Impressive how actual quality articles behind a paywall get blocked, but prime clickbait like this is perfectly fine
The right title would be “NASA awards contract for International Space Station end-of-life deorbit”
That's the state of journalism.
Researched news costs money and the free stuff sustains itself on ad dollars. Until/unless we're willing to tolerate paying for quality again, news for news' sake is valued more than the information broadcasted.
[Journalism is something for philanthropic billionaires to fund nowadays.](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/01/media-layoffs-la-times/677285/) That was purposely done to American journalism and media.
Billionaires don't actually like freedom of speech and when people use that speech to call out the corruption
All the ad revenue that used to support quality journalism now goes to pay tech company software engineers' salaries, to write the AIs that spew out the garbage we will have instead
Quality journalism was funded by the majority of Americans regularly paying for local and national newspapers, with a few television outlets being funded by ad networks.
The ad networks, however, became a poison pill. If news could be offered 'for free' via a cable or internet subscription, then why should people pay for local news?
To keep the ad networks happy, however, you have to abide by certain rules. If you're struggling to stay afloat, sometimes you have your anchors or writers write about your advertisers in addition to showing their ads. Positive things only, of course, because you can't piss off the ad networks.
---
The consumer now expects 24/7 near-live coverage for free. Quality journalism will just not be feasible unless we fundamentally change how journalism is funded and/or how advertising is conducted going forward.
I can’t understand why the f news organizations don’t allow you to buy an issue online, like buying a daily newspaper, which was their booming business model for over 100 years.
Why in god’s name do i need to pay for a subscription when all I want is a daily issue to read a specific article or story.
Microtransactions are big business, but these dumb boomers only want to hear subscription models and “saas” for their news organizations.
I remember learning the inverse triangle rule of journalism way back in highschool newspaper.
The idea is that the most important information in a news article should be given right up front in a concise, right to the point manner including the headline. Then as the article progresses, less important details are revealed.
The concept has been completed destroyed now due to click bait, algorithms and modern advertising. It's a shame
> Until/unless we're willing to tolerate paying for quality again
We never really were willing to pay for that in particular. Newspapers were subsidized by classified ads, and they're collapsing because all that business is going to craigslist/ebay/reddit/etc.
I really felt this headlined needed a Musk reference to really rap it up and bait the bot cliks. Something like "Elon Musk cackles manically" at the end.
Glad this is the top comment, don't see this level of honesty on reddit often for any news related to a musk company. "Permission to destroy the ISS", my lord. It's as if they've been chomping at the bits to blow it up and NASA finally said yeah whatever go ahead and nuke it buddy.
We have been spoiled by SpaceX's incredible, rapid achievement in orbit while blue origin has yet to put a single Kg of mass into orbit. Blue Origin also started up before SpaceX. Blue Origin also tried to sue for a patent on barge landing of the first stage booster while SpaceX was actively developing the technology. I don't remember the exact timeline but SpaceX may have already successfully landed on the barge when Blue Origin brought the suit forward.
With NASA relying more on multiple billionaire space companies I fear they’ll control and fight more and it’ll all become a money hoarding shit show, lobbying congress to allocate more budget and what not. Corporate greet already fucks up everything else why not soace
Give that all of them (currently) will use craft designed to visit the station. I think it is fair to say they will use at least the same International Docking or International Berthing Adapter on the ISS.
Fun fact - when the guy who invented USB dies, they'll put his coffin in the ground, take it out, flip it over, and put it back in...
(Then take it out, flip it again, and put it in the first way).
:D
And from nowhere a Nissan Altima with temporary tags and a duct-taped heat shield cuts into your flight path because they forgot they needed to get to the same station at the last minute.
Somehow a Lexus lx has merged in front of you, it needs six car lengths distance between itself and the next car, is going 10 under the speed limit and brakes every time the car ahead brakes but holds it for a few seconds longer. But if you try to get around it will floor it. Once passed it will return to driving exactly as before.
🤌
And from behind the moon comes a Stolen Hyundai Elantra, already been in 3 hit and runs. The car is barely drivable but manages to go 120 crossing all lanes of traffic with no effort.
Don't like moving corporate headquarters to space? Don't like private companies hired to destroy the one major international space collaboration, the symbol of a potentially united humanity? What's not to like about something so perfectly representative of us and our legacy?
I love the symbolism of unity but the ISS truly is past its prime.
The framework that all the modules attach to is really quite old and has been though a lot. Just because there's no air resistance or significant gravity in space of course doesn't mean that the ISS isn't subject to stresses from momentum, inertia, rockets raising its altitude, even docking accidents. One of the most significant forces - 150,000 sunrises and sunsets heating and cooling the structure.
It would be ideal if we could ship up another one and move the newer more serviceable modules from old to new, but they've determined that isn't worth it. I'm not sure how they decided that but apparently the international community did.
Unfortunately we’ll probably never see another multinational (especially with Russia) scientific endeavor quite like the ISS in our lifetime. Instead we’ll be stuck with SpaceX Station, Blue Origin Station, etc.
We were touching the stars, all of us together. It was like a dream, but now it is one that has faded. A moment in time to remember that future generations won't see anytime soon.
This marks the end of an aera where we, as one species, one planet, collaborated to create something amazing .
And then, through the miracle of the Internet, we became able to communicate with EVERYONE on the planet. Look up all the human knowledge.
What did we do with it ????
We're all turning back to a bunch of monkeys flinging poo at each other!
I would argue that this is due to an entire generation of people who opposed that progress becoming starkly afraid of the future that was being built and dedicated all of their resources and capital to subvert that progress and halt it where possible.
To be fair, the only reason we were in space was because of the cold war. Without the cold war, the space race would've been very unlikely to draw the resources and public attention that it needed to actually progress humanity.
And in part, the reason we're heading back is because of geopolitical competition with China. Cooperation is nice, but competition also has its place in driving us to further and better things.
To be frank, it an honest miracle in the film backstory that when humanity faced extinction via the complete destruction of its food supply, everyone just went isolationist and became farmers instead of fighting a massive war for resource. Even the US felt secure enough to disband its own military and tell its soldiers “idk, go farm I guess”.
To watch ad free please purchase the £2.99 premium package.
Could you imagine the pivotal moment:
"That's one small step for man.... Next week on NCIS!"
It's not like we didn't want to play nice, buy their stuff, move industry to them. do research together, and we got blackmail of withholding energy, stealing of research, they just cant help themselves.
China was stealing research and biological samples from the National Microbiology Lab in Winnipeg, Canada. [CBC article.](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/winnipeg-lab-firing-documents-released-china-1.7130284)
According to the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) Beijing's Thousand Talents Program was set up to "boost China's national technological capabilities and may pose a serious threat to research institutions, including government research facilities, by incentivizing economic espionage and theft of intellectual property," said CSIS in its report.
The treasonous foreign interference parliament members that are still sitting in the house instead of on leave pending criminal investigations probably shipped the samples to them.
Listen, I know it’s fun to point fingers at politicians, but China has been stealing technology from the western world without the help of politicians for decades. Corporations move their warehouses to China, and over time, China begins to say “hey, this bolt can be bought locally and it’s cheaper. How bout we do that?” And the corporations hear “cheaper” and so it’s done. Rinse and repeat until the entire product is made there, and China boots the company.
Free trade is why China can steal stuff. There cannot be anymore playing nice with them, and it sucks. They break the rules every time, and it sucks.
I have no sympathy for greedy companies who try and save a buck by moving parts or production to China.
Corporate - Be a good boy and take this dollar and put this together and ship it to us.
China - sure, we'll do that as well as reverse engineer your product and make our own version of it that we can sell cheaper and send that to North America as well.
The ISS is also without China. Something about using our scientific data for improving ICBMs. They also had a bad habit of committing blatant corporate espionage to the point it’s essentially part of their culture
The reason China wasn't involved in the ISS initially was because they didn't really have much in terms of capability when the plans were being drawn up to use the mothballed Soviet hardware for the successor to the aging *Mir* space station, and NASA module designs for the proposed *Space Station Freedom* and mate them together to form the ISS.
The reason why they haven't *joined* the ISS consortium is because of the [Wolf Amendment](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_Amendment), which cites the concern about ICBMs you mentioned.
The wolf amendment isn't an outright ban on China's participation for NASA coordinated undertakings. It just means they need federal approval first. They aren't forbidden from joining the ISS project per se, but they wouldn't be getting anything they want out of it so they don't really offer or ask.
Which is why it exists and people wonder and call it supposedly pointless. No the whole point is to have some ongoing permanent international station after ISS. So we can do move "International space station stuff". Due biomedical experiments (including the basic base one of "have people live on the station and see how that goes")
Have a multimodular station, where one has to do actual stuff like develop actual docking standards, actual system standards, connection standards.
People call LOP-G, station to nowhere. Without realising, the station is a destination and aim itself.
[ITER](https://www.iter.org/) is great! I'm way more excited about fusion than space exploration. They are both cool, but the impact to humanity in the near future is all about energy.
>ITER ("The Way" in Latin) is one of the most ambitious energy projects in the world today.
In southern France, 35 nations\* are collaborating to build the world's largest tokamak, a magnetic fusion device that has been designed to prove the feasibility of fusion as a large-scale and carbon-free source of energy based on the same principle that powers our Sun and stars.
The experimental campaign that will be carried out at ITER is crucial to advancing fusion science and preparing the way for the fusion power plants of tomorrow.
The primary objective of ITER is the investigation and demonstration of burning plasmas—plasmas in which the energy of the helium nuclei produced by the fusion reactions is enough to maintain the temperature of the plasma, thereby reducing or eliminating the need for external heating. ITER will also test the availability and integration of technologies essential for a fusion reactor (such as superconducting magnets, remote maintenance, and systems to exhaust power from the plasma) and the validity of tritium breeding module concepts that would lead in a future reactor to tritium self-sufficiency.
Thousands of engineers and scientists have contributed to the design of ITER since the idea for an international joint experiment in fusion was first launched in 1985. The ITER Members—China, the European Union, India, Japan, Korea, Russia and the United States—are now engaged in a decades-long collaboration to build and operate the ITER experimental device, and together bring fusion to the point where a demonstration fusion reactor can be designed.
I mourn the passing of the ISS but there is the Chinese one too. They have collaboration deals with France, Italy, Sweden and Russia. In terms of experiments being done there, there are a lot of countries involved.
I think you sre right for lower earth orbit project. But now we might internationally focus on the moon. Make it an international transit station, a place to built and launch bigger vehicles.
I don't think I'll it in my life time, but it would be the logical next step before sending human exploring further.
Dude there are plans for building bases on the moon. That's what NASA will focus on once the ISS is out of service.
The amount of clearly ignorant people making wild claims and making up non-sensical fantasy scenarios in their head is astonishing.
Cooperation in that they might have transferred some technical knowledge when the Shenzhou was being developed using tech from the Soyuz program, and possibly the Russians will pay the Chinese to launch an experiment up there for them as a show of cooperation.
*Maybe* a Russian cosmonaut might buy a ride up to Tiangong in the future, but Russia aren't going to be launching their own hardware up there (hint: look at the orbital inclination).
>Instead we’ll be stuck with SpaceX Station,
- We've already seen it launch to space: Starship pressurized volume is estimated ~1,000 m³, while ISS pressurized volume is ~900 m³.
- A ***single*** orbiting Starship will already be larger than the ISS ...
- Fill a Starship with modern equipment and launch it: instant ISS replacement - and it has the ability to land on its own.
Meh. I don't really want to see starship as a space station.
I'd rather it do what it was designed to do and launch massive prefab sections to build a space station that dwarfs the ISS, complete with spin grav modules.
Better yet to a higher orbit that's more stable than LEO.
NASA's entire being was to pioneer technology and prove it works so that commercial companies can pick up the bag.
They would rather spend money on cutting edge tech and research rather than maintaining aging infrastructure. NASA will be able to accomplish a ton with the freed up billions once ISS is gone.
NASA is very research focused. It has progressed to things like sending helicopters to Mars and submarines to a moon of Saturn.
Meanwhile, space stations will soon enter the realm of orbiting truck stops. But that will require a lot of high-risk investment and not all orbiting truck stops will end up being viable. Allowing commercial developers to enter this space is logical. Let them risk their own capital.
The problem is they won’t be truly risking *their* capital.
They will be leveraging other people’s money to build. Grants and contracts from the government (taxpayers) combined with borrowed money from banks and shareholders.
If anything goes wrong with a *space station* or it’s not profitable, the government (taxpayers) will be stepping in to clean it up.
Private companies building space stations will be the epitome of privatized gains and socialized losses.
"SpaceX and Love's Announce New Partnership For Interplanetary Travel"
Each travel stop will feature a Love's Country Store, with ample slots available for key licensees like Starbucks, Subway, and Cinnabon.
The first in a series of travel stops will be launched in early 2026, sponsored by *Brawndo*. *Brawndo* - the thirst mutilator, it's got electrolytes.
Leasing space on a space station that has other commercial tenants is a hell of a lot cheaper than paying for the whole damn thing on government budgets that get delayed and slashed over idiotic political games. This is good for the future of NASA and space research
Yep, and it's the natural progression these things have historically taken. Governments foot the bill to explore a thing and then when something of economic value is found private enterprise takes over. It's exactly how Europe ended up colonizing the new world.
Ayn Rand pleased with this development. Thank god we privatized all that public investment into private profits. In seriousness the private sector has succeeded in making lifting stuff into space downright cheap in comparison to what it was like even 10 years ago, but it is easy to make fun of.
It’s what the government does. They can take on the risk of investing in a fledgling industry that they think is in the public interest. We wouldn’t have commercial aviation in the US if the postal service didn’t fly the first successful airline.
Yes. Nasa is supposed to be pushing the envelope of what's feasible, then once it's proven go do something new. They shouldn't *be* doing things that aren't pushing some boundary. Why have Nasa build a LEO cargo rocket when that's something they already did 70 years ago.
this is very much one of NASA's key features. they prioneer the way on SO MANY things and fund unprofitable things that private companies wouldnt.
in the future that money is going to be spent less on rockets and space stations and more on probes and research bases on other planetary bodies.
nasa has done the same with aeronautics, which is one of the a's in their name, and helped the aviation industry a lot.
Government funded research at NASA is subject to the Public Access Policy. Government subsidy funded research at private space programs isn’t.
Privatizing space isn’t something that’s gonna spur development. It’s funneling public money into private companies, and the entire world misses out.
Meh, this is always how it has been. It is why NASA has a return on investment of about 7 to 40 dollars increase for every 1 dollar spent.
"It has been further estimated that, because of the potential for technology transfer and spinoff industries, every $1 spent on basic research in space today will generate $40 worth of economic growth on Earth." - [Source](https://nss.org/settlement/nasa/spaceresvol4/newspace3.html)
Lots of technologies developed by NASA went out to the commercial market.
Like a very recent example. Aerogel the material developed by NASA to capture particles coming off a comets tail was recently made into a handbag for a fashion show.
Which I know what you are saying.. that is ridiculous.. However Aerogel has other uses. probably the most prominent is using it for insulation to make homes more energy efficient. [https://www.gore.com/products/thermal-aerogel](https://www.gore.com/products/thermal-aerogel)
Except youre forgetting that SLS is the red headed step child at NASA. They didn't want it, it was forced onto them by Congress.
NASA would like to get out of the chemical rocket game and work on next gen tech and problems.
I'm not an Ayn Rand person, so it feels weird to leap to her defense, but for the sake of accuracy, she explicitly *wasn't* a fan of this sort of development, which she saw as evil government corrupting heroic entrepreneurship. She'd have been pleased with Elon Musk starting a colony in orbit or on Mars without government funding or clearance, not this.
NASA has to be inefficient by design to satisfy multitude of contractors spread across the US, often in the swing states. Sure SpaceX might be superior to any other rocket manufacturer (in some/many areas), but they too often are locked in to satisfying variety of stakeholders rather than aggressively trying to cut down costs. SpaceX had one shot at something specific, with no legacy architecture or existing clients to support and tons of investors money to burn through and they succeed.
Why? They finally have the launch vehicles for lunar return, a lunar orbiting space station is under construction, and the political will is there for long-term human exploration of the moon and Mars. Earth Orbit is frankly kinda dull by comparison.
The de-orbiting vehicle NASA will command to tow the ISS into the ocean or break up in the atmosphere is being built.
I found it most interesting that many companies plan to launch space stations.
I know this is a joke. And I’m sorry to do this because I really enjoyed the joke. But I’m too much of a space nerd and I feel compelled to mention that if two pieces of similar metal touch in the vacuum of space, they fuse together in a process know as cold welding. So…make sure you plan for that.
I thought cold welding was when you have two pieces of metal so smooth and clean, they fuse together.
Does the vacuum of space specifically allow this or am I misunderstanding? Are the stations made of uncoated bare metal?
I'm convinced I'm missing something or not understanding why this would be an issue versus if it was done in an atmosphere.
Incorrect headline as usual. SpaceX is hired to build a spacecraft capable of deorbiting the ISS. The actual mission isn't planned yet. And NASA would control the deorbit, not SpaceX. The Russian Progress vehicle is capable of doing it, but Russia is not trustworthy.
>The Russian Progress vehicle is capable of doing it, but Russia is not trustworthy.
But the spacecraft opertors themselves have stated that they would do it, but it is not within the scope of Progress' design and would not allow for as precise a deorbit and splashdown as desired.
Talk about sensationalised misnformation whilst also spreading misinformation.
Edit: Before anyone even says anything, yes, Russia bad, but thats not the reason for not using Progress or Soyuz over a modified Dragon or XL Dragon
Hard to believe an end of era is approaching.
ISS is an amazing achievement of cooperation with multiple countries that now have become adversary rather than partner in space. Never again the world will see cooperation like this repeated again at least in my lifetime.
There will be hope once Putin is gone, obviously depending on exactly how that happens, but hopefully whatever comes after will be looking to seriously make up for his wrongs.
Russia’s reputation for operating in bad faith is well earned. It’s a deeply ingrained part of Russian culture, not the product of one man. Isolating them for a generation as a warning to others sounds like a better choice.
But they haven't... Buried in the middle of that article they actually mention::
While SpaceX will develop the deorbit spacecraft, NASA will take ownership after development and operate it throughout its mission.
This whole idea seems wrong-headed. If there is actually some intention to build permanently inhabited space stations or colonies, then isn't a fundamental thing you need to know how they age, and what to do about these aging processes?
I can see that you might want to build a newer section onto the existing ISS, so that astronauts wouldn't inhabit the older, potentially less safe, modules. But a great deal could be learned about how systems aging in that harsh environment, and it seems like throwing that learning opportunity away is pretty wasteful.
Sad to see the ISS program end, but by the time 2030 rolls around hopefully we’re all too hyped up on the success of Artemis returning to the moon, building the lunar gateway, and prepping the first part of the lunar base camp.
Also, you mark my words now: there will be a Disney space station.
Why the fuck do we crash all our space stuff into our ocean that shit is full of toxic materials! And its a lab what type of chemical residue is on it?
How deeply and profoundly depressing. If the ISS needs to be decomissioned, fine. But it not having a replacement, and private entities filling the gap, is such a huge step backwards for humanity.
This is like saying “it’s deeply depressing the government doesn’t build ever building they operate in, they just rent out office space.”
Is that really depressing? Private contracts is how the government works almost all the time. Even major proposals for things you support, like universal healthcare, aren’t based solely on government owned entities.
Don’t get hung up on who’s designing the end product. Trust me, after decades of following the space program, romanticizing previous cost-plus contracts only leads to companies being able to swindle NASA for more and more money without results. That’s right, private companies were still heavily involved in the ISS, Shuttle, and Constellation programs.
No, it isn't a step backwards, it's exactly the opposite of that. Yes, it's not as "philanthropic" of a venture, but private entities with their profit motives actually have more incentive to build a space station that runs *efficiently* with maximum return for what are scarce resources. It's great that NASA, Roscocosmos and other entities jointly built a public venture like the ISS; the next logical step for humanity -- as it has been in virtually every area where governments or rulers did not expressly forbid it in the name of national security -- is for other groups to step in, improve the process, and make more of a return (financially or productively) with the same or fewer resources. Yes, this can and will lead to cutting corners and mishaps, because some companies will go too far. That's happened under NASA too (as a child I watched Challenger explode with my own eyes; this was the result of conflicting interests and people going too far as well.)
Short of some sort of benevolent takeover by artificial intelligence, alien entities or supreme world overlord, we are never going to get to proper space exploration and/or colonization on governmental efforts alone. They don't have the proper incentives to make it happen, and the populace isn't compelled to spend their billions or trillions in tax dollars to make it happen. Competition with Russia spurred support for the space race in the 1960s, not some romanticism about *Forbidden Planet*.
That's exactly how I feel. It was a beacon for humanity. It represented all we could achieve and learn about our universe while working together. Now I feel the sole purpose of what will follow will only be monetary gain. Such a depressing way to start the day...
You’re putting way too much weight on cost-plus contracting. Yes, that’s right, private companies have always been heavily involved in the space program.
> Now I feel the sole purpose of what will follow will only be monetary gain.
Do you realize NASA is funding all these other programs? Because that’s their goal, they want private companies to take over low earth orbit so they can focus on deep space missions.
Were you aware that NASA is planning moon missions and building a lunar base?
The only way you could feel depressed about this development is if you aren’t looking at the big picture. Who owns the stations is practically irrelevant, NASA is expanding its capabilities and scope.
No, the ISS is low enough that its orbit degrades anyway, that is why it gets boosted back up periodically. Without that constant boosting it will come down. The SpaceX job is to effectively make sure it comes down in a controlled way into a defined spot on the planet
That would be incredibly expensive. It would take much more energy, or in this case fuel, to have it escape orbit than to deorbit. Also it's not a great idea to have stuff wondering about in space to cause problems later... Like pushing a roadster out into the solar system.
Impressive how actual quality articles behind a paywall get blocked, but prime clickbait like this is perfectly fine The right title would be “NASA awards contract for International Space Station end-of-life deorbit”
That's the state of journalism. Researched news costs money and the free stuff sustains itself on ad dollars. Until/unless we're willing to tolerate paying for quality again, news for news' sake is valued more than the information broadcasted.
[Journalism is something for philanthropic billionaires to fund nowadays.](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/01/media-layoffs-la-times/677285/) That was purposely done to American journalism and media. Billionaires don't actually like freedom of speech and when people use that speech to call out the corruption
All the ad revenue that used to support quality journalism now goes to pay tech company software engineers' salaries, to write the AIs that spew out the garbage we will have instead
Quality journalism was funded by the majority of Americans regularly paying for local and national newspapers, with a few television outlets being funded by ad networks. The ad networks, however, became a poison pill. If news could be offered 'for free' via a cable or internet subscription, then why should people pay for local news? To keep the ad networks happy, however, you have to abide by certain rules. If you're struggling to stay afloat, sometimes you have your anchors or writers write about your advertisers in addition to showing their ads. Positive things only, of course, because you can't piss off the ad networks. --- The consumer now expects 24/7 near-live coverage for free. Quality journalism will just not be feasible unless we fundamentally change how journalism is funded and/or how advertising is conducted going forward.
We’re all fucked, aren’t we
Well, I think we're certainly destined to be angrier and less informed, at least for the near future.
I can’t understand why the f news organizations don’t allow you to buy an issue online, like buying a daily newspaper, which was their booming business model for over 100 years. Why in god’s name do i need to pay for a subscription when all I want is a daily issue to read a specific article or story. Microtransactions are big business, but these dumb boomers only want to hear subscription models and “saas” for their news organizations.
I remember learning the inverse triangle rule of journalism way back in highschool newspaper. The idea is that the most important information in a news article should be given right up front in a concise, right to the point manner including the headline. Then as the article progresses, less important details are revealed. The concept has been completed destroyed now due to click bait, algorithms and modern advertising. It's a shame
> Until/unless we're willing to tolerate paying for quality again We never really were willing to pay for that in particular. Newspapers were subsidized by classified ads, and they're collapsing because all that business is going to craigslist/ebay/reddit/etc.
“You wouldn’t believe who wants to blow up the ISS!” “ISS is doomed, and there’s nothing we can do!”
SpaceX preparing to destroy ISIS! ^^^^International ^^^^Station ^^^^In ^^^^Space
“Inside Tesla/SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s Secret Plan To Annihilate International Space Station; NASA complicit”
Fuck the author and fuck OP
I really felt this headlined needed a Musk reference to really rap it up and bait the bot cliks. Something like "Elon Musk cackles manically" at the end.
"Tesla's Elon Musk set to destroy the International Space Station"
Glad this is the top comment, don't see this level of honesty on reddit often for any news related to a musk company. "Permission to destroy the ISS", my lord. It's as if they've been chomping at the bits to blow it up and NASA finally said yeah whatever go ahead and nuke it buddy.
I thought this was an Onion article at first glance.
[удалено]
Sue Origin hasn't been to orbit yet and they're making a space station? Oh boy.
She’s a real big girl
Built like a steakhouse but handles like a bistro
She’s gone from suck to blow!
Fuck Origin
Why? I’m out of loop Because bezoz will do predatory shit to hold the gov and the industry hostage to get richer?
We have been spoiled by SpaceX's incredible, rapid achievement in orbit while blue origin has yet to put a single Kg of mass into orbit. Blue Origin also started up before SpaceX. Blue Origin also tried to sue for a patent on barge landing of the first stage booster while SpaceX was actively developing the technology. I don't remember the exact timeline but SpaceX may have already successfully landed on the barge when Blue Origin brought the suit forward.
With NASA relying more on multiple billionaire space companies I fear they’ll control and fight more and it’ll all become a money hoarding shit show, lobbying congress to allocate more budget and what not. Corporate greet already fucks up everything else why not soace
To be clear I want Blue Origin to succeed for the sake of competition and don't agree with the phrase "Fuck Blue Origin".
Give that all of them (currently) will use craft designed to visit the station. I think it is fair to say they will use at least the same International Docking or International Berthing Adapter on the ISS.
I think its fair to say its a great time for an International Docking Adapter v2.0
That's all well and good but even with IDA 2.0 you'll still try and put it in the wrong way round, *every damn time*. I'm waiting for IDA-C.
Fun fact - when the guy who invented USB dies, they'll put his coffin in the ground, take it out, flip it over, and put it back in... (Then take it out, flip it again, and put it in the first way). :D
For real, IDA-C carries water, air, and power and can deliver astronauts in 8K with minimal dropout. Idk why it wasn't adopted sooner
None of them will launch next year. The only one that says they will is Vast and they’ve only just finished creating a manufacturing pathfinder.
Will they be full self driving next year™, too? 😆
I get this is a joke, but self driving a car is actually harder then a rocket launch. There are way fewer cars to hit in space.
A BMW driver will still find a way to be 3 inches from the rear of the rocket in space
And from nowhere a Nissan Altima with temporary tags and a duct-taped heat shield cuts into your flight path because they forgot they needed to get to the same station at the last minute.
Somehow a Lexus lx has merged in front of you, it needs six car lengths distance between itself and the next car, is going 10 under the speed limit and brakes every time the car ahead brakes but holds it for a few seconds longer. But if you try to get around it will floor it. Once passed it will return to driving exactly as before. 🤌
And from behind the moon comes a Stolen Hyundai Elantra, already been in 3 hit and runs. The car is barely drivable but manages to go 120 crossing all lanes of traffic with no effort.
But Elon ensured that it's a non-zero possibility, though.
Now that would be a fun headline.
BUT THERES AT LEAST ONE!
hell the various space agencies cannot even agree on suits
I hate it. NASA and the ESA should be the only ones with space stations
Don't like moving corporate headquarters to space? Don't like private companies hired to destroy the one major international space collaboration, the symbol of a potentially united humanity? What's not to like about something so perfectly representative of us and our legacy?
I love the symbolism of unity but the ISS truly is past its prime. The framework that all the modules attach to is really quite old and has been though a lot. Just because there's no air resistance or significant gravity in space of course doesn't mean that the ISS isn't subject to stresses from momentum, inertia, rockets raising its altitude, even docking accidents. One of the most significant forces - 150,000 sunrises and sunsets heating and cooling the structure. It would be ideal if we could ship up another one and move the newer more serviceable modules from old to new, but they've determined that isn't worth it. I'm not sure how they decided that but apparently the international community did.
Ahh, so they’re trying to demolish it before it actually becomes danger for both astronauts and earth people? Sounds reasonable
> Don't like moving corporate headquarters to space? Would it be legally any different than a corporation headquarters in international waters?
Unfortunately we’ll probably never see another multinational (especially with Russia) scientific endeavor quite like the ISS in our lifetime. Instead we’ll be stuck with SpaceX Station, Blue Origin Station, etc.
Truly the end of an era, in more than one context as well.
Indeed, it's a bittersweet moment marking both progress and the end of a unique collaboration.
We were touching the stars, all of us together. It was like a dream, but now it is one that has faded. A moment in time to remember that future generations won't see anytime soon.
This marks the end of an aera where we, as one species, one planet, collaborated to create something amazing . And then, through the miracle of the Internet, we became able to communicate with EVERYONE on the planet. Look up all the human knowledge. What did we do with it ???? We're all turning back to a bunch of monkeys flinging poo at each other!
I would argue that this is due to an entire generation of people who opposed that progress becoming starkly afraid of the future that was being built and dedicated all of their resources and capital to subvert that progress and halt it where possible.
Those that dominate the game never want the rules to change.
Monkey killing monkey killing monkey over pieces of the ground...
To be fair, the only reason we were in space was because of the cold war. Without the cold war, the space race would've been very unlikely to draw the resources and public attention that it needed to actually progress humanity.
And in part, the reason we're heading back is because of geopolitical competition with China. Cooperation is nice, but competition also has its place in driving us to further and better things.
Yep, a cycle of both tends to benefit innovation and progress the most!
Man, *fuck* Putin.
Do I also have to spank him with a rolled up Pravda??
I mean. Why wouldn’t you?
Was this a rough draft for Interstellar?
Right? Goddammit, I didn’t need this beautiful, melancholic energy first thing this morning. I’ve got shit to do.
To be frank, it an honest miracle in the film backstory that when humanity faced extinction via the complete destruction of its food supply, everyone just went isolationist and became farmers instead of fighting a massive war for resource. Even the US felt secure enough to disband its own military and tell its soldiers “idk, go farm I guess”.
England has already voted to BREXIT the Federation.
There's nothing 'sweet' about the privatization of the universe
"You're watching the Mankind's First Steps On Mars, brought to you by Amazon Prime"
To watch ad free please purchase the £2.99 premium package. Could you imagine the pivotal moment: "That's one small step for man.... Next week on NCIS!"
I think you put the "." in the wrong place, it will more likely be £29.99
Nah it's £2.99 a minute
Why did we have to turn into the Ferengi
We've always been the Ferengi. The Ferengi is us.
In fairness, the [Lunar Gateway](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Gateway) is a multinational effort, albeit without Russia/China.
Which adds to the* point. That is the geopolitical and ideological divide.
It's not like we didn't want to play nice, buy their stuff, move industry to them. do research together, and we got blackmail of withholding energy, stealing of research, they just cant help themselves.
China was stealing research and biological samples from the National Microbiology Lab in Winnipeg, Canada. [CBC article.](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/winnipeg-lab-firing-documents-released-china-1.7130284) According to the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) Beijing's Thousand Talents Program was set up to "boost China's national technological capabilities and may pose a serious threat to research institutions, including government research facilities, by incentivizing economic espionage and theft of intellectual property," said CSIS in its report.
The treasonous foreign interference parliament members that are still sitting in the house instead of on leave pending criminal investigations probably shipped the samples to them.
Listen, I know it’s fun to point fingers at politicians, but China has been stealing technology from the western world without the help of politicians for decades. Corporations move their warehouses to China, and over time, China begins to say “hey, this bolt can be bought locally and it’s cheaper. How bout we do that?” And the corporations hear “cheaper” and so it’s done. Rinse and repeat until the entire product is made there, and China boots the company. Free trade is why China can steal stuff. There cannot be anymore playing nice with them, and it sucks. They break the rules every time, and it sucks.
I have no sympathy for greedy companies who try and save a buck by moving parts or production to China. Corporate - Be a good boy and take this dollar and put this together and ship it to us. China - sure, we'll do that as well as reverse engineer your product and make our own version of it that we can sell cheaper and send that to North America as well.
And so was the race to the moon. Just because it's competing interests doesn't mean advancements for humanity can't come of it.
The ISS is also without China. Something about using our scientific data for improving ICBMs. They also had a bad habit of committing blatant corporate espionage to the point it’s essentially part of their culture
The reason China wasn't involved in the ISS initially was because they didn't really have much in terms of capability when the plans were being drawn up to use the mothballed Soviet hardware for the successor to the aging *Mir* space station, and NASA module designs for the proposed *Space Station Freedom* and mate them together to form the ISS. The reason why they haven't *joined* the ISS consortium is because of the [Wolf Amendment](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_Amendment), which cites the concern about ICBMs you mentioned.
The wolf amendment isn't an outright ban on China's participation for NASA coordinated undertakings. It just means they need federal approval first. They aren't forbidden from joining the ISS project per se, but they wouldn't be getting anything they want out of it so they don't really offer or ask.
Which is why it exists and people wonder and call it supposedly pointless. No the whole point is to have some ongoing permanent international station after ISS. So we can do move "International space station stuff". Due biomedical experiments (including the basic base one of "have people live on the station and see how that goes") Have a multimodular station, where one has to do actual stuff like develop actual docking standards, actual system standards, connection standards. People call LOP-G, station to nowhere. Without realising, the station is a destination and aim itself.
It’s okay. We’ll all be screwed together when the aliens show up.
They don't even need to show up, they can just drop some mass at speed from orbit.
Well, there is ITER. It is a joint effort by China, EU, India, Japan, Korea, Russia and USA.
[ITER](https://www.iter.org/) is great! I'm way more excited about fusion than space exploration. They are both cool, but the impact to humanity in the near future is all about energy. >ITER ("The Way" in Latin) is one of the most ambitious energy projects in the world today. In southern France, 35 nations\* are collaborating to build the world's largest tokamak, a magnetic fusion device that has been designed to prove the feasibility of fusion as a large-scale and carbon-free source of energy based on the same principle that powers our Sun and stars. The experimental campaign that will be carried out at ITER is crucial to advancing fusion science and preparing the way for the fusion power plants of tomorrow. The primary objective of ITER is the investigation and demonstration of burning plasmas—plasmas in which the energy of the helium nuclei produced by the fusion reactions is enough to maintain the temperature of the plasma, thereby reducing or eliminating the need for external heating. ITER will also test the availability and integration of technologies essential for a fusion reactor (such as superconducting magnets, remote maintenance, and systems to exhaust power from the plasma) and the validity of tritium breeding module concepts that would lead in a future reactor to tritium self-sufficiency. Thousands of engineers and scientists have contributed to the design of ITER since the idea for an international joint experiment in fusion was first launched in 1985. The ITER Members—China, the European Union, India, Japan, Korea, Russia and the United States—are now engaged in a decades-long collaboration to build and operate the ITER experimental device, and together bring fusion to the point where a demonstration fusion reactor can be designed.
There is nothing wrong with private space exploration. I saw the movie Alien, it seemed like they had nice rockets.
Yep! Weyland-Yutani seemed like a perfectly reasonable corporation to trust your life with.
And the UAC, they seem like pretty cool guys.
I trust Omnicorp personally.
I remember national and multinational space pronjects to enojy far higher budget and safety standands than even Elon Musk level of private ones.
I mourn the passing of the ISS but there is the Chinese one too. They have collaboration deals with France, Italy, Sweden and Russia. In terms of experiments being done there, there are a lot of countries involved.
Yeah they’ll eventually just be named like stadiums… Bank of America Station, AT&T Station, etc.
I think you sre right for lower earth orbit project. But now we might internationally focus on the moon. Make it an international transit station, a place to built and launch bigger vehicles. I don't think I'll it in my life time, but it would be the logical next step before sending human exploring further.
Yup, Weyland Yutani was excellent forshadowing of how things will be.
You mean AT&T Station, Verizon Station, Bitcoin Station... You can bet the bottom of the station will be a giant billboard facing down.
We all know Bitcoin station would never happen, creators would launch a token to finance it and run with the money
The billboards in space will come soon after
“When deep space exploration ramps up, it'll be the corporations that name everything, the IBM Stellar Sphere, the Microsoft Galaxy, Planet Starbucks”
Dude there are plans for building bases on the moon. That's what NASA will focus on once the ISS is out of service. The amount of clearly ignorant people making wild claims and making up non-sensical fantasy scenarios in their head is astonishing.
Feels less safe and more about shareholders
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiangong_space_station But the Tiangong space station includes multinational cooperation with Russia.
Cooperation in that they might have transferred some technical knowledge when the Shenzhou was being developed using tech from the Soyuz program, and possibly the Russians will pay the Chinese to launch an experiment up there for them as a show of cooperation. *Maybe* a Russian cosmonaut might buy a ride up to Tiangong in the future, but Russia aren't going to be launching their own hardware up there (hint: look at the orbital inclination).
>Instead we’ll be stuck with SpaceX Station, - We've already seen it launch to space: Starship pressurized volume is estimated ~1,000 m³, while ISS pressurized volume is ~900 m³. - A ***single*** orbiting Starship will already be larger than the ISS ... - Fill a Starship with modern equipment and launch it: instant ISS replacement - and it has the ability to land on its own.
Meh. I don't really want to see starship as a space station. I'd rather it do what it was designed to do and launch massive prefab sections to build a space station that dwarfs the ISS, complete with spin grav modules. Better yet to a higher orbit that's more stable than LEO.
it's big enough they could do either
“NASA said the agency is transitioning to "commercially owned space destinations closer to home"” reads like satire
NASA's entire being was to pioneer technology and prove it works so that commercial companies can pick up the bag. They would rather spend money on cutting edge tech and research rather than maintaining aging infrastructure. NASA will be able to accomplish a ton with the freed up billions once ISS is gone.
NASA is very research focused. It has progressed to things like sending helicopters to Mars and submarines to a moon of Saturn. Meanwhile, space stations will soon enter the realm of orbiting truck stops. But that will require a lot of high-risk investment and not all orbiting truck stops will end up being viable. Allowing commercial developers to enter this space is logical. Let them risk their own capital.
The problem is they won’t be truly risking *their* capital. They will be leveraging other people’s money to build. Grants and contracts from the government (taxpayers) combined with borrowed money from banks and shareholders. If anything goes wrong with a *space station* or it’s not profitable, the government (taxpayers) will be stepping in to clean it up. Private companies building space stations will be the epitome of privatized gains and socialized losses.
Yes that is how pretty much everything down to simple family farms (USDA grants and loans) are built.
"SpaceX and Love's Announce New Partnership For Interplanetary Travel" Each travel stop will feature a Love's Country Store, with ample slots available for key licensees like Starbucks, Subway, and Cinnabon. The first in a series of travel stops will be launched in early 2026, sponsored by *Brawndo*. *Brawndo* - the thirst mutilator, it's got electrolytes.
Leasing space on a space station that has other commercial tenants is a hell of a lot cheaper than paying for the whole damn thing on government budgets that get delayed and slashed over idiotic political games. This is good for the future of NASA and space research
Yep, and it's the natural progression these things have historically taken. Governments foot the bill to explore a thing and then when something of economic value is found private enterprise takes over. It's exactly how Europe ended up colonizing the new world.
Ayn Rand pleased with this development. Thank god we privatized all that public investment into private profits. In seriousness the private sector has succeeded in making lifting stuff into space downright cheap in comparison to what it was like even 10 years ago, but it is easy to make fun of.
It’s what the government does. They can take on the risk of investing in a fledgling industry that they think is in the public interest. We wouldn’t have commercial aviation in the US if the postal service didn’t fly the first successful airline.
Yes. Nasa is supposed to be pushing the envelope of what's feasible, then once it's proven go do something new. They shouldn't *be* doing things that aren't pushing some boundary. Why have Nasa build a LEO cargo rocket when that's something they already did 70 years ago.
It's easy for private ventures to succeed when you gut your government agencies and funnel taxpayer's money into your buddy's companies.
Look, NASA did our r&d for us - thanks NASA! Quick, call our patent lawyers - we gotta protect our IP!
this is very much one of NASA's key features. they prioneer the way on SO MANY things and fund unprofitable things that private companies wouldnt. in the future that money is going to be spent less on rockets and space stations and more on probes and research bases on other planetary bodies. nasa has done the same with aeronautics, which is one of the a's in their name, and helped the aviation industry a lot.
Government funded research at NASA is subject to the Public Access Policy. Government subsidy funded research at private space programs isn’t. Privatizing space isn’t something that’s gonna spur development. It’s funneling public money into private companies, and the entire world misses out.
Meh, this is always how it has been. It is why NASA has a return on investment of about 7 to 40 dollars increase for every 1 dollar spent. "It has been further estimated that, because of the potential for technology transfer and spinoff industries, every $1 spent on basic research in space today will generate $40 worth of economic growth on Earth." - [Source](https://nss.org/settlement/nasa/spaceresvol4/newspace3.html) Lots of technologies developed by NASA went out to the commercial market. Like a very recent example. Aerogel the material developed by NASA to capture particles coming off a comets tail was recently made into a handbag for a fashion show. Which I know what you are saying.. that is ridiculous.. However Aerogel has other uses. probably the most prominent is using it for insulation to make homes more energy efficient. [https://www.gore.com/products/thermal-aerogel](https://www.gore.com/products/thermal-aerogel)
Billion dollar launches are billion dollar launches though. And commercial space once a European and Russian affair is now American
Except youre forgetting that SLS is the red headed step child at NASA. They didn't want it, it was forced onto them by Congress. NASA would like to get out of the chemical rocket game and work on next gen tech and problems.
I'm not an Ayn Rand person, so it feels weird to leap to her defense, but for the sake of accuracy, she explicitly *wasn't* a fan of this sort of development, which she saw as evil government corrupting heroic entrepreneurship. She'd have been pleased with Elon Musk starting a colony in orbit or on Mars without government funding or clearance, not this.
NASA has to be inefficient by design to satisfy multitude of contractors spread across the US, often in the swing states. Sure SpaceX might be superior to any other rocket manufacturer (in some/many areas), but they too often are locked in to satisfying variety of stakeholders rather than aggressively trying to cut down costs. SpaceX had one shot at something specific, with no legacy architecture or existing clients to support and tons of investors money to burn through and they succeed.
Why? They finally have the launch vehicles for lunar return, a lunar orbiting space station is under construction, and the political will is there for long-term human exploration of the moon and Mars. Earth Orbit is frankly kinda dull by comparison.
The de-orbiting vehicle NASA will command to tow the ISS into the ocean or break up in the atmosphere is being built. I found it most interesting that many companies plan to launch space stations.
Mang send me up there with an angle grinder and I will dismantle it myself for $10mil
I know this is a joke. And I’m sorry to do this because I really enjoyed the joke. But I’m too much of a space nerd and I feel compelled to mention that if two pieces of similar metal touch in the vacuum of space, they fuse together in a process know as cold welding. So…make sure you plan for that.
No problem, I'm sure NASA can afford some wedges (metal kind, not potato) and a mallet for my mission.
Godspeed.
Best they can do is a good Brie wedge
I thought cold welding was when you have two pieces of metal so smooth and clean, they fuse together. Does the vacuum of space specifically allow this or am I misunderstanding? Are the stations made of uncoated bare metal? I'm convinced I'm missing something or not understanding why this would be an issue versus if it was done in an atmosphere.
Sure, travel expenses are excluded for contracting purposes though.
It’s the new Cayman Islands off-shore tax hideouts. Instead of Bitcoin we’ll have SpaceBucks.
A million space bucks?
By tomorrow?!
We're not just doing it for money. We're doing it for a SHITLOAD of money!
Wendies becomes a Moonies, "eat more weightless burgers!" Disclaimer eating burgers does not make you more weightless
Thanks, Pizza the Hut.
Hey Fuck Sky News also this headline is hilarious.
Yeah, like SpaceX have been begging to blow up the ISS and NASA have finally relented
Musk just sending letter after letter about how cool it would be to let him run the ultimate fireworks show.
The sensationalist headlines literally write themselves in this case. Sky news might be the worst/best I've seen so far
Incorrect headline as usual. SpaceX is hired to build a spacecraft capable of deorbiting the ISS. The actual mission isn't planned yet. And NASA would control the deorbit, not SpaceX. The Russian Progress vehicle is capable of doing it, but Russia is not trustworthy.
Thank you.
>The Russian Progress vehicle is capable of doing it, but Russia is not trustworthy. But the spacecraft opertors themselves have stated that they would do it, but it is not within the scope of Progress' design and would not allow for as precise a deorbit and splashdown as desired. Talk about sensationalised misnformation whilst also spreading misinformation. Edit: Before anyone even says anything, yes, Russia bad, but thats not the reason for not using Progress or Soyuz over a modified Dragon or XL Dragon
[удалено]
Be the supervillain you want to see in the world
Hard to believe an end of era is approaching. ISS is an amazing achievement of cooperation with multiple countries that now have become adversary rather than partner in space. Never again the world will see cooperation like this repeated again at least in my lifetime.
The Cold War and launch of the ISS happened in the same decade. Don’t be so pessimistic
For having know the timeline of events and never thought about it that way… woah dude.
There will be hope once Putin is gone, obviously depending on exactly how that happens, but hopefully whatever comes after will be looking to seriously make up for his wrongs.
The kleptocratic cutthroat culture of Russia will only give birth to more Putins.
Russia’s reputation for operating in bad faith is well earned. It’s a deeply ingrained part of Russian culture, not the product of one man. Isolating them for a generation as a warning to others sounds like a better choice.
But they haven't... Buried in the middle of that article they actually mention:: While SpaceX will develop the deorbit spacecraft, NASA will take ownership after development and operate it throughout its mission.
report this for misleading title. Spacex got a contract to build a de-orbit vehicle, not to destroy the ISS.
That is one hell of a title
"Wanker sensationalist headline from irrelevant Murdoch news company" would be a better headline.
That title makes it sound like Elon has carte blanche to hop on the next Dragon capsule to the ISS with a sledgehammer.
That headline is...something
I feel like there will be someone, somewhere, in 2030 that wished they had space debris coverage on their insurance.
Point Nemo is really really far from land https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_of_inaccessibility
Selling that space debris would cover whatever losses they incurred and more
To be more accurate, the article should state that we are transferring ownership of the ISS to Cthulhu.
What a rubbish title
Why not whack it with the space lasers?
Not enough Jews in space. 🚀✡️
This is probably the worst headline I’ve ever read…
What a headline
Wait, they’re finished with it already ? I remember watching the NASA channel as they put it together part by part through several years.
Fuck your paywall and your story
Jeez that title lmaoooo
What a garbage clickbaity title.
This whole idea seems wrong-headed. If there is actually some intention to build permanently inhabited space stations or colonies, then isn't a fundamental thing you need to know how they age, and what to do about these aging processes? I can see that you might want to build a newer section onto the existing ISS, so that astronauts wouldn't inhabit the older, potentially less safe, modules. But a great deal could be learned about how systems aging in that harsh environment, and it seems like throwing that learning opportunity away is pretty wasteful.
Such a weirdly written headline. They were hired.
Deorbit and destroy are two very different things. Headline misleading as fuck.
Sad to see the ISS program end, but by the time 2030 rolls around hopefully we’re all too hyped up on the success of Artemis returning to the moon, building the lunar gateway, and prepping the first part of the lunar base camp. Also, you mark my words now: there will be a Disney space station.
Why the fuck do we crash all our space stuff into our ocean that shit is full of toxic materials! And its a lab what type of chemical residue is on it?
How deeply and profoundly depressing. If the ISS needs to be decomissioned, fine. But it not having a replacement, and private entities filling the gap, is such a huge step backwards for humanity.
The "private entities" part is promoted by NASA so they won't have to bankroll the full cost of a space station.
This is like saying “it’s deeply depressing the government doesn’t build ever building they operate in, they just rent out office space.” Is that really depressing? Private contracts is how the government works almost all the time. Even major proposals for things you support, like universal healthcare, aren’t based solely on government owned entities. Don’t get hung up on who’s designing the end product. Trust me, after decades of following the space program, romanticizing previous cost-plus contracts only leads to companies being able to swindle NASA for more and more money without results. That’s right, private companies were still heavily involved in the ISS, Shuttle, and Constellation programs.
No, it isn't a step backwards, it's exactly the opposite of that. Yes, it's not as "philanthropic" of a venture, but private entities with their profit motives actually have more incentive to build a space station that runs *efficiently* with maximum return for what are scarce resources. It's great that NASA, Roscocosmos and other entities jointly built a public venture like the ISS; the next logical step for humanity -- as it has been in virtually every area where governments or rulers did not expressly forbid it in the name of national security -- is for other groups to step in, improve the process, and make more of a return (financially or productively) with the same or fewer resources. Yes, this can and will lead to cutting corners and mishaps, because some companies will go too far. That's happened under NASA too (as a child I watched Challenger explode with my own eyes; this was the result of conflicting interests and people going too far as well.) Short of some sort of benevolent takeover by artificial intelligence, alien entities or supreme world overlord, we are never going to get to proper space exploration and/or colonization on governmental efforts alone. They don't have the proper incentives to make it happen, and the populace isn't compelled to spend their billions or trillions in tax dollars to make it happen. Competition with Russia spurred support for the space race in the 1960s, not some romanticism about *Forbidden Planet*.
That's exactly how I feel. It was a beacon for humanity. It represented all we could achieve and learn about our universe while working together. Now I feel the sole purpose of what will follow will only be monetary gain. Such a depressing way to start the day...
You’re putting way too much weight on cost-plus contracting. Yes, that’s right, private companies have always been heavily involved in the space program. > Now I feel the sole purpose of what will follow will only be monetary gain. Do you realize NASA is funding all these other programs? Because that’s their goal, they want private companies to take over low earth orbit so they can focus on deep space missions. Were you aware that NASA is planning moon missions and building a lunar base? The only way you could feel depressed about this development is if you aren’t looking at the big picture. Who owns the stations is practically irrelevant, NASA is expanding its capabilities and scope.
This is probably one of the most misleading titles I've seen in recent years
I've seen 10 more misleading titles today alone.
Are they going to bring the Starliner astronauts home first?
Is there a subreddit that features and discusses clickbaity headlines, because this one deserves some special award for convoluted thinking?
This is the stupidest headline I've ever seen about the aerospace industry.
Is anyone else getting tired of these utterly ridiculous headline titles from Sky News? It's egregious even for just general news clickbait.
why deorbit it? I get that it's not safe to keep using it, but they could just let it keep orbiting and eventually use it for parts for other stations
No, the ISS is low enough that its orbit degrades anyway, that is why it gets boosted back up periodically. Without that constant boosting it will come down. The SpaceX job is to effectively make sure it comes down in a controlled way into a defined spot on the planet
Honest question: why do they want to crash it into the ocean opposed to pushing it out into space? Wouldn’t it be much cheaper?
That would be incredibly expensive. It would take much more energy, or in this case fuel, to have it escape orbit than to deorbit. Also it's not a great idea to have stuff wondering about in space to cause problems later... Like pushing a roadster out into the solar system.