SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the Privatized-International-Space-Station-==-PISS? dept.
NASA may sell/lease parts of the International Space Station in the next decade:
NASA has signalled its intention to offload the International Space Station (ISS) some time in the 2020s. News of the sale appeared in the video below, at about the 14:15 mark [YouTube] when Bill Hill, NASA's deputy associate administrator for exploration systems development, ponders the ISS' role in future missions.
"Ultimately our desire is to hand the space station to either a commercial entity or some other commercial capability so that research can continue in low-Earth orbit. We figure that will be around the mid-20s."
Hill and the other speakers in the video explain how NASA is preparing for a crewed Mars mission and outline how the agency is now well and truly in the market for ideas about how to get it done.
Also at SpaceFlight Insider and TechCrunch.
Related:
Russia to Build New Space Station with NASA after ISS
Russia Investigates Downsizing Space Station Crew From Three to Two
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @01:48PM
I can see this "International Space Station" from my viewing location on the surface of the Earth when i am, like, 20 degrees into the night. You can, too. Look carefully.
This is not consistent with a bunch of reflective tubes and panels @400 km over the surface shining sunlight back to me. Or moonlight. Or city light.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:31PM
I call dumbass. How do you make it through the day with such an ignorant grasp of the physical sciences?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @03:24PM
He also thinks that bubbles in a turbulent medium move in straight lines, which proves that EVA footage takes place in giant pool in... *flips through notes*... oh who cares.
I just wish he's move on to a better one already. I was liking the Weather War one.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @04:38PM
No, I am not that person.
Even if I was, does not change the fact that I can see the 'ISS' as described above.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @06:10PM
No, it just means that you have a weak grasp of orbits and basic geometry. The ISS spends 2/3rds of its orbit in sunlight. Why the hell wouldn't you see it from the ground. You may not realize this, but when you are in the dark doesn't mean that something 400km above you is in the dark as well. However, it might surprise you that when you close your eyes, the rest of the world doesn't actually disappear from existence.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @10:52PM
No, it just means that you have a weak grasp of orbits and basic geometry.
You may not realize this, but when you are in the dark doesn't mean that something 400km above you is in the dark as well.
Now you are in trouble, and you can thank your arrogant pretentiousness for it:
When you a) get a clue about what a cosine is, and b) get your head out of your ass just enough to calculate whether an altitude of 400 km 22 degrees past the separator is inside or outside of the shadow cast from a 6397 km radius globe, come back and visit us.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @11:32PM
get your head out of your ass just enough to calculate whether an altitude of 400 km 22 degrees past the separator is inside or outside of the shadow cast from a 6397 km radius globe, come back and visit us.
Let me get this straight: you are saying that you cannot see the ISS? Then what is that bright thing streaking across the sky? Are you suggesting aliens, or an "electric universe"? Your confusion is spreading. Now see what you have done! Would you be interested in some co-opt space real estate?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday August 23 2016, @02:38AM
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 23 2016, @10:35AM
Was there a point to your post?
Yes, there was a point in my post. Let me reiterate so there is no misunderstanding:
It is geometrically impossible for an object at said altitude to reflect sunlight at that time and location. As I said, once past ~22 degrees of the separator, it is Game Over. You are most welcome to not take my claim at face value, and to do the math yourself. Even better, figure out when the 'ISS' is presumably in the shadow, and ambush it. Do not just go for 'published best viewing times': you know the inclination, you know the speed, so do these math yourself as well, predict its location and see what gives.
I did too and my observation was consistent with what the ISS is supposed to be.
Right. So when the Pharaoh commands the Sun to be eclipsed, and you see the eclipse, this is consistent with the Pharaoh having super-powers.
PS>" Due to excessive bad posting from this IP or Subnet, anonymous comment posting has temporarily been disabled. "
Freedom of Speech, huh? I would expect this from Facebook or Slashdot, but not Soylentnews.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday August 23 2016, @11:53PM
It is geometrically impossible for an object at said altitude to reflect sunlight at that time and location. As I said, once past ~22 degrees of the separator, it is Game Over. You are most welcome to not take my claim at face value, and to do the math yourself. Even better, figure out when the 'ISS' is presumably in the shadow, and ambush it. Do not just go for 'published best viewing times': you know the inclination, you know the speed, so do these math yourself as well, predict its location and see what gives.
The obvious rebuttal is that you did the math or observation wrong and your result is not reproducible. I'll point out that I've been outside at night a lot over the years with the ISS wizzing by. It's quite visible. I've only seen it when it's in sunlight (eg, right after sunset, for example) not at times when it would be in Earth's shadow. So my observation is just as valid as yours is.
Let's point out some really obvious stuff here. First, 400 miles is just not that far away. You can image the ISS in a small telescope. If there's something other than the ISS there, then it'll look different. Second, the model of the ISS as a passive object that reflects sunlight will have a predictable spectrum. Again, you can observe that spectrum through a small telescope with attached spectrograph. I think if you sincerely do these observations and choose to accept the result, you'll have no reason to continue with this.
PS>" Due to excessive bad posting from this IP or Subnet, anonymous comment posting has temporarily been disabled. "
Freedom of Speech, huh? I would expect this from Facebook or Slashdot, but not Soylentnews.
You have to be responsible too. Sounds like you posted an enormous amount of bullshit. It's not your personal echo chamber. Other people use this site too.