It'd be better if they started re-engineering fixes and upgrades to the existing system. A propulsion system so that the station is completely self-contained. Instead, 30 other commercial entities are all building small, basically useless parts that could be made with a common adaptor and connected to the station so it becomes safe and up to date. But hey, nobody ever accused NASA or the government of being smart.
I live in Huntsville, AL where they recently “popped” one of Sierra Space’s inflatable modules. We’re used to rocket testing in this area but that explosion was another level.
I've wondered about that -- if some piece of orbital debris or small meteorite the size of a postage stamp hits one of those things, will it just start leaking (which _might_ give the people inside enough time to escape that section), or will it pop like a balloon?
Starting a space station by sticking modules onto the International Space Station that then becomes a separate station lends credence to the idea of using a more extensive version of this to save the International Space Station. Stick modules onto it, but then instead of throwing everything else away, just keep changing out the modules that are in the oldest and worst condition.
Problem. Vacuum welding. Metal surfaces in space that are in contact with each other, get welded together. Unless carefully designed, it is likely that all the modules have become welded together.
@@josephastier7421 definitely. There's so much minutia to space flight I just hadn't ever thought of it before. I'm still learning new things about Apollo!
The first robotic arm was on the MIR space station... Fixed to the central module, it swung each newly arrived module around, and onto the other ports on the central module... It was only about 4 feet long, but could move the 3 ton modules with ease... There are videos on YT and also check google... Lyappa arm..
This sounds a whole lot like the years leading up to the Shuttle retirement. 'There will be no gap in crew capability. Ares hardware is being built. Orion is being built. Constellation will be ready. We'll use off the shelf components to speed the process and keep cost low, etc...' 11 years later, we still would not have had crew capability had SpaceX not arrived.
Fortunately there are multiple private contractors that are pretty far along with their modules and there is a big profit motive for various high-price low-mass things that can only be created in space. I expect it will be quite the boom industry once we can do more research and development than the paltry effort on the ISS.
@@zacklewis342 What action? You can't just pull a human-rated spacecraft our of your butt. If not for SpaceX we would have continued buying seats on Soyuz to this day.
So teeeeechnically it has cost much, much more (~150 b) than its weight worth in gold (~30 b). So if it's only worth its weight in gold, it would have been a loss.
@@batcollins3714 All due respect, we spend a lot more on the climate change fight alone, forget the amount spent on wars. India alone spends around that much on fighting climate change every year.
Sorry, but after reading that title all I can think is: "SpaceX has been contracted to destroy the ISS and rescue the stranded astronauts." "...but.... not in that order, right?"
"Where Will Astronauts Go After The ISS Is Destroyed?" that title made me think about them just having surplus Astronauts in the closet somewhere, I'm hoping they find a nice field somewhere and just let them roam free and be who they want to be, try not to feed them after because they will think it's just another adventure. You could teach them to hunt with a spear to help the transition be smoother though
The space station is just going to go to a happy little farm. I assume the astronauts will all have nice coups there to sleep in when they come in from grazing.
Me and my GF saw an abandoned stray astronaut walking along the road yesterday and she really wanted me to stop and pick the poor fella up. But like I reminded her the last time we adopted a stray astronaut and the international political debate that ensued on who actually owns the astronaut and how much trouble it was teaching him to speak English. I'll never forget Romanov 😢
Oh, I like your dad. He has some very well reasoned ideas... as opposed to many of the "managerial staff" speaking on these topics. I think someone needs to disconnect their teleprompter!! 😆🙃👍
Untitled Space Craft: Three SLS main stages, two Falcon 9 rockets, two SLS solid boosters, two Delta IV M upper stages, a Space Shuttle Orbiter attached to the main tank, and a Saturn V upper stage.
The title reminded me of an old joke I heard from a Russian some years ago that went like this: TASS News Agency reports that the Mir station that reached the projected end of life was successfully deorbited and scuttled in the designated area of the Pacific Ocean. Currently our Cosmonauts... OH SHIT! COSMONAUTS!!!
_"Or party supplies, if that's your jam."_ Woe is me, when some fool sneaks a party popper onboard, *_packed full of glitter!_* At which point everyone is _immediately_ sent home, with the habitat prompt set for re-entry to burn up... Because as we all know, you will NEVER get rid of that glitter! 😅
I imagine that would be a huge hazard in free fall, with it getting into the ventilation system and avionics, shorting things out, and being breathed in by the occupants.
@@josephastier7421 haha I have no idea why you saying FOD triggered this thought... but now I'm genuinely curious how much damage a single speck of glitter would cause when colliding with something at orbital velocities; a synthetic 'micrometeoroid', if you will. 🤔🤣 I might have to see if one of those guys that make Fluid Dynamics videos about projectile hitting tank armor, would be willing to simulate this... Have them test it against a spacecraft's hull _(Starship, simply for ease of obtaining the stainless steel's specs),_ a heat shield tile, as well as an EVA suit's fabric and face shield. ☺️
It's not called "Stripper Glitter" for nothing, so that's gonna be one heck of a party. And, all that's needed to clean it up is a stage hand with a mop and towel.
Thank you, Scott, for this survey of the current "state of the stations". YOU are the man who gives us, true space nerds, our peridoc dose of "space" news. Great job and terrific vids and graphics.
Australia is where space debris goes to die. I remember you Aussies had one of our PSLV rocket's debris drift up to one of your beaches and were talking about sticking it into a museum or something.
I believe the Outback Australian town of Esperance was the one that fined NASA $400 for littering after small pieces of Skylab landed in their Main Street (the largest piece of was an oxygen tank that landed in a sheep paddock further away). It was meant as a joke and NASA didn’t pay it, but a radio DJ in the USA ended up having listeners call in to donate and paid the fine years later.
@@andrewn7365 Was in the firt 2-3 min of the vid.. later on 'research' gets included. But on that note - the only ULTIMATE reason for humans to go to space is for life FROM EARTH to make it to the stars - for life to expand.. IMHO also not REALLY exciting as the 'WHAT FOR?' really is nothing to write home about. It's what life does. Big whoop. ;-)
The Vast Haven-1 is the most ex citing of them all because it is the one with the best chance of happening and the best chance of happening the soonest. It is fantastic, practical, and pragmatic design perfect for helping boost a private-sector driven LEO economy
@framegrace1 I wonder if they could slowly push it to lower inclinations on each re-boost. And do defend the devil it does mean it sees more of the Earth, therefore Earth observing payloads and missions make more sense.
I remember a "wet workshop" proposal from around Skylab years where the station would be within the propellant tanks of a booster upper stage. Now, take a Starship without flaps and heat shield, cram the payload section with what you need to retrofit a space station inside the tanks, then send a crew to do the retrofitting job and recover the Raptor engines, and voilà, with only 2 super-heavy launches, you aready have a huge space station...
The internal capacity of Starship is already supposed to be a bit larger than ISS's total pressurized volume. I think the most valuable piece to figure out is a 4 or 6-way connector module to endlessly chain starships. From there, we would just need bespoke internals for the various needs, and a model with deployable solar panels. It would still be worth it do use the tank areas of course, for non-returning modules, but there's plenty of space, and you'll want to save some engines and fuel for orbital maintenance.
@@VaradiioEngine for manuvers, that could be shared hardware with the Luna Lander Starship. The connector between, could be a ring structure for a large number of ships to park on, that clips on to the same pins that are for the catch arms under the front flaps, plus a crew access arm style peice that swings out from an inner ring down to a crew hatch on the pez-door side, where it could also hook in to connectors in the raceway for systems monitors. Park ships around the ring, spin for gravity, have a central cube shaped docking structure that doesn't spin, and can have 5 dragons parked at it, with it's sixth side is a slip-ring that connects to the rotating structure.
@@josephastier7421Weren't they made of a super light metal that was crazy expensive, and IIRC, toxic to humans. Could have fitted walls and floors inside, then sprayed the gap to the tank walls with expanding foam to seal and thermal insulate.
@andrewcarter4046 it's not impossible to get information about the Tiangong. They public a lot in scientific journaly. But it's more effort for western media and it's not as streamlined like NASA or ESA communicate to the public.
I hate that all these solutions are private. Space should be developed as a public good for all humanity. But I guess that’s a philosophy from the 70s-90s, not for today
Private pursuits in space is the ONLY way we will get to space. Governments do it for clout and competition with other nations. I understand that. A private enterprise has a wider expanse of driving focus.
Thanks so much for creating and sharing this informative video. Great job. More. Thanks for collecting all of this information in a single, easy to "consume" video.
You passed over Starmax space station architecture being developed by Gravitics, which could be one to watch IMHO. They already got some kinda contract from the USSF, they are developing space station modules tailored to the Starship fairing that can be either launched as a single-module space station, or connected together into larger stations.
Russia could theoretically get to CSS, with a bit of effort. Russian territory south of Vladivostok goes down to ~42.3°N, which is very close to Tiangong at 41.47°N. Zenit-2 was supposed to be further developed to be human-rated. If it was, then they could launch of the old Sea Launch system (designed to launch Zenit-2SL) from the optimum latitude. That old launch platform is conveniently at Slavyanka (42.871°N 131.393°E), just outside Vladivostok. So not impossible, though I can't see them doing it.
Before the end of collaboration during the war with Ukraine Russia was also launching Soyuz from French Guyana. Depending on the political future in Russia and the EU, they may be able to launch from Kourou again. If such peace and/or political change does lead to the return of such a collaboration, they may be able to launch crew to the Chinese Tiangong space station from that launch site using Soyuz. But that may be a very optimistic view of the next 5 years of Russian political change
Damn while listening to this i want a "Kerbal Space Program 2" so badly that honests the ISS in a campaign where you need to build and rebuild a space station. And at the end it lets you free too explore other planets, build a space center on those and estabish a station around those on your own terms.
It would be nice if the ISS was boosted into a lunar orbit instead. Getting information about longevity of materials would and learning about what might go wrong earliest would be beneficial too.
Throw enough thrust at the problem and it can be overcome. Time isn’t an issue, so there can be more gravity assist orbits to increase its speed as well. Although atmospheric drag on the solar panels might become a problem if it gets too low. The Chandrayaan-3 spacecraft had a good trans lunar insertion strategy and it worked for them.
After Starliner's performance, I would be suspect of any design that did not include at least two docking ports. So Vast may want to re-think that design. They could put a segment that looks like a cross on the end where the Dragon attaches, that would accommodate two additional capsules. But to only have Life support, and once egress from the single capsule, is asking for trouble. Unless it doesn't mate with a Boeing product, then I suppose you'd be fine.
Two docks is definitely important for safety. Though Starliner isn't stuck. It could come home at any time, but the parts they want to study are jettisoned before re-entry and burn up, so they have intentionally delayed the return to gather data. No one is actually stranded.
Here's my idea: adapt Cargo Dragon to fly in a fairing, and dock a 6-port ball to the front. Launches, the cargo dragon then acts as a space tug to get the ball to the space station. It docks it, then undocks itself, then de-orbits.
"The head of Roscosmos, Yuri Borisov, signed off on the timetable with the directors of 19 enterprises involved in creating the new station. The agency confirmed plans to launch an initial scientific and energy module in 2027. It said three more modules would be added by 2030 and a further two between 2031 and 2033". You know, when i watch about space and our progress in that direction i expect facts not propaganda. Still love the video
Shh Scott: you have such a Manly Voice... utterly scintillating. Er or so I've been told. They also say that you sound like a really cocky chap, all cheeky and stuff- which is crossing the mark, I think you will agree.
@@JeffreyBue_imtxsmoke When nasa first did their evaluation they estimated 2028 would be the last year. The most recent analysis predicts 2030. Who knows, maybe once the date gets closer they will review it again and move it back another few more years.
It lacks power (without Russia's modules). There's stress cracks to be worried about worsening. I think it's safe enough for now, but definitely closely monitored and otherwise on life support.
Everything decays and there is no workshop in space, where you can easily fix your station. EVAs can't fix everything. Maybe they'll push the date back 2-3 more years, if the ISS holds up better than expected.
It will become dangerous to operate in the next few years as the radiation exposure causes materials to degrade and the constant heating and cooling cycles cause fatigue cracks in the lightweight alloys used for the station. Some of the Russian segments are already becoming potentially hazardous as they were not designed to go beyond 25 years and the station is now older than that. The current station would become a srious hazard to occupants by 2030 or thereabouts and even before then the extra safety equipment to continue operation would drive operating costs up far too much. The current ISS needs a successor if humanity wants a truly international space station up there, and I hope we do want it enough for somebody to pay for it.
@fred_derf well, it's bolted together from the inside, if you wanna play a game of mix and match with a space station you'd have to unbolt it from the inside, which would cause a rapid depressurisation, and NASA even said it themselves: "The station's modules and truss structure were not designed to be easily disassembled in space."
I would like to see a starship packed with goodies sent into a elliptical orbit to study asteroids on as a dry run to Mars but to really do some hard science in the asteroid belt
There is no reason for private companies to invest in space at all. Except for tourism, so, i dont get why people are overhyped with "finally commercial space stations!" Its like, from the space-research lab for the whole humanity we are falling to the space motels for the rich.
@@Andrey_Gysev the end goal is mining in space, the literal only thing that can stop the economy from collapsing under the weight of it's demand for growth.
Way back in the Apollo Applications Program, there was a proposal for a free-flying space telescope based on an Apollo lunar module chassis. It would have operated with Skylab. China is probably copying that idea for their free flying space telescope.
Not probably, we are. It's called XunTian and will fly closely with the space station, maintenance and equipment upgrades can be easily done in the pressurized space when docking.
*In This Case* using the word “copy” is a bit disingenuous as with Energia-Buran despite designs being different, at some point the core maths of engineering push designs to look/behave similar.
Copying = "We can not do it and they are going to do it better". A portrait of the current state of "Western Technology" in so many fields. Our antecessors will be pretty unhappy in their tombs.
You know, there's only so many ways to make a Space Telescope and a Space Station work together without compromising the telescope, it's not necessarily a copy.
China has a similar concept. The XunTian (巡天)China Space Station Telescope (CSST) is now under R&D. As planned it will be launched in 2024, but it is delayed in 2026.
I wonder when the first 'orbit clean-up' will happen. There is entirely too much crap floating around and something like Ocean Cleanup but for space would not only collect a lot of useful information it would also make space safer for all future endeavours.
If you look at the economics of doing CGI in big budget movies its not a big stretch to imagine the film industry using commercial space stations to shoot microgravity scenes.
11:00 Use the new Dragon that's being designed to deorbit the ISS as a space tugboat to assemble modules which don't have their own guidance and propulsion.
Once there's a dragon space pickup truck I think a starship gas station won't be far behind. With an on-orbit refueling infrastructure in place I think we'll see the problems of incompatible orbits slowly go away.
I’d love to see a butterfly garden out there. Beat to start that in the spring though. You can spread the seed in winter, and/or start seedlings and plant them in the spring.
I attended a talk in 1981 where Robert Teller advocated the simple solution of using the Moon. I agreed then, and continue to think that is the correct solution. It's time to lose the training wheels! When do we get started on the Space Elevator?
The biggest error the US and NASA made was retiring the space shuttle too quickly before there was a few replacement. NASA didn't develop Dragon or Falcon 9... SLS isn't up after one launch.... Where's the money going?
Very good episode Mr Scott manley, the futuristic industry that no one is speaking of is medical! Life-saving, life extending, kind of medical. There are certain conditions that can be repaired or cured by just being in space, alone or in combinations. One life-saving and life-extending surgery I need would be the repair of three vertebrae in my neck! Gravity dictates that the surgeries would have to be done at the surprising angles with certain machinery that would not be required in space with no gravity. The medical possibilities of space is as vast as spaces itself.
It's very sad to see tax payer's paying up the bill and private companies taking public subsidies for vanity projects. Nation states shouldn't be passive clients, they should invest in people and keep the know-how.
Cars, trains, planes, and boats have made huge leaps in technology without relying on government. I'd bet if NASA was a private entity, we'd be vacationing on the moon today.
the only one that for sure is going up is gateway and only because thats already been paid for but as for the rest you are ignoring one key factor, china has a better space station than america has access to currently and you just know that the american ego wont stand for that
@@exilestudios9546 it's not just about ego, it's also because China doesn't work with anyone. the station is theirs and any research made there belong to the Chinese alone. if they opened Tiangong to international participation that would be a different story.
Chances are low indeed, but definitely not as low when Nasa would be the ones putting something up. If it generates money, a company will launch. Nasa though, totally dependent on whatever a politician decides to pay for.
@@kennethroberts6993 With what reason would it ever be economically feasible? Research not even remotely can pay for this without additional government subsidies.
Scott- Just a thought... Instead of thinking about using Starship with a cargo bay and a manipulator arm to assemble parts of a new space station, how about this: Make three or four Starships to actually BE a component of a GIANT space station when assembled at the nose via a hub? (like each Starship being a blade like member like a windmill, all joined at the nose) That hub may have three or four (or more) docking ports for vehicles such as Dragon capsules to dock. The hub can be delivered in the "cargo bay" of one of these Starships/modules and then the empty bay can be sealed and converted to a workable pressurized part of the station. Also- The now empty tanks for fuel and the engines can be jettisoned turning that space into workable space station vacuum storage areas or even a protective "garage" for a Dragon like supply capsule once the engines have been jettisoned. Heck! Keep the tanks of one of the Starships and turn them into potable water/ oxygen storage tanks! Another Starship can keep its fuel tanks and engines for orbit correction/de-orbit. Imagine three or four huge Space Station modules each joined at the nose with the interior volume of a Starship! What's the usable interior space of a Starship now (without considering the fuel tank area as "usable space")? almost thirty feet x eighty feet? HUGE! So to recap- Each Starship is not delivering sections of a space station. They are purpose built to each be a complete COMPONENT/MODULE of a new space station! The list of possibilities when we rethink the Starships role in making a new space station are now ENDLESS and I believe a lot cheaper in the long run.
The brief mention of a Starship-based space "station" replacement is the most likely way SpaceX will contribute to replacing the ISS. Yes, it's *a lot* easier to land your "station", refit it with new experiments, and then launch it again than to place a ship in orbit and send up new equipment and supplies that have to be squeezed through an airlock and set up by astronauts. Astronaut time in space is very expensive! Replacing/modifying equipment in space takes extensive planning and rehearsal on the ground. It's much easier to land the ship and let techs on the ground do the work and test everything. It's surprising how many Starship fans still can't get their heads around how many paradigms Starship breaks. Launching once a month will be cheaper than anything NASA does now. Ditto for the commercial stations. People get carried away with grand visions about how a converted Starship can be a much larger version of the ISS when there is a more pragmatic option. One permanent piece of hardware that'd be useful to stay in orbit is a small module with solar and radiation panels. The shuttling station-ships can attach there rather than unfolding complex panels. It's also save room on the station-ship. A crew can go up for two weeks or two months. Idk if some long term experiments will need to stay longer but a Starship LEO economy will offer options. Bonus: if a crew will only be there a month they won't need to exercise a lot to stave off microgravity effects. ISS crews spend a very large amount of time exercising.
That would be similar to the Spacelab module, which was in the payload bay of the Space Shuttle. Setting up all hardware prior to flight definitely saves a lot of time on-orbit. But it could only stay on-orbit for a week or so, while Starship could stay up for months. (I think HLS has a 100-day loiter time, for reference). Definitely a gamechanger, as you say.
@@satoshimanabe2493 Indeed. I wasn't specific as to which mention of Starship Scott made but it was to the bit at the end where he talked about Spacelab. The future Mars-capable Starships will have essentially an indefinite lifetime in LEO since they're made to spend 6 months each way to Mars. With LEO refreshment available something derived from that could stay up for... decades, like the ISS. Sooo many possibilities, and there will be a place for a long term station although I think the station-ships will do the bulk of the work. Even for a hotel.
@@Shrouded_reaper There will probably be a place in the LEO economy for a permanent station or a long-term station-ship that stays up a year to more. One use would be for what you mention. There's plenty to elaborate on. Sensitive or delicate products of zero-g manufacturing will probably need to be brought back on Dreamchaser. But I think the great majority of work done on the ISS now can be done on a ship that returns every month or two.
Probably pretty well, considering that Russia has been failing to get even Venera-D done for two decades so far, and that is vastly cheaper than such a space station would ever be. Not to mention the delays of the recent Luna missions, also comparatively cheap and not requiring any fancier lift vehicle than a Soyuz. Perhaps it'd age poorer if this was 40 years ago or something, but Russia is very clearly falling well behind its optimistic plans in every regard. The only hope is if by 2030 Russia gets a leadership less concerned with plundering its own industrial capability for personal gain and alienating the entire rest of the globe, yet VERY interested in the space program.
@@isekaiexpress9450 Well, should miracles prove possible, I think some minor embarrassment would be a low price to pay! Assuming either of us even remembers this in six years.
@@xiphosura413Well they proved they are capable of getting their shit together for the war in Ukraine. It started as an utter disaster but two years later they are doing better than anyone could have predicted. It is a sad state of affairs that a war was the only thing that motivated them to do so, while space projects seem completely abandoned.
If the ISS has potential for expansion, we might as well turn it into a Theseus' Space Station kind of thing: Upgrading modules continuously, until at some point none of the original "classic" ISS exist, but the station itself carries on.
Regardless of what happens im sure its going to be really cool. I remember following the project as the ISS came together and thinking how cool it was that it even existed.
The SpaceX Pushin is born! I'm picturing a Starship, packed with solar pannels and life support supplies, completely replacing the ISS. That is one big spaceship!
SpaceX asks "how does this get us to Mars?" I don't think a station in LEO does that. At least not the kind of station being discussed, here. Also, China's telescope idea is awesome!
If you've got a propellant depot in orbit, so tanker ships can ferry up fuel on their schedule, and deep-space ships can tank up on theirs, it'd be simple to add some cargo storage, and even habitable modules.
They should seriously consider instead mothballing the station up in a higher orbit. Get extra fuel onto it, put it to high orbit and shut all systems down and can either be used in the future or as a mark of human achievement.
It’s wild how space equipment can cost 150 plus million and work yet Disney can spend 180 million on the Acolyte which is an utter failure. Maybe money needs to be allocated.
If I understand what you said, they are not going to slow the space station down enough to go through a too steep reentry, but they are going to push it downward and force its reentry at speed. But to do that without breaking the space station apart they would have to slowly reorient the space station so that its length would be parallel to the direction they want to push it. That of course would mean the space station would reenter the atmosphere sideways and expose the majority of the space station to the heat of friction all at the same time which will hopefully burn up all of the space station before anything hits the ocean, or ground if things do not work out as planned.
It'd be nice if they could somehow salvage the ISS wall where visiting emblems and signatures are posted.
Lol. It's now a superbug factory
It'd be better if they started re-engineering fixes and upgrades to the existing system. A propulsion system so that the station is completely self-contained.
Instead, 30 other commercial entities are all building small, basically useless parts that could be made with a common adaptor and connected to the station so it becomes safe and up to date.
But hey, nobody ever accused NASA or the government of being smart.
@@LuciFeric137Nothing a little ozone won't fix.
And/or harvest...❤
Yeah get an inspector sattelite to hack off some museum pieces first. Like the Starliner. 😊
I live in Huntsville, AL where they recently “popped” one of Sierra Space’s inflatable modules. We’re used to rocket testing in this area but that explosion was another level.
Pretty intense?
Big badda boom! 💥
Huntsville
Hope y’all doing good after 2011
I've wondered about that -- if some piece of orbital debris or small meteorite the size of a postage stamp hits one of those things, will it just start leaking (which _might_ give the people inside enough time to escape that section), or will it pop like a balloon?
I miss living in Huntsville
Starting a space station by sticking modules onto the International Space Station that then becomes a separate station lends credence to the idea of using a more extensive version of this to save the International Space Station. Stick modules onto it, but then instead of throwing everything else away, just keep changing out the modules that are in the oldest and worst condition.
Like my grandfather's broom...
And then comes the new module called "Ship of Theseus"
I just commented something similar. I’m disappointed this question was not addressed. Seems infinitely sustainable and an engineering no-brainer.
NASA seems hell bent on privatization of all hardware, sigh.
Problem. Vacuum welding. Metal surfaces in space that are in contact with each other, get welded together. Unless carefully designed, it is likely that all the modules have become welded together.
17:15 “it’s not dragon the station, it’s pushin the station”!
My favourite Scott Manley pun to date!
Took me 3 senconds to get the joke, its really funny indeed😂
Damn I JUST got it. Took me way too long lol
i also picked up on this, was brilliant
🙄
Took me a few seconds, but that was funny 🤣
That moving bidirectional robotic arm is super cool. I never realized it could change location where the working end becomes the base!
It wouldn't be much good if it was stuck in one place. The ISS is huge! The arms can walk around like inchworms all over it.
@@josephastier7421 definitely. There's so much minutia to space flight I just hadn't ever thought of it before. I'm still learning new things about Apollo!
@@NGinuity Just staggering how much innovation goes into spaceflight.
The first robotic arm was on the MIR space station... Fixed to the central module, it swung each newly arrived module around, and onto the other ports on the central module... It was only about 4 feet long, but could move the 3 ton modules with ease... There are videos on YT and also check google... Lyappa arm..
Untitled Space Craft has done so many amazing missions for me. Some of them, it even survived!
Untitled Space Craft was the first permanent space station around Jupiter, however, it has no docking ports
I wonder if Starliner will still be docked when it happens
They'll shove it away from the station like a broke down Ford long before then.
Be nice now.
Now... that's just _mean..._ 😒
*_HILARIOUS!_* But _mean..._ 🤣🤣
Hahahahahaa
Oof. That hurts. Lol
This sounds a whole lot like the years leading up to the Shuttle retirement.
'There will be no gap in crew capability. Ares hardware is being built. Orion is being built. Constellation will be ready. We'll use off the shelf components to speed the process and keep cost low, etc...'
11 years later, we still would not have had crew capability had SpaceX not arrived.
Fortunately there are multiple private contractors that are pretty far along with their modules and there is a big profit motive for various high-price low-mass things that can only be created in space. I expect it will be quite the boom industry once we can do more research and development than the paltry effort on the ISS.
Wrong, you've created a false alternate history that pre-supposes no action would have been taken to remedy the situation.
@@slartybarfastb3648 Boeing can get crew up there, they just can’t bring them back
@zacklewis342 Action like what? SpaceX was one of two contracts awarded. This was the action taken. Boeing's offering still hasn't become operational.
@@zacklewis342 What action? You can't just pull a human-rated spacecraft our of your butt. If not for SpaceX we would have continued buying seats on Soyuz to this day.
The ISS has been worth its weight in gold. All of that tremendous research accomplished.
So teeeeechnically it has cost much, much more (~150 b) than its weight worth in gold (~30 b). So if it's only worth its weight in gold, it would have been a loss.
@@KhongDr You beat me to it lol.
But objects in space are weightless…
While the planet burns through countless wars and man made climate catastrophe.
@@batcollins3714 All due respect, we spend a lot more on the climate change fight alone, forget the amount spent on wars. India alone spends around that much on fighting climate change every year.
Awesome footage of the ISS with the shadow of the Space Shuttle passing over it!
Time stamp at 0:04 for anyone who didn't notice like me!
Space Motel 6 -- "We'll leave the lights & oxygen on."
You win comment of the day. 😊
_"I'm Tom Bodett for Habtel 6, and_
_we'll leave the CO2 scrubbers on."_
That's my take. 😅
Even in space they'd still have roaches
if a motel is a motor hotel, then a rocket motel would probably be a "rotel" or whatever.
The oxygen will definitely be an extra, taxed surcharge. Lol
Sorry, but after reading that title all I can think is:
"SpaceX has been contracted to destroy the ISS and rescue the stranded astronauts."
"...but.... not in that order, right?"
It's Elon, so consider a roll of the dice to determine the order.
Elon will put a poll on twitter
@@marcogenovesi8570”erm actually it’s called X 🤓☝️”
@@marcogenovesi8570 X*
Depends if the check clears or not.
"Where Will Astronauts Go After The ISS Is Destroyed?" that title made me think about them just having surplus Astronauts in the closet somewhere, I'm hoping they find a nice field somewhere and just let them roam free and be who they want to be, try not to feed them after because they will think it's just another adventure.
You could teach them to hunt with a spear to help the transition be smoother though
Maybe chase them with actors in ape costumes?
"try not to feed them after because they will think it's just another adventure." - What's the joke
The space station is just going to go to a happy little farm. I assume the astronauts will all have nice coups there to sleep in when they come in from grazing.
Me and my GF saw an abandoned stray astronaut walking along the road yesterday and she really wanted me to stop and pick the poor fella up. But like I reminded her the last time we adopted a stray astronaut and the international political debate that ensued on who actually owns the astronaut and how much trouble it was teaching him to speak English. I'll never forget Romanov 😢
Moon and Mars
My dad always told me "Don't start Vast projects with half-vast ideas."
Oh, I like your dad. He has some very well reasoned ideas... as opposed to many of the "managerial staff" speaking on these topics. I think someone needs to disconnect their teleprompter!! 😆🙃👍
..poor Bigelow, made all those plans with inflatable Habs but was too early and had to wait for crew vehicles
Untitled Space Craft: Three SLS main stages, two Falcon 9 rockets, two SLS solid boosters, two Delta IV M upper stages, a Space Shuttle Orbiter attached to the main tank, and a Saturn V upper stage.
SLS Saturn Shuttle 9
Or SSSN 🤣
I christen this spacecraft "The Johnny Cash".
A piece at a time spacecraft bringing an end to the piece at a time space station.
And a space partridge in a space pear tree.
Well, if it works like a charm in KSP…
I'm sure there's a Project Orion drive somewhere in the background too. Just for good measure. :D
The title reminded me of an old joke I heard from a Russian some years ago that went like this:
TASS News Agency reports that the Mir station that reached the projected end of life was successfully deorbited and scuttled in the designated area of the Pacific Ocean. Currently our Cosmonauts... OH SHIT! COSMONAUTS!!!
Nah, that guy is wild
"the international community" aka US and west europe
Like if they ever cared about human lives... hah, funny in its own grotesque way.
@@matwyder4187 says the westerner with the biggest slaugher of human lives the past centuries
@@automatedrussianbot still international (because of the amount of countries)
_"Or party supplies, if that's your jam."_
Woe is me, when some fool sneaks a party popper onboard, *_packed full of glitter!_* At which point everyone is _immediately_ sent home, with the habitat prompt set for re-entry to burn up... Because as we all know, you will NEVER get rid of that glitter! 😅
I imagine that would be a huge hazard in free fall, with it getting into the ventilation system and avionics, shorting things out, and being breathed in by the occupants.
Space-rated party poppers have all their glitter bits numbered for easy FOD audit after use.
@@RCAvhstape Oh geeze... Yea, it would DEFINITELY be a human hazard as well!
And admittedly, I totally hadn't considered that fact!! 🤦♂️😆
@@josephastier7421 haha
I have no idea why you saying FOD triggered this thought... but now I'm genuinely curious how much damage a single speck of glitter would cause when colliding with something at orbital velocities; a synthetic 'micrometeoroid', if you will. 🤔🤣
I might have to see if one of those guys that make Fluid Dynamics videos about projectile hitting tank armor, would be willing to simulate this...
Have them test it against a spacecraft's hull _(Starship, simply for ease of obtaining the stainless steel's specs),_ a heat shield tile, as well as an EVA suit's fabric and face shield. ☺️
It's not called "Stripper Glitter" for nothing, so that's gonna be one heck of a party. And, all that's needed to clean it up is a stage hand with a mop and towel.
17:05 - It's not Dragon ... the station, it's pushin' the station.
Gold.
Thank you, Scott, for this survey of the current "state of the stations". YOU are the man who gives us, true space nerds, our peridoc dose of "space" news. Great job and terrific vids and graphics.
The de-orbit vehicle should be called: the Kraken. Mythical sea monster, destroyer of many a ship and vessel..both on the high seas and in KSP.
Shiva.
The video of the robot arm manipulating modules made it look like an old fashioned gentleman taking off his hat in an extravagant bow!
There is only one name worthy of this space station destroying monster… the dreaded Kraken!!
17:26. . . That Kerbal space shuttle configuration. . . LOL!!
"Untitled Spacecraft" seems legit
The dad jokes in your videos are some of the best. Absolutely love them and chuckle every time.
Who else is old enough to remember SkyLab de-orbiting in the late 70s ? America still owes Australia $ for littering. 😅
I remember Ren & Stimpy making fun of Mir when I was a kid 😊
I remember Skylab coming down.Did you know there was a worker's revolt on it?
At least, that was the urban legend at the time.
Australia is where space debris goes to die. I remember you Aussies had one of our PSLV rocket's debris drift up to one of your beaches and were talking about sticking it into a museum or something.
A pity they couldn't get the Shuttle built on time so they could have saved it.
I believe the Outback Australian town of Esperance was the one that fined NASA $400 for littering after small pieces of Skylab landed in their Main Street (the largest piece of was an oxygen tank that landed in a sheep paddock further away). It was meant as a joke and NASA didn’t pay it, but a radio DJ in the USA ended up having listeners call in to donate and paid the fine years later.
@scottmanley: _"uses of a spacestation: 1) fun, 2) prestige"_ 😆
Honestly depressing in my opinion
@@andrewn7365 Was in the firt 2-3 min of the vid.. later on 'research' gets included.
But on that note - the only ULTIMATE reason for humans to go to space is for life FROM EARTH to make it to the stars - for life to expand.. IMHO also not REALLY exciting as the 'WHAT FOR?' really is nothing to write home about. It's what life does. Big whoop.
;-)
The learned meat bags aren’t good at space stuff.
The Vast Haven-1 is the most ex citing of them all because it is the one with the best chance of happening and the best chance of happening the soonest. It is fantastic, practical, and pragmatic design perfect for helping boost a private-sector driven LEO economy
Great episode, thanks very much. You are (still) by far the best "Spaceflight Explainer" out there (at least on earth) 😉👍🚀
Those inflatable modules are very interesting for a number of reasons. Excellent update, Scott.
Forget these clunky Lego projects...when are we going to get a "2001" station with a Hilton and Howard Johnsons?
I demand Velcro shoes
About the time Satan takes up ice skating
Have you seen the Hilton logo at 5:45 though? At least they're working on it
Unfortunately, PanAm can't operate the ground-to-orbit shuttles.
Probably a good century away minimum
I really hope axiom can use some of the iss hardware. I really like their approach of using the iss as a stepping stone.
No everything is nice with that approach. The ISS orbit is something no one really wants. Makes the trips a lot more expensive.
@framegrace1 I wonder if they could slowly push it to lower inclinations on each re-boost.
And do defend the devil it does mean it sees more of the Earth, therefore Earth observing payloads and missions make more sense.
And the Orion III Spaceplane. With Pan Am Spaceways as the carrier. :)
I remember a "wet workshop" proposal from around Skylab years where the station would be within the propellant tanks of a booster upper stage.
Now, take a Starship without flaps and heat shield, cram the payload section with what you need to retrofit a space station inside the tanks, then send a crew to do the retrofitting job and recover the Raptor engines, and voilà, with only 2 super-heavy launches, you aready have a huge space station...
so the old shutell tank space station idea
@@anuvisraa5786 Every time they dropped one of those I thought "Well there goes a perfectly good ISS module"
The internal capacity of Starship is already supposed to be a bit larger than ISS's total pressurized volume. I think the most valuable piece to figure out is a 4 or 6-way connector module to endlessly chain starships. From there, we would just need bespoke internals for the various needs, and a model with deployable solar panels. It would still be worth it do use the tank areas of course, for non-returning modules, but there's plenty of space, and you'll want to save some engines and fuel for orbital maintenance.
@@VaradiioEngine for manuvers, that could be shared hardware with the Luna Lander Starship. The connector between, could be a ring structure for a large number of ships to park on, that clips on to the same pins that are for the catch arms under the front flaps, plus a crew access arm style peice that swings out from an inner ring down to a crew hatch on the pez-door side, where it could also hook in to connectors in the raceway for systems monitors. Park ships around the ring, spin for gravity, have a central cube shaped docking structure that doesn't spin, and can have 5 dragons parked at it, with it's sixth side is a slip-ring that connects to the rotating structure.
@@josephastier7421Weren't they made of a super light metal that was crazy expensive, and IIRC, toxic to humans. Could have fitted walls and floors inside, then sprayed the gap to the tank walls with expanding foam to seal and thermal insulate.
I love the Ship of Theseus approach to space station evolution. 😉
Excellent! its the future we all wanna see Scott. Thank you
I for one am down with the Cygnus.
glad I am not the only one who makes that joke
Can't they bring a Cygnus back from orbit with that inflatable heatshield?
Scott, you should do a video on the Chinese Space Station. Western press largely ignores it, but it seems impressive.
China will be leading the way in the near future
Isn't it ignored because there's nothing known to talk about?
Don’t care about communist china at all!
China should be ignored !
@andrewcarter4046 it's not impossible to get information about the Tiangong. They public a lot in scientific journaly. But it's more effort for western media and it's not as streamlined like NASA or ESA communicate to the public.
I hate that all these solutions are private. Space should be developed as a public good for all humanity. But I guess that’s a philosophy from the 70s-90s, not for today
I feel the same way. Now it'll just be another playground for billionaires
If it was spent by governments, people complain the money is not spent on social issues. Let the rich spend their money. 🤷♂️
That’s a philosophy from USSR. "Public good, not those evil rich!" and they got rid of the rich... so everyone become poor.
What's your favorite government program that came in on time and under budget?
Private pursuits in space is the ONLY way we will get to space. Governments do it for clout and competition with other nations. I understand that. A private enterprise has a wider expanse of driving focus.
another fantastic video there Scott, i am very much in agreement with regards to a future where we maintain a LEO human presence and beyond!
Thanks so much for creating and sharing this informative video. Great job. More.
Thanks for collecting all of this information in a single, easy to "consume" video.
Untitled spacecraft😂 it took me a second for that one!
Interesting point about the Shuttle allowing modules to be more weight efficient since they didn't need engines
You passed over Starmax space station architecture being developed by Gravitics, which could be one to watch IMHO. They already got some kinda contract from the USSF, they are developing space station modules tailored to the Starship fairing that can be either launched as a single-module space station, or connected together into larger stations.
ah man, I love an optimistic Scott Manly video!!
The "draggin'" pun actually elicited a very loud "Shut up, Scott!" from me.
Russia could theoretically get to CSS, with a bit of effort. Russian territory south of Vladivostok goes down to ~42.3°N, which is very close to Tiangong at 41.47°N. Zenit-2 was supposed to be further developed to be human-rated. If it was, then they could launch of the old Sea Launch system (designed to launch Zenit-2SL) from the optimum latitude. That old launch platform is conveniently at Slavyanka (42.871°N 131.393°E), just outside Vladivostok. So not impossible, though I can't see them doing it.
They can always buy a seat on the Chinese Rockets like how the Americans did with the Soyuz to get to the ISS.
Could also do expensive plane change manoeuvres.
Before the end of collaboration during the war with Ukraine Russia was also launching Soyuz from French Guyana. Depending on the political future in Russia and the EU, they may be able to launch from Kourou again. If such peace and/or political change does lead to the return of such a collaboration, they may be able to launch crew to the Chinese Tiangong space station from that launch site using Soyuz.
But that may be a very optimistic view of the next 5 years of Russian political change
Pushin' VS. Dragon/draggin' --- -> -*-GROAN-*-
Peace is not something you wish for. It's something you make, something you do, something you are, and something you give away.
Damn Scott... made me snort audibly. "Not Dragon. Pushin!" Witty. Very witty.
Damn while listening to this i want a "Kerbal Space Program 2" so badly that honests the ISS in a campaign where you need to build and rebuild a space station. And at the end it lets you free too explore other planets, build a space center on those and estabish a station around those on your own terms.
Now, we're just waiting on the Space Force Station.
I'm waiting for the SFCIS
Space Force Criminal Investigative Service
Maybe rods if death will become a thing by then.
@@NeedsLessWedge"Rods from God"
@@jimurrata6785 yes that's it.
It would be nice if the ISS was boosted into a lunar orbit instead.
Getting information about longevity of materials would and learning about what might go wrong earliest would be beneficial too.
Nah the LAN won’t match
Throw enough thrust at the problem and it can be overcome. Time isn’t an issue, so there can be more gravity assist orbits to increase its speed as well. Although atmospheric drag on the solar panels might become a problem if it gets too low.
The Chandrayaan-3 spacecraft had a good trans lunar insertion strategy and it worked for them.
After Starliner's performance, I would be suspect of any design that did not include at least two docking ports. So Vast may want to re-think that design. They could put a segment that looks like a cross on the end where the Dragon attaches, that would accommodate two additional capsules. But to only have Life support, and once egress from the single capsule, is asking for trouble. Unless it doesn't mate with a Boeing product, then I suppose you'd be fine.
Two docks is definitely important for safety.
Though Starliner isn't stuck. It could come home at any time, but the parts they want to study are jettisoned before re-entry and burn up, so they have intentionally delayed the return to gather data. No one is actually stranded.
Here's my idea: adapt Cargo Dragon to fly in a fairing, and dock a 6-port ball to the front. Launches, the cargo dragon then acts as a space tug to get the ball to the space station. It docks it, then undocks itself, then de-orbits.
@@CptJistuce intentional delays, that's a new one
“Name it Pushin instead of Drogon” That is hilarious , thank you Scott, for a great chuckle 🤭😂
Again great work from your end, Scott ! I'm tensed to see (1) which one of the stations designs shown will become reality and (2) when that'll happen.
Dragon to deorbit the ISS? Not Draggin', Pushin'! 😂 So, a Puffin or Penguin? 😅
Puff, the *magic* Dragon.
It really should be Kraken. Because it's used for crackin' the station, but also because Kerbal.
@@Noughmad Kraken is a good Rum 🥃😉🖖
Pushin sounds too much like someone we'd prefer to forget.
I heard NASA had a farm upstate 😉
If by upstate, you mean in a long term heliocentric storage orbit waiting for a future spacecraft to recover it and deliver it to a museum? I so wish
It's Quit Uptown
It's where they take space project budgets when they're tired and need a place where they can relax and have fun forever!
@@josephastier7421 Is that the farm where Voyager 3 is telling "When I was your age" stories to Project Prometheus?
@@MonkeyJedi99 Yes. Everybody who goes to The Farm is happy forever there.
Dragon? No ...
TROGDOR!!!!!! TROGDOR!!!!!! Burninating the station!
guitar hero fan too? lmao
@@edthegoomba type in strongbad emails in the search engine of your choice to get the answer
"The head of Roscosmos, Yuri Borisov, signed off on the timetable with the directors of 19 enterprises involved in creating the new station. The agency confirmed plans to launch an initial scientific and energy module in 2027. It said three more modules would be added by 2030 and a further two between 2031 and 2033". You know, when i watch about space and our progress in that direction i expect facts not propaganda. Still love the video
Shh Scott: you have such a Manly Voice... utterly scintillating. Er or so I've been told. They also say that you sound like a really cocky chap, all cheeky and stuff- which is crossing the mark, I think you will agree.
I’m really hoping that they continue normal operations of ISS past 2030. It seems like ditching it would be a huge waste.
I think so too but....
@@JeffreyBue_imtxsmoke When nasa first did their evaluation they estimated 2028 would be the last year. The most recent analysis predicts 2030. Who knows, maybe once the date gets closer they will review it again and move it back another few more years.
It lacks power (without Russia's modules).
There's stress cracks to be worried about worsening.
I think it's safe enough for now, but definitely closely monitored and otherwise on life support.
Everything decays and there is no workshop in space, where you can easily fix your station. EVAs can't fix everything. Maybe they'll push the date back 2-3 more years, if the ISS holds up better than expected.
It will become dangerous to operate in the next few years as the radiation exposure causes materials to degrade and the constant heating and cooling cycles cause fatigue cracks in the lightweight alloys used for the station. Some of the Russian segments are already becoming potentially hazardous as they were not designed to go beyond 25 years and the station is now older than that. The current station would become a srious hazard to occupants by 2030 or thereabouts and even before then the extra safety equipment to continue operation would drive operating costs up far too much.
The current ISS needs a successor if humanity wants a truly international space station up there, and I hope we do want it enough for somebody to pay for it.
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets.
...So, we won't be seeing that opening sequence of an ever expanding space station in real life?
Can't they slowly replace the ISS with the jnflatable modules that they get a Space Station of Theseus?
I'm pretty sure each ISS module is bolted together
No
@@thescrimblzllo, writes, _"I'm pretty sure each ISS module is bolted together"_
You do know that bolts can be unbolted, right?
@fred_derf well, it's bolted together from the inside, if you wanna play a game of mix and match with a space station you'd have to unbolt it from the inside, which would cause a rapid depressurisation, and NASA even said it themselves: "The station's modules and truss structure were not designed to be easily disassembled in space."
@@fred_derf you do know what vacuum is, right ? Who will be unbolting from inside ? You ?
What an interesting idea for a video!
Another awesome video from you.
I would like to see a starship packed with goodies sent into a elliptical orbit to study asteroids on as a dry run to Mars but to really do some hard science in the asteroid belt
I predict not a single commercial space station venture will work out.
The idea will shrink and shrink until they end up contributing a single module or some subassemblies to the final multi-national station.
There is no reason for private companies to invest in space at all. Except for tourism, so, i dont get why people are overhyped with "finally commercial space stations!"
Its like, from the space-research lab for the whole humanity we are falling to the space motels for the rich.
@@Andrey_Gysev the end goal is mining in space, the literal only thing that can stop the economy from collapsing under the weight of it's demand for growth.
@@Andrey_Gysev Space manufacturing might change that.
Way back in the Apollo Applications Program, there was a proposal for a free-flying space telescope based on an Apollo lunar module chassis. It would have operated with Skylab. China is probably copying that idea for their free flying space telescope.
Not probably, we are. It's called XunTian and will fly closely with the space station, maintenance and equipment upgrades can be easily done in the pressurized space when docking.
*In This Case* using the word “copy” is a bit disingenuous as with Energia-Buran despite designs being different, at some point the core maths of engineering push designs to look/behave similar.
Copying = "We can not do it and they are going to do it better".
A portrait of the current state of "Western Technology" in so many fields. Our antecessors will be pretty unhappy in their tombs.
You know, there's only so many ways to make a Space Telescope and a Space Station work together without compromising the telescope, it's not necessarily a copy.
China has a similar concept. The XunTian (巡天)China Space Station Telescope (CSST) is now under R&D. As planned it will be launched in 2024, but it is delayed in 2026.
With SpaceX focused on launch vehicles, other companies could potentially develop space stations, land habitats, ground vehicles, and more.
I wonder when the first 'orbit clean-up' will happen. There is entirely too much crap floating around and something like Ocean Cleanup but for space would not only collect a lot of useful information it would also make space safer for all future endeavours.
I like that idea of personal craft for the dragon to connect to for a vacation, a private suit in space.
Get your ticket to that wheel in space
While there's time
The fix is in
You'll be a witness
to that game of chance in the sky
Just avoid the station labeled "Honeymoon Suites".
😂😂😂
If you look at the economics of doing CGI in big budget movies its not a big stretch to imagine the film industry using commercial space stations to shoot microgravity scenes.
11:00 Use the new Dragon that's being designed to deorbit the ISS as a space tugboat to assemble modules which don't have their own guidance and propulsion.
Once there's a dragon space pickup truck I think a starship gas station won't be far behind. With an on-orbit refueling infrastructure in place I think we'll see the problems of incompatible orbits slowly go away.
I’d love to see a butterfly garden out there. Beat to start that in the spring though. You can spread the seed in winter, and/or start seedlings and plant them in the spring.
I attended a talk in 1981 where Robert Teller advocated the simple solution of using the Moon. I agreed then, and continue to think that is the correct solution. It's time to lose the training wheels! When do we get started on the Space Elevator?
The biggest error the US and NASA made was retiring the space shuttle too quickly before there was a few replacement. NASA didn't develop Dragon or Falcon 9...
SLS isn't up after one launch....
Where's the money going?
Yes they could made shuttle autonomous,to fly with out astronauts ,if Buran could do it in 1989 then could make in 21 century
Dragon and F9 were built to satisfy NASA contracts.
4:55 "-or party supplies if that's your jam" I bet doing lines of coke is hard in space.
what mechanism would you need to do proper lines in space? important research right here
think of one of those flavor bead straws but replace the beads with cocaine and cap the ends with a peelable seal @unflexian
Scott,
You should consider arranging a tour of the Axiom facilities in Houston. You have quite a few viewers there.
When I read the title of your video, this popped into my head: "Next on NOVA: A Space Age Problem: Homeless Astronauts"
Very good episode Mr Scott manley, the futuristic industry that no one is speaking of is medical! Life-saving, life extending, kind of medical. There are certain conditions that can be repaired or cured by just being in space, alone or in combinations. One life-saving and life-extending surgery I need would be the repair of three vertebrae in my neck! Gravity dictates that the surgeries would have to be done at the surprising angles with certain machinery that would not be required in space with no gravity. The medical possibilities of space is as vast as spaces itself.
It's very sad to see tax payer's paying up the bill and private companies taking public subsidies for vanity projects. Nation states shouldn't be passive clients, they should invest in people and keep the know-how.
Cars, trains, planes, and boats have made huge leaps in technology without relying on government. I'd bet if NASA was a private entity, we'd be vacationing on the moon today.
Which people should they invest in? The US is far from a nation state.
Forgive my pessimism but I doubt any of these will make it to orbit before budgets get cut and they get cancelled.
the only one that for sure is going up is gateway and only because thats already been paid for but as for the rest you are ignoring one key factor, china has a better space station than america has access to currently and you just know that the american ego wont stand for that
If any of these is economically feasible, they will launch. Because private interests will fund it.
My bet is some form of Starship.
@@exilestudios9546 it's not just about ego, it's also because China doesn't work with anyone. the station is theirs and any research made there belong to the Chinese alone. if they opened Tiangong to international participation that would be a different story.
Chances are low indeed, but definitely not as low when Nasa would be the ones putting something up. If it generates money, a company will launch. Nasa though, totally dependent on whatever a politician decides to pay for.
@@kennethroberts6993 With what reason would it ever be economically feasible? Research not even remotely can pay for this without additional government subsidies.
lol, "Shoveling money into the hole in the sky called 'Blue Origin'"
17:25 Finally, years of watching Scott Manley made me worthy for this joke!
Scott- Just a thought... Instead of thinking about using Starship with a cargo bay and a manipulator arm to assemble parts of a new space station, how about this: Make three or four Starships to actually BE a component of a GIANT space station when assembled at the nose via a hub? (like each Starship being a blade like member like a windmill, all joined at the nose)
That hub may have three or four (or more) docking ports for vehicles such as Dragon capsules to dock. The hub can be delivered in the "cargo bay" of one of these Starships/modules and then the empty bay can be sealed and converted to a workable pressurized part of the station. Also- The now empty tanks for fuel and the engines can be jettisoned turning that space into workable space station vacuum storage areas or even a protective "garage" for a Dragon like supply capsule once the engines have been jettisoned. Heck! Keep the tanks of one of the Starships and turn them into potable water/ oxygen storage tanks! Another Starship can keep its fuel tanks and engines for orbit correction/de-orbit.
Imagine three or four huge Space Station modules each joined at the nose with the interior volume of a Starship! What's the usable interior space of a Starship now (without considering the fuel tank area as "usable space")? almost thirty feet x eighty feet? HUGE! So to recap- Each Starship is not delivering sections of a space station. They are purpose built to each be a complete COMPONENT/MODULE of a new space station! The list of possibilities when we rethink the Starships role in making a new space station are now ENDLESS and I believe a lot cheaper in the long run.
The brief mention of a Starship-based space "station" replacement is the most likely way SpaceX will contribute to replacing the ISS. Yes, it's *a lot* easier to land your "station", refit it with new experiments, and then launch it again than to place a ship in orbit and send up new equipment and supplies that have to be squeezed through an airlock and set up by astronauts. Astronaut time in space is very expensive! Replacing/modifying equipment in space takes extensive planning and rehearsal on the ground. It's much easier to land the ship and let techs on the ground do the work and test everything.
It's surprising how many Starship fans still can't get their heads around how many paradigms Starship breaks. Launching once a month will be cheaper than anything NASA does now. Ditto for the commercial stations. People get carried away with grand visions about how a converted Starship can be a much larger version of the ISS when there is a more pragmatic option. One permanent piece of hardware that'd be useful to stay in orbit is a small module with solar and radiation panels. The shuttling station-ships can attach there rather than unfolding complex panels. It's also save room on the station-ship.
A crew can go up for two weeks or two months. Idk if some long term experiments will need to stay longer but a Starship LEO economy will offer options. Bonus: if a crew will only be there a month they won't need to exercise a lot to stave off microgravity effects. ISS crews spend a very large amount of time exercising.
That would be similar to the Spacelab module, which was in the payload bay of the Space Shuttle. Setting up all hardware prior to flight definitely saves a lot of time on-orbit. But it could only stay on-orbit for a week or so, while Starship could stay up for months. (I think HLS has a 100-day loiter time, for reference). Definitely a gamechanger, as you say.
If you are manufacturing, you don't want to be relaunching equipment all the time, especially if it's sensitive and/or heavy.
@@satoshimanabe2493 Indeed. I wasn't specific as to which mention of Starship Scott made but it was to the bit at the end where he talked about Spacelab. The future Mars-capable Starships will have essentially an indefinite lifetime in LEO since they're made to spend 6 months each way to Mars. With LEO refreshment available something derived from that could stay up for... decades, like the ISS. Sooo many possibilities, and there will be a place for a long term station although I think the station-ships will do the bulk of the work. Even for a hotel.
@@Shrouded_reaper There will probably be a place in the LEO economy for a permanent station or a long-term station-ship that stays up a year to more. One use would be for what you mention. There's plenty to elaborate on. Sensitive or delicate products of zero-g manufacturing will probably need to be brought back on Dreamchaser. But I think the great majority of work done on the ISS now can be done on a ship that returns every month or two.
I remember when the first modules were launched... Now I'm going to witness the deorbit of the ISS... Such a bittersweet moment...
14:40 let's see how this statement is going to age until 2030.
Russia won't have enough cash for toilet paper the next few decades.
Probably pretty well, considering that Russia has been failing to get even Venera-D done for two decades so far, and that is vastly cheaper than such a space station would ever be. Not to mention the delays of the recent Luna missions, also comparatively cheap and not requiring any fancier lift vehicle than a Soyuz. Perhaps it'd age poorer if this was 40 years ago or something, but Russia is very clearly falling well behind its optimistic plans in every regard. The only hope is if by 2030 Russia gets a leadership less concerned with plundering its own industrial capability for personal gain and alienating the entire rest of the globe, yet VERY interested in the space program.
@@xiphosura413 i screened your comment, just in case you'd delete it out of shame. :D
@@isekaiexpress9450 Well, should miracles prove possible, I think some minor embarrassment would be a low price to pay! Assuming either of us even remembers this in six years.
@@xiphosura413Well they proved they are capable of getting their shit together for the war in Ukraine. It started as an utter disaster but two years later they are doing better than anyone could have predicted.
It is a sad state of affairs that a war was the only thing that motivated them to do so, while space projects seem completely abandoned.
If the ISS has potential for expansion, we might as well turn it into a Theseus' Space Station kind of thing: Upgrading modules continuously, until at some point none of the original "classic" ISS exist, but the station itself carries on.
Regardless of what happens im sure its going to be really cool. I remember following the project as the ISS came together and thinking how cool it was that it even existed.
The SpaceX Pushin is born!
I'm picturing a Starship, packed with solar pannels and life support supplies, completely replacing the ISS. That is one big spaceship!
I'm still hoping the astronauts on board will be moved to somewhere else _before_ it's destroyed.
SpaceX asks "how does this get us to Mars?" I don't think a station in LEO does that. At least not the kind of station being discussed, here.
Also, China's telescope idea is awesome!
If you've got a propellant depot in orbit, so tanker ships can ferry up fuel on their schedule, and deep-space ships can tank up on theirs, it'd be simple to add some cargo storage, and even habitable modules.
You can build a "space station" and keep adding to it until you've built a self sustainable interplanetary craft. You can try it for yourself in KSP.
They should seriously consider instead mothballing the station up in a higher orbit. Get extra fuel onto it, put it to high orbit and shut all systems down and can either be used in the future or as a mark of human achievement.
The thing that it slowing all this down is the shortage of engineers with experience designing and manufacturing a space station. 😊Great video.
not happning. There will not be ny non-certified hardware in space launchd form western countries.
It’s wild how space equipment can cost 150 plus million and work yet Disney can spend 180 million on the Acolyte which is an utter failure. Maybe money needs to be allocated.
Will the stationless astronauts be floating around risking arrest for space vagrancy?
If I understand what you said, they are not going to slow the space station down enough to go through a too steep reentry, but they are going to push it downward and force its reentry at speed. But to do that without breaking the space station apart they would have to slowly reorient the space station so that its length would be parallel to the direction they want to push it. That of course would mean the space station would reenter the atmosphere sideways and expose the majority of the space station to the heat of friction all at the same time which will hopefully burn up all of the space station before anything hits the ocean, or ground if things do not work out as planned.
Great presentation and new facts for me. Thanks
I have an idea using a particular medal that can shield cosmic radiation, provide power, and component cooling. For starship and habitat/station.