February 21, 2025
"Elon Musk has called for NASA to deorbit [its] International Space Station (ISS) 'as soon as possible'..."
"... because the $150 billion lab has 'served its purpose.'
In Thursday post on X, he wrote: 'It is time to begin preparations for deorbiting the [ISS]. It has served its purpose. There is very little incremental utility. Let's go to Mars.'"
Posts
40 comments:
Try a little Bondo first.
You can be right and talk your book up all at the same time. Elon would never miss this kind of opportunity.
Wince also makes a fine suggestion, but space dust abatement may be a factor.
The point of the space station was to give the shuttle someplace to go.
the station was supposed to have engaged in zero g experiments and perhaps some manufacturing, we came up pitifully,
Good example of Musk conflict of interest if he has authority in this area.
I love how he defines a clear line and avoids anything that might be seen as a conflict of interest with Space X.
ISS had a specification for a 20-year design life. For non-engineers, that doesn't mean it is only good for 20 years, but that you design it such that it will last at least 20 years. The clock starts on the first day of operation, which was 20 November 1998.
The initial activities planned for ISS have long since been completed, and its continued operation is mostly about giving NASA something to do, while it fails to advance its programs for returning to the moon. The Space Shuttle was retired to give NASA more resources to focus on the moon. That was over a decade ago. Now it is time for the Space Station.
Finally, Musk is only repeating what the NASA Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel suggested two weeks ago.
To that point, the ISS’s service life has already been extended several times and additional extensions would
be expensive and risky. Most ISS partners have agreed to decommission the ISS by 2030, before the overall
risks become unmanageable. So far, Russia has only agreed to extend ISS service to 2028. For more than a
decade, ASAP has noted the ISS deorbit plan as a major concern, both for end of life and, if warranted, an
unplanned emergency deorbit.
In fact, they had a similar finding in 2023:
2023-04-01 Recommendation: NASA should develop a comprehensive understanding of the resources and timelines of the ISS-to-CLD transition plan to a much higher level of fidelity, to provide confidence that the Nation will be able to sustain a continuous human presence in LEO. The plan should be grounded in explicit, defensible assumptions and should include quantifiable metrics and progress deadlines for ensuring that the market for commercial LEO activities exists and is sufficient to support the development,
production, and operation of one or more commercial platforms to replace the ISS.
What about just maintaining the ISS and keeping it flying? Consider that the spacesuits onboard the station, needed to exit the vehicle to conduct repairs, have outlived their certified design life and new ones do not exist to replace them. Repair missions have been cancelled due to reliability problems with the current suits. In 2024, NASA and the contractor hired to design a replacement spacesuit mutually agreed to terminate the contract.
Musk hasn't closed any agency or office, nor has he fired anyone. Neither can he order the downing of the ISS. He reports to the President who makes the decision and it says so in the article: "But he also said the decision is 'up to the president.' "
Readering said...
Good example of Musk conflict of interest if he has authority in this area.
Musk conflict of interest is SpaceX is the only company NASA requested, under the Biden Administration, to find a way to provide continued ISS operations. He has authority because he built the only company with any capability to rescue the Space Station. In fact, if you see my previous comment about spacesuits; SpaceX is the only US company with newly operational EVA spacesuits, which Trump's current pick for NASA Administrator was the first person to use in flight. And really, even those suits are inadequate for ISS repair duties.
The environment on Mars sounds like Hell which is where everyone on the left wishes Musk would go. At last, some bipartisan agreement…
I see the Daily Mail failed to even mention the NASA Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel report signed by former Space Shuttle Commander Susan Collins and released 19 February 2025. No wonder commenters are making ignorant statements that Musk has a conflict of interest.
For those interested, here is NASA ASAP reports rationale for closing their 2022 recommendation to "Define an ISS Deorbit Plan":
Closure Rationale: As of June 2024, NASA funded a contract with SpaceX to provide a USDV to support an ISS End of Life (EOL) timeline of 2030. The SpaceX USDV design is a modified version of the cargo Dragon vehicle, and the proposed development timeline appears reasonable to meet the required launch date of mid-2029. NASA has also made good progress addressing an emergency ISS deorbit capability prior to USDV arrival and has an ISS Contingency Deorbit Protocol in place outlining a high-level strategy.
Additionally, the ISS program will maximize ISS propellant deliveries to ensure propellant availability for contingency orbit reserve. Given the release of the USDV contract and that NASA has plans to accommodate controlled ISS deorbit for emergency scenarios, the Panel believes NASA’s response to the recommendation will significantly lower the risk to the public for both planned and emergency ISS deorbit scenarios.
Deorbiting ISS earlier takes away a SpaceX contract awarded during the Biden Administration.
Well there you go, Leland, F*ucking up their fantasies with facts.
NASA is welfare for engineers.
NASA has a well-funded office whose sole responsibility is making sure that every NASA boondoggle has at least one part made in each of the 435 congressional districts.
Lucky for us, there are two astronauts up there who can get the ball rolling.
“ISS had a specification for a 20-year design life. For non-engineers, that doesn't mean it is only good for 20 years, but that you design it such that it will last at least 20 years. “
The 20 year spec allows the designers to build in constraints that make the whole project fail at a few predictable points. These few points of failure can be ameliorated at a high cost, by the original low cost bidder.
To me, the ISS seems like performance art, yes I can stand on broken glass and make paint from my blood and urine. But we get tired of watching after a bit.
"NASA is welfare for engineers."
The can do brilliance of NASA during the Apollo Program is gone because competence and creativity have been replaced on the qualification checklist by skin color, gender, and sexual orientation.
"Well there you go, Leland, F*ucking up their fantasies with facts."
Mark and Readering don't even have the decency to withdraw their mendacious calumnies.
Dumb Lefty Mark: "I love how he defines a clear line and avoids anything that might be seen as a conflict of interest with Space X."
Delaware Chancery Court Fanboy Readering: "Good example of Musk conflict of interest if he has authority in this area."
LOL
Notice how both of these lefty morons avoid spelling out precisely what the conflict of interest supposedly is.
Because there is none.
Every SpaceX contract with NASA has been set price, fee for service, where SpaceX offered far and away the best value and now has a track record where SpaceX has hit every single performance target within budget.
But only every single time.
Dumb Lefty Mark and readering are your typical NPC types, like parrots sitting on someone's shoulder and squawking "conflict of interest!" "conflict of interest!"
These buffoons would never be satisfied with anything less than a return to the pre-SpaceX world where the US was forced to use ChiCom rockets for payload launches to orbit and the russkis were the only option to get personnel into space. Space ops "paradise" for the idiot lefties.
SpaceX did win a contract to develop a specialized version of the Cargo Dragon capsule with enough thrust and propellant to perform a controlled deorbit in 2030. If they moved the deorbit date up to 2027 as Musk suggests, that vehicle development would have to be accelerated. That shouldn't be an issue for SpaceX.
SpaceX has provided crew transportation to and from the ISS since 2020. They're still on contract to provide additional crew and resupply support until the ISS is deorbited. Cutting short the ISS's lifetime would reduce the number of flights needed to support the station, actually reducing the money going to SpaceX. There are various efforts to build and launch commercial space stations. As of now, only one that I know of has a chance to launch much before 2027. If those stations are developed, SpaceX stands to win cargo and crew transport missions to support them, but as of now, it's far from certain it will happen.
I forgot to add, if they do decide to deorbit the ISS, that seems likely to be the death blow to Boeing's Starliner capsule.
Of the people expressing "conflict of interest" concerns here, how many spoke up with similar concerns when Joe Biden made decisions involving those who bribed him?
Just wondering.
I asked Grok,
“How much extra would it cost to push the ISS into a more permanent orbit and leave it there decommissioned for salvage or emergency habitation?”
Here is part of the response.
“Cost of Launch and Propulsion:
- Posts on X and web sources suggest that pushing the ISS to a higher orbit could cost 10 times the deorbiting price, or roughly $6.5–8.4 billion, though this is speculative. A more grounded estimate comes from comparing it to boosting smaller satellites to graveyard orbits. For a 1-ton satellite, this might cost $10–50 million in fuel and launch expenses. Scaling this proportionally to the ISS’s 450-ton mass (assuming linear scaling, which oversimplifies the physics), the cost could range from $4.5–22.5 billion just for the boost, not including the spacecraft or infrastructure.”
This doesn’t include maintenance costs.
It will cost $1.5 billion to bring it down safely. I think it will be cheaper to let it crash and pay for the damages. I asked Grok
"If the International Space Station deorbited and crashed into the earth, how much damage would it cause?" https://x.com/i/grok?conversation=1893049214873325776
"NASA is welfare for engineers."
A misconception, engineers can find work in the Long Island and Burbank war factories, they don’t need nasa. JFK and Johnson needed nasa for politics.
It should be decommissioned for the one reason astronauts sometimes didn’t cone it…
"JFK and Johnson needed nasa for politics."
Which is why so much of it is in Texas.
Yes. Let's think big and take big risks. Easier for me to say, as I won't be in space. Let's freaking go for it! MMGS - Make Mars Great, Soon
Perhaps, in order to avoid "conflict of interest" situations, all the government's current contracts with SpaceX should be annulled.
I'm sure the folks on the space station would understand.
Larry J said...
I forgot to add, if they do decide to deorbit the ISS, that seems likely to be the death blow to Boeing's Starliner capsule.
LOL
Elon Musk publically brandished a chainsaw and was wearing giant sunglasses indoors while stammering demands to “legalize comedy.” Bummer! He was high on drugs.
Elon Musk has publicly admitted to using ketamine, which he takes under a doctor's prescription to treat depression. There are also reports suggesting he has used other drugs like LSD, cocaine, ecstasy, and psychedelic mushrooms at parties, although he denies using illegal drugs regularly.
Ketamine can cause sensitivity to light as a short-term side effect, which may lead to discomfort in bright environments. Additionally, it can result in involuntary eye movements or blurred vision. LSD, cocaine, and ecstasy (MDMA) can affect sensitivity to light. Cocaine use can lead to dilated pupils, which may increase light sensitivity, while LSD can cause visual distortions and heightened sensory perception, including sensitivity to light.
For those interested, here is NASA's IG report from September 2024 on the Risks to Sustaining ISS through 2030. It is an audit, so some people may recoil from the thought of reading its results.
Pull quote from Conclusion:
NASA must continue to refine the ISS deorbit plan, which
requires a yet to be developed U.S. deorbit vehicle and the participation of Roscosmos that has yet to commit to ISS operations past 2028.
For Mark and Readering, the emphasized part is where the USA pays Putin more money to continue operations of the ISS past 2028. Would you like to tell us of your business interests in lobbying for more money to give to Putin?
Ah Gadfly enters the chat to defame Musk while talking about a subject from a previous post. Were you high on drugs Gadfly when you posted your comment to the wrong post?
Perfect timing
. Readering , then Mark ,repeat some childish one sentence dem talking point from msnbc, and Leland 's comment immediately below theirs explains the reality of the situation.
"Ah Gadfly enters the chat to defame Musk while talking about a subject from a previous post. Were you high on drugs Gadfly when you posted your comment to the wrong post?"
gadfly is the moron who actually claimed, and I kid you not as gadfly is just that stupid, that only NASA and Boeing and ULA etc had real engineers and the SpaceX was basically a fake company!!
SpaceX...currently responsible for almost 90% of all mass to orbit lifts as well as all of our crewed missions (after Boeing's last disaster) to space.
Its amazing how much astonishing technical ignorance is combined with maliciousness by our resident lefties in pushing their latest New Soviet Democratical talking points.
LeRoy’fly enters the chat.
The country seems to need a meaning or a purpose. It seems a little funny now, but putting a man on the moon was a purpose for the country in the 1960s.
This makes me think a little about today's comments about Canada and young Trudeau's belief that "common values" will hold a "post-national Canada" together. Is that really going to be enough? Maybe he overestimates the commitment to values and the degree to which it's shared by all Canadians. Maybe a common mission or purpose helps.
But what if we make interplanetary exploration, our effort, purpose and mission and, despite everything, the Chinese get to Mars first? Maybe we hedge our bets and find a way to cut them in on the deal, or they let one of our astronauts in on their mission to Mars so nobody loses face?
Last we heard from the ISS, there was a chemical odor coming from the Russian side. I think before that the news was the leaks from the Russian side, and the Russians being Communist Party members were evasive and unforthright about it. A couple of months ago there was what the press called "a smell scare", some odd odor of unknown origin that was feared to be toxic at first. And of course the Russians denied it and were no help.
At this point, sharing the ISS with the Russkies is like co-owning a rental condo with a family of smelly, thieving gypsies. Butch and Sunny drove up for the weekend but the car shit the bed and Dad said he was too busy to go get them, let them stay up there.
The thing is falling apart, the neighbors are assholes, we don't really use it for any reason, get rid of it.
It's about ten years past its sell by date. Drop it in the ocean and let's start building a high earth orbit station. The places we need to go are further away and we need someplace to store food and fuel for the trips.
Post a Comment
Comments older than 2 days are always moderated. Newer comments may be unmoderated, but are still subject to a spam filter and may take a few hours to get released. Thanks for your contributions and your patience.