Spaceflight

654 readers

37 users here now

Your one-stop shop for spaceflight news and discussion.

All serious posts related to spaceflight are welcome! JAXA, ISRO, CNSA, Roscosmos, ULA, RocketLab, Firefly, Relativity, Blue Origin, etc. (Arca and Pythom, if you must).

Other related space communities:

Related meme community:

[email protected]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

threelonmusketeers

[email protected]

NASA has a fine plan for deorbiting the ISS—unless Russia gets in the way (arstechnica.com)

submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/spaceflight

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/25502187

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Depends. Not even many stone buildings last many centuries. Wooden structures tend to be much less, and humanity has seen many stone structures slowly turn uninhabitable.

Besides, in space, there is much, MUCH more space. There is only a little need to fight over orbital space, let alone literal adjacent space. We don't need to rennovate the ISS to reclaim ideal space.

Whether or not you know about them, there are also several plans ongoing for replacing the ISS, too, so your inability to grasp this is... kinda' weird.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Besides, in space, there is much, MUCH more space. There is only a little need to fight over orbital space, let alone literal adjacent space. We don’t need to rennovate the ISS to reclaim ideal space.

What? Room inside a space station is incredibly expensive because we have to design, build and launch it!

Whether or not you know about them, there are also several plans ongoing for replacing the ISS, too, so your inability to grasp this is… kinda’ weird.

Key word: "plans." I.e., things that aren't actually built yet and in fact might not ever get built.

Throwing out the ISS before we have at least part of a replacement in orbit is an excellent way to risk failing to have a space station completely.

[–] threelonmusketeers 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Throwing out the ISS before we have at least part of a replacement in orbit is an excellent way to risk failing to have a space station completely.

I agree. We are not doing that though. Haven-1 is scheduled to launch NET 2025, the Axiom orbital segment is NET 2026, Orbital Reef is targeting 2027, and Starlab is targeting 2028. Even if these schedules slip a couple years, they would still be ready in time for the ISS deorbit in (or after) 2030.