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

181–190 of 330 posts

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

#181

Post by deepsun »

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…

Make it robotic only. Stop/dump all life support, but leave manipulators/robots like Canadarm, and accept robotic add-ons and commercial sub-satellites.

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

#182

Post by lanstin »

chaboud wrote: post #167
coryrc wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Steel, below a certain loading (err, ~20% of max fatigue?) does have indefinite life.

Climbers and riggers should all be familiar with fatigue limits. It can be as high as 50% max tensile strength for steel, but I use 30% as my working figure when rigging, and I regularly re-inspect and age-retire gear (at least use annualized color coded markings). When I’ve rigged circus in the past I’ve taken to replacing aluminum gear I find with steel, especially if it’s going to be installed for a while. That sa…

I had an aluminum bicycle where the front fork failed suddenly. Not instantly but in maybe one or two seconds (just slowly enough to let me not have a terrible fall). My next bike was chrome/steel.

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

#183

Post by waheoo »

lmilcin wrote: post #125
waheoo wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "gotcha" game is tedious I agree but you can say the same thing in reverse. This is a public forums, you don't need to claim something isn't right because it doesn't fit the technical description.

Just stop this already. The post said "is this materials decomposing or degrading". While I may have not been precise about "degrading" part, we can assume the metal is definitely not "decomposing".

Ah I think my reply went to the wrong person. Edit: Nope just under your comment is all.

My remark is at the person claiming tit for tat about the tat instead of the tit.

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

#184

Post by grey-area »

JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #176
lsllc wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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've been watching a lot of documentaries about Mars and the more I learn the more it seems so incredibly daunting and overwhelming. The atmosphere isn't even thick enough to slow down properly from the massive speed you need to get there at a time scale that works. How do you land large colonization facilities, landers, etc. in an atmosphere that is 1% as dense as Earth's? How do you then have enough fuel to leave?…

How do you land large colonization facilities, landers, etc. in an atmosphere that is 1% as dense as Earth's?

With supersonic retro propulsion on a rocket that can be reused.

How do you then have enough fuel to leave?

You don’t, so you need to make the fuel with robots landed on one-way missions first. Luckily there are plenty of raw materials on Mars (in the atmosphere, soil and water deposits).

It’s very hard but it’s certainly doable if you can do the first part.

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

#185

Post by hindsightbias »

spike021 wrote: post #32

Not a big space person, but this makes me wonder: why have we not planned for a new ISS? We must have better tech nowadays from all the working countries/groups currently involved, plus SpaceX and other space companies' backing that would not have existed as it does now back when this ISS was first designed/created.

NASA had no vehicle for launching a replacement. It didn’t even have a domestic vehicle for launching astronauts for 9 years. SLS ate up any funds that were left.

Private industry doesn’t need a station.

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

#186

Post by walrus01 »

As a person that's previously owned a Zodiac-type boat, I really wonder what an ISS patch kit looks like.

What sort of adhesives, covering materials, chemicals and application stuff do they have on hand for quick "we need to stop air escaping through this hole NOW" type situations?

Obviously the problem is sort of reversed, if you have a leaky zodiac you're patching it from the outside and trying to stop air escaping into the atmosphere. If you have a leaky ISS module you're inside it, and applying some sort of quick-setting malleable chemical goop into a hole that's sucking your air outwards...

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

#187

Post by iguy »

khuey wrote: post #151
WalterBright wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Government spending "creating jobs" is a lot like a business plan where you pay people to buy your products, or a car that makes its own fuel.

I'm not saying it's a good goal but it is clearly the goal.

While I am horrified by the sums of money, I think there's a slightly less cynical take than the congressional districts one.

If you want to have an industry of people who make X, then there need to be people employed making X, every year, for decades. And at more than one company, so that it isn't too fragile a career path. When X is single-use rockets there is the advantage that after one flight you have to re-build, whereas when X is tanks (or other long-lasting hardware) you have to choose to throw the old ones away.

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

#188

Post by NewLogic »

WalterBright wrote: post #173
lordlic wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not too expensive for governments to do it, and it doesn't have to be private enterprise. Neither of those things are true. Nor is it even clear that it would be cheaper to contract with some private provider to boost the ISS than for the space agencies to figure it out themselves with the launch vehicles they have. How do you think NASA, ESA, etc build rockets anyway? They contract with Lockheed, Boeing, Airbus…

Government contracting is not at all indicative of how the free market works. Also, the free market would never have built a design like the space shuttle. Pushing very heavy wings and landing gear into space doesn't make sense and never did.

It was actually the side-mount design that made the least sense. It left the heatshield completely exposed to ice and insulation strikes.

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

#189

Post by snomad »

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.

Seems we have dialed back manned missions, but the rovers on Mars, the satellites orbiting Jupiter (Juno) and Cassini, reaching Pluto (New Horizons), and asteroids (Hayabusa) and soon to be James Webb Telescope are all very exciting and represent significant progress.

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

#190

Post by simonh »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #172
godelski wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's still a lot of defense reasons to go to the moon. You can put much larger telescopes there, though you're back to windows of time you can look at a location but you can have good will and dedicate time to scientists. Though they might not want to reveal the resolution even though this can be roughly back tracked through size. There's also the weapons incentive even though that's illegal. But if you're able to…

> the resources to cheaply put large rods of tungsten in orbit And then it takes a big rocket to get them back out of orbit. Such a waste of effort.

There have been studies and the rods from the gods concept doesn’t work. Atmospheric braking would slow them to their terminal velocity before impact. You might as well throw them out of a plane. There are also all kinds of problems with time to target, terminal guidance and cross range capability.
Post reply on HN