Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI
SpaceKB.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Space Forum / Shuttle / March 2007



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Space station sinks to new low - but it's OK

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Jim Oberg - 15 Mar 2007 23:37 GMT
Space station sinks to new low - but it's OK

NASA says that's part of its plan for finishing the orbital outpost

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17630218/

By James Oberg, NBC News space analyst // Special to MSNBC

  HOUSTON - The international space station has been literally falling out
of the

sky, according to NASA tracking data obtained by MSNBC.com. Under the
inexorable

decay of air drag, its orbital path around Earth has slipped down to 207
miles

(332 kilometers), the lowest average altitude in the nine-year life of the
project.

  A small rocket engine on a docked cargo ship is being fired this week to
boost

the orbit by a small amount. But since the orbit is continually dropping at

about 300 feet (90 meters) per day, the boost will be eaten up by the
effects of

air drag within several weeks.

  A graph released by NASA shows that the gradual decline began in earnest
after

the loss of shuttle Columbia in early 2003. Prior to that disaster, the
altitude

had been maintained at a fairly high level, thanks mainly to reboosts from

visiting shuttles. Since that event, all reboosts have been the
responsibility

of Russian spacecraft.

  However alarming the line on the graph might appear to be, NASA orbital

trajectory experts insist that the station's orbit is under control. They
say

the decline is part of a long-range plan for the current phase of orbital

assembly that involves particularly heavy payloads for shuttle missions.

They say the orbit is still stable, and scheduled Russian reboost rocket
firings

will not allow it to decay any further. And beginning late next year, when
the

delivery of the station's heaviest structural elements will be completed,
the

orbit will be reboosted to greater and greater altitudes.
hallerb@aol.com - 16 Mar 2007 03:41 GMT
> Space station sinks to new low - but it's OK
>
[quoted text clipped - 58 lines]
>
> orbit will be reboosted to greater and greater altitudes.

If onboard rocets somehow malfunctioned wonder how long its orbit will
be stable?
John Doe - 16 Mar 2007 06:08 GMT
In related news, NASA has announced it will fit the station with a powerful ship
fog horn. As its orbit drops, there will come a point where it will have to use
its fog horn to warn buildings and mountains to move aside if they don't want to
be in the station's path. :-)
Brian Thorn - 16 Mar 2007 17:01 GMT
>In related news, NASA has announced it will fit the station with a powerful ship
>fog horn. As its orbit drops, there will come a point where it will have to use
>its fog horn to warn buildings and mountains to move aside if they don't want to
>be in the station's path. :-)

AH-HOOO-GAH

"MAKE A HOLE! COMIN' THROUGH..."
Greg D. Moore (Strider) - 16 Mar 2007 17:50 GMT
>>In related news, NASA has announced it will fit the station with a
>>powerful ship
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> "MAKE A HOLE! COMIN' THROUGH..."

I can see this now.

http://www.snopes.com/military/lighthse.htm

Signature

Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting
Email: sql  (at)  greenms.com          http://www.greenms.com

bradguth@gmail.com - 16 Mar 2007 21:19 GMT
As long as they manage to avoid the outter SAA contour, that's all
that matters, that is unless there's not enough fuel as to reboost
that big old sucker back to 375+ km.
-
Brad Guth
Herb Schaltegger - 16 Mar 2007 21:38 GMT
> As long as they manage to avoid the outter SAA contour, that's all
> that matters, that is unless there's not enough fuel as to reboost
> that big old sucker back to 375+ km.
> -
> Brad Guth

Change your email address again?  Why don't you spend that effort on getting
your meds regulated instead?

<PLONK>

Signature

You can run on for a long time,
Sooner or later, God'll cut you down.
~Johnny Cash

hallerb@aol.com - 16 Mar 2007 22:08 GMT
On Mar 16, 3:38�pm, Herb Schaltegger
<herb.schalteg...@gmail.com.INVALID> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:19:20 -0500, bradg...@gmail.com wrote
> (in article <1174076360.672019.289...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>):
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> Sooner or later, God'll cut you down.
> ~Johnny Cash

You know a nice evacuated station dropping into the pacific would
solve LOTS of troubles:)

Shuttle budget now zero, better use $$ for CEV

No more risky shuttle flights.

This nice low orbits also easier for terrorists.
bradguth@gmail.com - 17 Mar 2007 05:32 GMT
On Mar 16, 1:08 pm, "hall...@aol.com" <hall...@aol.com> wrote:

> You know a nice evacuated station dropping into the pacific would
> solve LOTS of troubles:)
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> This nice low orbits also easier for terrorists

Correct on all counts.  Besides, a few Bigelow POOFs at VL2 would be
so much better, and perhaps even a whole lot less spendy.

One manned mission per 19 month cycle, all others robotic.
-
Brad Guth
bradguth@gmail.com - 17 Mar 2007 05:28 GMT
On Mar 16, 12:38 pm, Herb Schaltegger
<herb.schalteg...@gmail.com.INVALID> wrote:

> Change your email address again?  Why don't you spend that effort on getting
> your meds regulated instead?

Always had this email, but then unlike yourself, at least I'm a real
person.

Why are you insider folks always so upset?
-
Brad Guth
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.