:: snort ::
No, it's not "insignificant."
Posted on 08/30/2011 7:47:13 PM PDT by Nachum
WASHINGTON — The risk of an unprecedented evacuation of the International Space Station will spike if Russian craft cannot resume their missions and return by November, a senior NASA official has warned.
"There is a greater risk of losing the ISS when it's unmanned than if it were manned," Michael Suffredini, the ISS program manager for the US space agency, said in a conference call with Russian officials.
"The risk increase is not insignificant," he added.
Russia on Monday delayed its next manned mission to the ISS by at least a month after an unmanned cargo vessel crashed into Siberia instead of reaching orbit on August 24. The head of Russia's manned spaceflight programme also warned that a significantly longer delay would force the six people on board the station to abandon the orbiter due to fatigue and supply problems.
The station crew normally consists of six -- currently three Russians, two Americans and one Japanese -- working six-month rotations.
Staff safety and the "very big investment" that the Russian and US governments have made in the ISS would guide future decisions, Suffredini said during the call on Monday.
"We prefer not to operate in that condition without crew on board for an extended period of time just to make sure we end up in that situation.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
The list, ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
Just great. Not only dump the shuttle but cancel its replacement and pay the Russians to get us there.
That worked out great.
I know it cost alot but is it really worth anything?
Hopey Changey.
First it was the F-22.
Then the Shuttle. Now the space station.
does the science justify that enormous cost? Maybe those billions would be better spent on researching cure for cancer or something
If they lose that station after the billions upon billions and blood sweat and tears to get it there - they are in deep, deep kimchie.
:: snort ::
No, it's not "insignificant."
They just said they could keep it going indefinitely without crew on board, now they say they may very well lose it without anybody on board? Is anybody able to make up their minds?
Man, it’s too bad we don’t have some sort of reusable spacecraft that could make regular trips to service the ISS. It could be made like a plane, and we’d launch it like a rocket and let it glide back to Earth. A “Space Plane” or, even better a “Space Shuttle”!! Wouldn’t that be cool! (Sarcasm is dripping, no tag required ;-)
Oh yeah, who's fault is that?
“Screw those commie bastards, and screw their wussy little space station.”
The shuttle program turned out to be nothing more than a very dangerous and extremely expensive and inefficient way to launch satellites. And the ISS? Totally useless to science and space exploration.
Great signature...
Would somebody pleas tell me what the ISS is good for?
Has its existence produced any worthwhile scientific knowledge?
Is there anything that has been discovered as a result of the ISS?
Can its continued existence be justified?.........
What do you think they're doing up there? Getting a tan?
See post #15.
Well, that's actually some good news for this fiasco. NASA is in no shape to boost anything, and certainly not Islamic esteem :-)
Hmmm....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.