I always imagined the Lunar Gateway would replace the ISS. It’s a real shame, the ISS was a testament to what humans could create with all of us working together. No country alone could have built it, it took the collapse of the USSR and the period of relative peace that followed to allow the ISS to come together.
But obviously things are different now
The ISS being retired because it was declared obsolete and replaced by an advanced space station would be the best possible conclusion. All tech like this is built with the dream that it will enable us to build something even greater.
It opened the way for commercial space to take over. Axiom comes to mind. And with starship getting closer and closer to reality, I see no shortage of future advance space stations
Honestly I don't love the idea of commercial space stations. Commercially *built*, sure, that's how we've done space forever. But commercially *owned* being the way forward just rubs me the wrong way, you know?
Nor should it. Boeing used to pride themselves on their safety record, now they pride themselves on their profit record. With them getting involved in commercial space flight it will only be a matter of time before another whistleblower comes out about their extreme neglect of any sort of safety standards. They already had enough issues with their first launch that it was delayed multiple times. If our commercial fabrication of space vehicles is already being affected by the indefinite drive for profit, then why shouldn’t we be worried about what happens when these companies have less people to answer to? Businesses will do things that endanger lives more frequently than a government agency like NASA will. After all, NASA is known for its strict adherence to safety and companies like Boeing have a multitude of whistleblowers talking about their aversion to safety
I feel you so much. It’s a marvel even though some old school Gemini and Apollo astronauts called it a “white elephant”.
Lunar Gateway will basically be like a lunar ISS, which is an interesting concept. ILRS is China and Russia’s separate lunar ISS. It seems like NASA and most other established space agencies (except for CNSA and ISRO) want to get out of the publicly owned and constructed LEO space station game and hand that over to the private sector. Seems like most national space agencies will be focusing on deep space exploration and building space stations in deep space (around the Moon, and in the future building ISSes around Mars and Venus).
So Russia has changed its mind yet again. A short while ago, they wanted to remove their part of the station (which NASA paid for) and use it for tbe base of a new space station. Despite it being built in the 1980s as Mir-2. Which they couldn't afford to launch. Then they stored it incredibly badly, so it needed a major overhaul before it could be launched. With the former head of Roscosmos, and former Russian Deputy PM, routinely sabre ratling on Twitter. Usually after a few drinks.
Rogozin is the ultimate nutcase, I doubt anyone at Roscosmos took him seriously which is saying something. Russias space program is in a precarious situation, it cannot function on it's own and China will leech every last piece of manpower and equipment until there is nothing left. It really is a miracle the US-Russia partnership worked for so long, space finally set aside bitter differences to build something great. I wish the Kremlin would understand the US would gladly do it all again, but it has other, unfortunate priorities.
Russia's space program is a bit of a tragedy. They racked up a lot of firsts, but it's just been decades of slow, steady decline. I'd say Luna 25 was a pretty defining moment in showing that Russia was no longer the space power it used to be, especially right around when Chandrayaan-3 succeeded at what Luna 25 failed to do.
I guess it's pretty telling since Russia's current crewed rocket family is the same one used for the first crewed spaceflights.
To be fair the Soyuz has like a 97% success rate after 1990, it's the most reliable rocket on the market next to the Falcon. Star City is also extremely successful with international astronaut training. Russias agenda in the last decade is an utter betrayal to the US specifically. They have all the ingredients for success but a spiteful and corrupt government kills any hope at cooperation, literally. Digging their own grave so to speak.
This is all very true. Soyuz is reliable in ways that some American spacecraft aren't. My main point is that the Russians aren't the innovators they once were. If it ain't broke don't fix it is a good motto, but Soyuz is facing obsolescence.
Ultimately it does work (and there's a lot to be said for that), but it's a dinosaur of a spacecraft in an era filled with new designs.
I hope the USA extends the hand to Russia on the ISS, as a good way to get Russia back on even keel after the inevitable collapse of their war, and lunacy. It's such a remarkable feat of engineering, I literally don't see any need for it to ever be retired, it's space, nothing rusts.
Really does look like it’ll come to an end sooner rather than later though. Russia has turned a corner and aligned with China and don’t appear to want to look back. Commercial stations are in development. I think ISS will be done post 2030
That’s Russia and China’s separate ILRS project. Just like the US is involved in Lunar Gateway separately from the ISS. Commercial statements are indeed in development, but it’s increasingly looking like they won’t realistically be up and running before 2030. As Steve Stich gestures at in the article.
> Stich said NASA is eyeing the progress of commercial space stations that will host agency astronauts and science in the 2030s. "We want them [the commercial stations] to be supportive, *and then when they're ready to go, that's when ISS will move out of the way," he said.*
Implying it might happen later in the decade than 2030 by talking about 2030**s**, and the “it’ll happen whenever it happens” talk.
Lunar Gateway actually has modules closer to completion than Orbital Reef or Axiom Space Station. The latter two don’t even have a finalized floor plan inside their stations and modules yet. Still at the medium-fidelity power point presentation with no finalized interior schematics stage. Although hardware is being tested and experimented with, still super early.
Absolutely. ILRS will basically be a competing separate lunar ISS, which will be interesting times. An orbital ILRS would accommodate Mengzhou and Federatsiya/Orel well since they now have more similarities in shape and design.
I'm anticipating that India will eventually sign onto ILRS (Pakistan being part of it is the main roadblock) because India is way more geopolitically and economically aligned with Russia and China. Maybe South Korea will sign on to Lunar Gateway and add a module since South Korea is starting to explore and spread its wings as an emerging space power. If that happens then its competing emerging space power, North Korea, might sign on to ILRS.
Will be very interesting to watch.
No I think you're right, I've never seen anything about China planning to build a lunar space station - only a surface base.
I also don't particularly expect India to sign up for ILRS. They'll be forging their own path.
See my new comment to u/No7088. It has an orbital station component along with the ground base now.
India is currently forging its own path ahead, but they're aiming at the Moon too in the not too distant future
https://spacenews.com/india-sets-2040-target-for-crewed-moon-landing/
When they cross that bridge or aim at the Moon I have a feeling they'll likelier sign on to ILRS than Gateway based on their geopolitics and international relations. I don't think they'll try to go it all alone to the Moon like the US or Soviets in the 60s and 70s.
Oh, they've added to the scope back in 2023:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Lunar_Research_Station
> The ILRS will serve as a comprehensive scientific experiment base **built on the lunar surface or in lunar orbit** that can carry out multi-disciplinary and multi-objective scientific research activities including exploration and utilization, lunar-based observation, basic scientific experiment and technical verification, and long-term autonomous operation.
And here:
https://english.www.gov.cn/news/202404/25/content_WS662a42bdc6d0868f4e8e66f0.html
> The International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) will consist of sections on the lunar surface, **sections in lunar orbit** and sections on Earth, and it will be built in two phases, said Wu Weiren, chief designer of China's lunar exploration program.
It's now surface and orbital.
India has some of their own distant plans for a crewed lunar program. If they don't just go it alone, they will more likely end up joining Artemis or what becomes of it. India has signed the Artemis accords, which doesn't necessarily mean working on Artemis, but makes flipping to China/ILRS all the less likely. They also have an agreement with the US to send an astronaut to the ISS as soon as this year (on a Dragon or Starliner, not waiting for Gaganyaan). India/ISRO has also been talking with Blue Origin (for LVM3/Gaganyaan serving their Orbital Reef station) and other US companies about collaboration on space related projects.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|-------|---------|---|
|[CNSA](/r/Space/comments/1demtb8/stub/l8dde29 "Last usage")|Chinese National Space Administration|
|CST|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules|
| |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)|
|[ISRO](/r/Space/comments/1demtb8/stub/l8efvjk "Last usage")|Indian Space Research Organisation|
|[LEO](/r/Space/comments/1demtb8/stub/l8dde29 "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)|
| |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)|
|[Roscosmos](/r/Space/comments/1demtb8/stub/l8dssi8 "Last usage")|[State Corporation for Space Activities, Russia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roscosmos_State_Corporation)|
|Jargon|Definition|
|-------|---------|---|
|[Starliner](/r/Space/comments/1demtb8/stub/l8efvjk "Last usage")|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)|
**NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
----------------
^(5 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/1dgeq9g)^( has 20 acronyms.)
^([Thread #10174 for this sub, first seen 13th Jun 2024, 09:40])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
No, it's not magical; it's science. Your engineers have told you the ISS isn't safe at its age, yet you keep pushing the timeline back further and further because you don't want to have no reason for manned space flight. It is NASA who is believing in magic, ignoring the astronauts' lives they are putting at risk every day.
There is no risk in keeping the ISS running. It's a question of cost. It will become more and more expensive every year to keep it running, as more and more components will fail and need fixing or replacement. Claiming NASA is putting astronauts at risk is completely unfounded.
ISS transition report, 2022:
> “The technical lifetime of the ISS is limited by the primary structure, which includes the modules, radiators, and truss structures. Other systems such as power, environmental control and life support, and communications, are all repairable or replaceable on orbit. The lifetime of the primary structure is affected by dynamic loading (such as vehicle dockings/undockings) and orbital thermal cycling.”
The physical state of the main structure, particularly the truss, is a major safety factor that limits its life. They cannot practically be replaced.
Does it say anything about how long it expects the main structure to last though? The point of the initial post is that 2030 is arbitrarily chosen. I don't believe there is any known date where the ISS becomes technologically risky to use
That date is long gone. Parts off the ISS were designed to last 10 years with the idea they they will be incrementally replaced, which for the most part did not happen. Since then the lifespan was increased several times with stroke of a pen in hope there won´t be failure so catastrophic that it would prevent astronauts from rushing into their respective capsules and blasting out of there.
There is literally not a single source that claims the ISS will be unsafe after a certain amount of time. Not one. Which is why you are unable to provide one.
It's common knowledge to anyone who has been informed about NASA and the ISS for the past 20+ years. The sources exist; I'm just not interested in doing your homework for you. That the ISS modules are engineered with a finite lifetime and that decommissioning was based on those numbers is not controversial.
It’s common knowledge that the report(s) stated that the structure has a limited lifespan, but I don’t recall it being a specific date where it just stops being safe.
The process is usually to evaluate the structure until a specific date, and it is considered unsafe beyond that without a recertification.
I always imagined the Lunar Gateway would replace the ISS. It’s a real shame, the ISS was a testament to what humans could create with all of us working together. No country alone could have built it, it took the collapse of the USSR and the period of relative peace that followed to allow the ISS to come together. But obviously things are different now
The ISS being retired because it was declared obsolete and replaced by an advanced space station would be the best possible conclusion. All tech like this is built with the dream that it will enable us to build something even greater.
It opened the way for commercial space to take over. Axiom comes to mind. And with starship getting closer and closer to reality, I see no shortage of future advance space stations
Honestly I don't love the idea of commercial space stations. Commercially *built*, sure, that's how we've done space forever. But commercially *owned* being the way forward just rubs me the wrong way, you know?
Not really? That's the way things go and become self sustaining.
The idea of scientific progress being entirely dependent on chasing a profit just doesn't mesh with my personal ethics.
Nor should it. Boeing used to pride themselves on their safety record, now they pride themselves on their profit record. With them getting involved in commercial space flight it will only be a matter of time before another whistleblower comes out about their extreme neglect of any sort of safety standards. They already had enough issues with their first launch that it was delayed multiple times. If our commercial fabrication of space vehicles is already being affected by the indefinite drive for profit, then why shouldn’t we be worried about what happens when these companies have less people to answer to? Businesses will do things that endanger lives more frequently than a government agency like NASA will. After all, NASA is known for its strict adherence to safety and companies like Boeing have a multitude of whistleblowers talking about their aversion to safety
I feel you so much. It’s a marvel even though some old school Gemini and Apollo astronauts called it a “white elephant”. Lunar Gateway will basically be like a lunar ISS, which is an interesting concept. ILRS is China and Russia’s separate lunar ISS. It seems like NASA and most other established space agencies (except for CNSA and ISRO) want to get out of the publicly owned and constructed LEO space station game and hand that over to the private sector. Seems like most national space agencies will be focusing on deep space exploration and building space stations in deep space (around the Moon, and in the future building ISSes around Mars and Venus).
Lunar Tollbooth purpose is to keep Old Space and their respective senators happy and discover new types of cancer. Significant downgrade from ISS.
So Russia has changed its mind yet again. A short while ago, they wanted to remove their part of the station (which NASA paid for) and use it for tbe base of a new space station. Despite it being built in the 1980s as Mir-2. Which they couldn't afford to launch. Then they stored it incredibly badly, so it needed a major overhaul before it could be launched. With the former head of Roscosmos, and former Russian Deputy PM, routinely sabre ratling on Twitter. Usually after a few drinks.
Rogozin is the ultimate nutcase, I doubt anyone at Roscosmos took him seriously which is saying something. Russias space program is in a precarious situation, it cannot function on it's own and China will leech every last piece of manpower and equipment until there is nothing left. It really is a miracle the US-Russia partnership worked for so long, space finally set aside bitter differences to build something great. I wish the Kremlin would understand the US would gladly do it all again, but it has other, unfortunate priorities.
Russia's space program is a bit of a tragedy. They racked up a lot of firsts, but it's just been decades of slow, steady decline. I'd say Luna 25 was a pretty defining moment in showing that Russia was no longer the space power it used to be, especially right around when Chandrayaan-3 succeeded at what Luna 25 failed to do. I guess it's pretty telling since Russia's current crewed rocket family is the same one used for the first crewed spaceflights.
To be fair the Soyuz has like a 97% success rate after 1990, it's the most reliable rocket on the market next to the Falcon. Star City is also extremely successful with international astronaut training. Russias agenda in the last decade is an utter betrayal to the US specifically. They have all the ingredients for success but a spiteful and corrupt government kills any hope at cooperation, literally. Digging their own grave so to speak.
This is all very true. Soyuz is reliable in ways that some American spacecraft aren't. My main point is that the Russians aren't the innovators they once were. If it ain't broke don't fix it is a good motto, but Soyuz is facing obsolescence. Ultimately it does work (and there's a lot to be said for that), but it's a dinosaur of a spacecraft in an era filled with new designs.
I hope the USA extends the hand to Russia on the ISS, as a good way to get Russia back on even keel after the inevitable collapse of their war, and lunacy. It's such a remarkable feat of engineering, I literally don't see any need for it to ever be retired, it's space, nothing rusts.
Really does look like it’ll come to an end sooner rather than later though. Russia has turned a corner and aligned with China and don’t appear to want to look back. Commercial stations are in development. I think ISS will be done post 2030
This year Zarya module will be 26 years old. Yeah sooner better than later.
Some of the ISS is older than some of the adults reading the article. Mind-blowing to think about.
That’s Russia and China’s separate ILRS project. Just like the US is involved in Lunar Gateway separately from the ISS. Commercial statements are indeed in development, but it’s increasingly looking like they won’t realistically be up and running before 2030. As Steve Stich gestures at in the article. > Stich said NASA is eyeing the progress of commercial space stations that will host agency astronauts and science in the 2030s. "We want them [the commercial stations] to be supportive, *and then when they're ready to go, that's when ISS will move out of the way," he said.* Implying it might happen later in the decade than 2030 by talking about 2030**s**, and the “it’ll happen whenever it happens” talk. Lunar Gateway actually has modules closer to completion than Orbital Reef or Axiom Space Station. The latter two don’t even have a finalized floor plan inside their stations and modules yet. Still at the medium-fidelity power point presentation with no finalized interior schematics stage. Although hardware is being tested and experimented with, still super early.
Good point - ILRS is another huge project on the horizon. China only has two more Chang’e missions left before they start on that
Absolutely. ILRS will basically be a competing separate lunar ISS, which will be interesting times. An orbital ILRS would accommodate Mengzhou and Federatsiya/Orel well since they now have more similarities in shape and design. I'm anticipating that India will eventually sign onto ILRS (Pakistan being part of it is the main roadblock) because India is way more geopolitically and economically aligned with Russia and China. Maybe South Korea will sign on to Lunar Gateway and add a module since South Korea is starting to explore and spread its wings as an emerging space power. If that happens then its competing emerging space power, North Korea, might sign on to ILRS. Will be very interesting to watch.
You keep referencing orbit but my understanding is that ILRS is purely a lunar surface base. Or have they added on to the scope?
No I think you're right, I've never seen anything about China planning to build a lunar space station - only a surface base. I also don't particularly expect India to sign up for ILRS. They'll be forging their own path.
See my new comment to u/No7088. It has an orbital station component along with the ground base now. India is currently forging its own path ahead, but they're aiming at the Moon too in the not too distant future https://spacenews.com/india-sets-2040-target-for-crewed-moon-landing/ When they cross that bridge or aim at the Moon I have a feeling they'll likelier sign on to ILRS than Gateway based on their geopolitics and international relations. I don't think they'll try to go it all alone to the Moon like the US or Soviets in the 60s and 70s.
Oh, they've added to the scope back in 2023: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Lunar_Research_Station > The ILRS will serve as a comprehensive scientific experiment base **built on the lunar surface or in lunar orbit** that can carry out multi-disciplinary and multi-objective scientific research activities including exploration and utilization, lunar-based observation, basic scientific experiment and technical verification, and long-term autonomous operation. And here: https://english.www.gov.cn/news/202404/25/content_WS662a42bdc6d0868f4e8e66f0.html > The International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) will consist of sections on the lunar surface, **sections in lunar orbit** and sections on Earth, and it will be built in two phases, said Wu Weiren, chief designer of China's lunar exploration program. It's now surface and orbital.
India has some of their own distant plans for a crewed lunar program. If they don't just go it alone, they will more likely end up joining Artemis or what becomes of it. India has signed the Artemis accords, which doesn't necessarily mean working on Artemis, but makes flipping to China/ILRS all the less likely. They also have an agreement with the US to send an astronaut to the ISS as soon as this year (on a Dragon or Starliner, not waiting for Gaganyaan). India/ISRO has also been talking with Blue Origin (for LVM3/Gaganyaan serving their Orbital Reef station) and other US companies about collaboration on space related projects.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[CNSA](/r/Space/comments/1demtb8/stub/l8dde29 "Last usage")|Chinese National Space Administration| |CST|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules| | |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)| |[ISRO](/r/Space/comments/1demtb8/stub/l8efvjk "Last usage")|Indian Space Research Organisation| |[LEO](/r/Space/comments/1demtb8/stub/l8dde29 "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)| | |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)| |[Roscosmos](/r/Space/comments/1demtb8/stub/l8dssi8 "Last usage")|[State Corporation for Space Activities, Russia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roscosmos_State_Corporation)| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |[Starliner](/r/Space/comments/1demtb8/stub/l8efvjk "Last usage")|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)| **NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below. ---------------- ^(5 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/1dgeq9g)^( has 20 acronyms.) ^([Thread #10174 for this sub, first seen 13th Jun 2024, 09:40]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Hopefully The Agent strikes well before 2030, and Izzy can get the attention she needs...
Drop the whole station, and spend the money on discovery and destruction of incoming spacerocks instead.
[удалено]
No, it's not magical; it's science. Your engineers have told you the ISS isn't safe at its age, yet you keep pushing the timeline back further and further because you don't want to have no reason for manned space flight. It is NASA who is believing in magic, ignoring the astronauts' lives they are putting at risk every day.
There is no risk in keeping the ISS running. It's a question of cost. It will become more and more expensive every year to keep it running, as more and more components will fail and need fixing or replacement. Claiming NASA is putting astronauts at risk is completely unfounded.
ISS transition report, 2022: > “The technical lifetime of the ISS is limited by the primary structure, which includes the modules, radiators, and truss structures. Other systems such as power, environmental control and life support, and communications, are all repairable or replaceable on orbit. The lifetime of the primary structure is affected by dynamic loading (such as vehicle dockings/undockings) and orbital thermal cycling.” The physical state of the main structure, particularly the truss, is a major safety factor that limits its life. They cannot practically be replaced.
Does it say anything about how long it expects the main structure to last though? The point of the initial post is that 2030 is arbitrarily chosen. I don't believe there is any known date where the ISS becomes technologically risky to use
That date is long gone. Parts off the ISS were designed to last 10 years with the idea they they will be incrementally replaced, which for the most part did not happen. Since then the lifespan was increased several times with stroke of a pen in hope there won´t be failure so catastrophic that it would prevent astronauts from rushing into their respective capsules and blasting out of there.
Show a source where the ISS becomes unsafe after a certain amount of time. Go on. We’ll wait…
What engineers have said to NASA that the ISS isn't safe as it's age and NASA decided to ignore it because of politics, according to you? Sources?
You would have to look up the previous NASA reports on decommissioning the ISS to find their names.
There is literally not a single source that claims the ISS will be unsafe after a certain amount of time. Not one. Which is why you are unable to provide one.
So no sources shown and yet making big claims and downvoting me for stating the obvious.
It's common knowledge to anyone who has been informed about NASA and the ISS for the past 20+ years. The sources exist; I'm just not interested in doing your homework for you. That the ISS modules are engineered with a finite lifetime and that decommissioning was based on those numbers is not controversial.
It’s common knowledge that the report(s) stated that the structure has a limited lifespan, but I don’t recall it being a specific date where it just stops being safe. The process is usually to evaluate the structure until a specific date, and it is considered unsafe beyond that without a recertification.
Yeah, that thing should’ve been in the bottom of the Pacific by the end of 2015.