Boeing Workers Will Fly to ISS Aboard Their Company's New Spaceship

The ISS is scheduled to come down in 2020. The CTS-110 will not become operational until 2016 if all goes well. There are a number other companies planning to go to the ISS so how many trips can the CTS-110 make and what will be the purpose of going? I am glad they are building this but what are they going to do with it after 2020?

Hmm with the ISS going down in 2020..
Question for you smart ones..
Would it be possible insted of ditching it in the ocean to send it to the moon.

And maybe some how land it there even in parts to start the building of a moon base?
Its such a waste since alot of the stuff is up there in the first place, were the most expensive part is putting stuff in orbit..

I bet if they dared some schools to come up with a way they could by 2020..may people should think before they decide to junk something..

I believe the 2020 date for ditching the ISS is really when the plans for its' use run out. Something will come up to keep it up there, like maybe a space dock for a Mars ship. Likely NASA wants to keep it, but wow to any politician who votes to trash it.

"Boeing said that [Boeing being part owner of the rocket maker] had no bearing on its decision"

Ha! I could just imagine them choosing to fly on a SpaceX rocket because they are six times cheaper.

@Areuthinking see http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/roskosmos-when-iss-finished-2020-were-crashing-it-ocean#comments

for all the details about that you'd ever want

@Areuthinking

great proposal. i had the same thing in mind. i wish there were a lot more people in charge that REALLY cared about the expansion of humans in the cosmos. it seems that money is more important to some of these fools. --
this the order of how we should do things-
1.underwater base on earth
2.floating cites on the enormous oceans(100 miles in diameter)
3.cities in the sky(imagine giant airships)
4.more ISS types arrangements but bigger that can support 100,000+
6.moon base/underground moon base
7.mars base

after this we start to make our mark in space and history and solidify ourselves in exploration of mankind for the common good.

" Boeing ", I wish you the stars and beyond. I wish you all the opportunity in the world and I love to work for your company and very frankly, I am not afraid of heights or risk and I am proven, and researchable. But for that matter, GOD BLESS ANY USA COMPANY AS WE USA PERSURE THE STARS!

This picture of a space capsule is captivating and well I just want to float all the way to Orion and beyond. The picture is just a nice graphic and inspiring. So what does it really look like?

Believe you will love it.

We have good reputation, fashion products,

come here quickly== http://www.jordanforworld.com

Opportunity knocks but once

We should recycle the ISS. After all it is the green thing to do. We should not make the ocean NASA's landfill.

First; the ISS is extremely unlikely to be splashed in 2020. That is the date the current funding extension runs out, and another extension to 2028 is already being talked about. The articles last about the Russians splashing it were likewise FUD.

CST-100 has no beyond Earth orbit (BEO) capability - it's an orbital taxi with only enough battery power for 2-3 days of flight, though it can recharge once docked at ISS or a Bigelow Aerospace Space Complex commercial lab. Could it be upgraded to BEO specs and gain a service module with solar power later? Sure, if there's a business case.

As far as manned BEO missions go, none of the capsules under development (CST-100, Dragon, Blue Origin's or NASA's MPCV) would also be used as the primary habitat for missions further than the Moon or to a Lagrange Point space station (L-points are gravitational stability points perfect for space docks.)

For long missions beyond these (asteroids, Mars, Deimos, Ceres etc) a separate and larger habitat, a lander, a propulsion module and a docking module to connect it all would be required, and the capsule only used for the ride up to and the ride back down to Earth.

Bigelow will already be making most of these parts for their Space Complex's in their expanded 360,000 sq/ft factory in Nevada. Opens this fall. Add the lander and make a module of a size appropriate to the mission and....

DocM

@Areuthinking

Doubt that would work. Structurally, the ISS is designed for true zero gravity. Even at 1/6th of earth surface gravity, the moon's surface gravity is still probably too much for many of the ISS components. I'm thinking particularly of some of the module linkages, which would likely break under the strain. You'd have to construct an enormous super-structure for the entire thing to sit on in order to keep it all stable. And once you've gone to that much effort, what's the point?

No, as others have speculated, the ISS will probably not be splashed in 2020, but extended and/or repurposed. I could even see it being sold to a private corporation. It isn't too far fetched that we might see lunar or asteroid mining within 9 years. At the very least, you could make it a tourist destination.

only an American politician would be stupid enough to vote to trash it!

@BubbaGump -

" The picture is just a nice graphic and inspiring. So what does it really look like?"

Pretty much like the picture. Image of the CST-100 pressure hull & basic service section structure during construction, but minus its skin. -

http://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/DSC_4810.jpg

DocM

Could the ISS be moved to orbit the moon?

You need to remember this was constructed on earth..
So even at 1/6 of gravity it would not damage it much..plus it is moduler...so it will come apart so theres no need to land it all in one shot.

If people would look at the money benafit in a longrun way insted of short term.
They would find space a realy dam good investment..

You could mine the flooting ice balls for water and other items..have robotic tugships grab on and use lightsails to bring them to a lunar orbit..

And if possible use a divebomb method to to place it on the moon , were crews can mine the ice after..it should be possible to slow the decent to the surface with not much lost to evaporisation..

Even if it takes a year to get said iceball back to the moon..who cares you have alot of other things to do during that time..and i think water would be worth a small fortune up there..and save a ton down here..

Its just to bad everyone wants to be payed 50$ a hour and not have to work for it, i think whey would have been on the moon by now if people could just agree to a wider look then ones self at a instent...but im just dreaming..

I only wish to see man base on the moon before i died and im still young..

@calebscape808, actually it is the Russians that wants splash the ISS. Parts of the station are getting old and maintenance is becoming difficult and expensive. And since the Russians are the only ones with a crew vehicle that can get there they are stuck with the bulk of the upkeep.

@Areuthinking, no disrespect intended, but obviously yo are not a rocket scientist. The ISS's super structure is not even remotely close to being strong enough to hold together during a lunar orbital insertion. It might be feasible to reuse some modules for a lunar station. This would require building and launching a special vehicle to move them to the lunar surface. This however consume a lot of time and money to move something that is mostly worn out.

I expect the powers that be will eventually agree to a ISS remodeling project that will replace older broken down equipment (which will get splashed) with new equipment. But then again, I'm not a rocket scientist either-just a lowly mech eng.

Areyouthinking, moving the ISS to the moon is a major undertaking. In order to get it out of Earth's gravity well, you'll have to get it going about 7 miles per second. As massive as that thing is now, that would require huge amounts of fuel, far more than we can easily get into orbit. And cholln3947 is right about the structure not being made to take the stress of trans-lunar insertion. Maybe if it was completely disassembled then reassembled once it got there but you're talking about a major undertaking.

Then there's the problem of soft landing it on the moon. Crashing it into the moon is easy; an actual landing is hard. Even at 1/6 Earth gravity, that's enough acceleration to bring it down at a high rate of speed.

Finally, the ISS is meant to be resupplied from Earth. That's why the Russians keep sending the resupply craft. There is no means of growing food on the ISS (there simply isn't enough real estate) nor is there a method of producing oxygen in the amounts required. Water recycling technology isn't there yet.

Will there eventually be a moon base? Not unless we can demonstrate a need for it beyond the "gee, isn't it cool to have a base on the moon" factor. So maybe some day but not yet.

Nice picture! Good to see they are planning to put refrigerators in space :)

Form follows function, and a conical capsule is the safest re-entry vehicle because it's self orienting and has a heat shield that is protected during launch and through the flight until just before it's needed.

DocM

I wonder how this capsule flies upon re-entry towards earth. Seems the other capsules had a type of curved parabolic shape. This illustration capsule has a rather flat shape. Could the air turbulence pushing against this flat bottom cause the unit to go into a tumble on free fall and where is there a heat shield?

@BubbaGump: Perhaps it's not supposed to make it back to Earth :) In this economy, they had to leave out the "unnecessary parts" :P

@BubbaGump

"I wonder how this capsule flies upon re-entry towards earth. Seems the other capsules had a type of curved parabolic shape. This illustration capsule has a rather flat shape. Could the air turbulence pushing against this flat bottom cause the unit to go into a tumble on free fall and where is there a heat shield?"

The flat, cylindrical bottom part of CST-100 you see in the pic is a service module that gets jettisoned before re-entry. The capsule bottom, like that of Dragon etc., is rounded into what's called a blunt body. This shape forms a shock wave that deflects the superheated plasma cloud around rather than melting the vehicle.

Stability is obtained by adjusting the center of gravity and by it re-entering at a slight angle (angle of attack). This angle means that the capsules vertical center-line is not parallel to its trajectory, giving the capsule a bit of lift like a wing. This reduces the G-load on the passengers & cargo by bleeding off speed over a longer path instead of a headlong dive.

Of course before all this can work it helps for the vehicle to be pointed the right way first. In most return vehicles, especially Dragon which has a full robot mode, this is usually a pre-programmed maneuver handled by the avionics - but if that fails during a crew flight that's what the monkey in the pilot seat is for ;)

DocM

Please input this URL:
http://www---- bestniceshoes ----com
http://www---- bestniceshoes ----com

Best quality, Best reputation , Best services !!!

Do you think anyone has made love in space yet?

Here are three things that are essential for human spacetravel:

1. Protection from the suns radiation.

2. Overcoming the destructiveness of weightless on the human body.

3. Sexual intercourse in space.

And I don't think sexbots would help.

Until ALL three are satisfied humans will be using robotics to explore space.

@JCC_Starguy:
Actually there is value in putting a base on the moon. It has a large amount of Helium 3. Estimates are, that just 1 shuttle full of it could power the US for years. If we had full access to it here on earth (it can be produced but is extremely expensive to do) it could be used to power nuclear fusion power plants. Harvesting may cost a lot in the short term but, in the long term you're making your investment back drastically.

I also remember reading something a long while back that said it was possible to put a solar collecting base on the moon and beam it back here on earth. The article stated that we've had the tech for it for a long time.

Russia proclaims to splash down of ISS into the ocean 2020. Has anyone ever heard of DRMO? Maybe not, but anyway, perhaps prior to the ISS become economically obsolete they should consider it up for bid. Sell it to a company for civilian company. All the countries that have a vested interest can earn a little pay back. Who knows, Boing or another company may find it economically feasible to use it as a space-port and run missions to it and the moon, mining for helium-3. Hmmm, $$$$ !

Now this is the kind of work perk that can get me applying for you. What are we going to do in space again?

fishercapitalmanagement-corporatenews.com

Maybe modules of the space station could be disconnected, used as a habitat and then assembled in a straight line configuration for structural integrity purposes to be used on a Mars mission? Then all you need would be the lander and extra fuel tanks. Once in Mars orbit, it would be reused later for the return trip for habitat space.

I guess it would be outside the ability of our current technology to capture one of those spent upper stage boosters in orbit and refuel it?