I'm honestly saddened by the lack of progress in space in my lifetime. I mean we've done some great work, but we haven't made any giant leaps since getting to the moon 51.5 years ago. Thankfully, we do have SpaceX et. al. who really are making some big strides -- but how do we multiply & speed up that effort? ... sorry, I'm being selfish, but I really want to go to Mars.

I don't share your gloomy view. The annual rate of orbital space launches has been steadily climbing since 2000 and is now double what it was then. It's still slightly below the peak of the 1960s-70s but I'm pretty optimistic based on the clear trend.

http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/logyear.html

Men on the moon was just a gimmick. I'm pretty excited by all the stuff we keep sending to Mars. There's another rover landing there in just a few weeks' time.

It's not just NASA and SpaceX. We've recently seen Israel go to the Moon, Europe and India go to Mars, Japan return samples from an asteroid, and China return samples from the Moon. Who knows what one of them will do next. The only value I see in having people on the Moon or Mars is in working towards a permanent colony that could eventually become self-sufficient. Anything less and what's the point? We have robots to do almost all the stuff humans used to be needed for.

Re: One hull crack located in ISS, another one suspected

#317

Post by geoduck14 »

Sargos wrote: post #139
ipnon wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine it's from a popular science fiction novel.

It's just Jeff Foxworthy

If you have a house that's mobile, and 3 cars that aren't... you might be a redneck.

If you mow the lawn, and find a buick (a car)... you might be a red neck.

If your TV sits on top of your old TV... you might be a redneck.

Re: One hull crack located in ISS, another one suspected

#318

Post by geoduck14 »

MisterTea wrote: post #62
ChuckMcM wrote: post #2

Materials aging in space is a pretty deep subject. That it is the Russian Zvevda module that is leaking/cracking is likely related to the fact that it is also the oldest module in the ISS. The ISS is/was scheduled to be retired in 2024 (aka 3 years from now) but there are calls to keep it going. My fantasy would be to have SpaceX move it into the Lunar L1 Lagrange point which would keep it in use but it would have to…

> Parking it in L4 or L5 could keep it for future generations but it would be even more of a challenge to go visit. "If your planet has one or more broken down space stations on its lawn, you might be a redneck colony." (Sorry.)

If you clear out your abandoned satellites and find a space station... you might be a redneck.

Re: One hull crack located in ISS, another one suspected

#319

Post by edgyquant »

WalterBright wrote: post #298
edgyquant wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes what you present is anecdotal evidence. Also nobody is saying they like the Soviet Union that is an idiotic strawman. My point is that they could be made but the USSR wasn’t gearing its economy towards consumer goods because it was a military state who cared almost entirely about heavy industry to benefit its military industrial complex and competition with the US.

The US free economy produced a better military and plenty of high quality consumer goods.

I’m not arguing the US isn’t a better system. I’m saying had the USSR decided to allocate its resources towards consumer goods, it’s ridiculous to think they couldn’t have had a large industry.

Re: One hull crack located in ISS, another one suspected

#320

Post by Beldin »

Blikkentrekker wrote: post #272
seabrookmx wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> could have easily given mankind nuclear fusion There's no proof of this because viable nuclear fusion has not yet been achieved. Humanity may never achieve this for all we know (though I sincerely hope we do).

The same can be said about any research whereto resources are allocated. Making a reasonable estimate when both started, nuclear fusion seems to be a smarter investment, for if it finally be there, the benefits are incalculable.

We have nuclear fusion, both from the sun and here on Earth (ITER, NIF, H-bombs). The main problems with human-started nuclear fusion are that (so far, iirc) it consumes more energy than it produces, and we cannot sustain it for a long time.

"The benefits" are currently very calculable, and direct economics of nuclear fusion is very negative. (The research benefit is unique though.)

For nuclear fusion to be of incalculable benefit to mankind, we need insanely small nuclear fusion that is energy-positive and sustainable in a simple way. "Insanely small" means smaller than Moon-sized, when we know that Jupiter-sized is too small/light in nature.

Sustained nuclear fusion for energy generation still faces daunting challenges.

Post reply on HN