Spiny Norman said:
Youtube live video
Hope they come back to tell the tale.
Watching.
Tau.Neutrino said:
Watching.
Launch plus ten minutes?
So UIVMM these will be the highest altitude humans since the Appollo era
dv said:
So UIVMM these will be the highest altitude humans since the Appollo era
Turns out that I am vmm as there were ssslightly higher flights to service Hubble
dv said:
dv said:
So UIVMM these will be the highest altitude humans since the Appollo era
Turns out that I am vmm as there were ssslightly higher flights to service Hubble
So surely you are only smm then.
The Rev Dodgson said:
dv said:
dv said:
So UIVMM these will be the highest altitude humans since the Appollo era
Turns out that I am vmm as there were ssslightly higher flights to service Hubble
So surely you are only smm then.
Fair
With all these privatized flights….
Any possibility of handing over the Hubble space telescope to another space agency or another astronomy observatory ?
Which could hopefully update the electronics and send it up into a higher orbit?
Tau.Neutrino said:
With all these privatized flights….Any possibility of handing over the Hubble space telescope to another space agency or another astronomy observatory ?
Which could hopefully update the electronics and send it up into a higher orbit?
And give it a new things to do list?
Tau.Neutrino said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
With all these privatized flights….Any possibility of handing over the Hubble space telescope to another space agency or another astronomy observatory ?
Which could hopefully update the electronics and send it up into a higher orbit?
And give it a new things to do list?
This could open the gate for a lot of older satellites to be re-serviced or an electronic swap and refuelled, new missions with new things to do lists….
Tau.Neutrino said:
With all these privatized flights….Any possibility of handing over the Hubble space telescope to another space agency or another astronomy observatory ?
Which could hopefully update the electronics and send it up into a higher orbit?
Why hand it over?
Tau.Neutrino said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
With all these privatized flights….Any possibility of handing over the Hubble space telescope to another space agency or another astronomy observatory ?
Which could hopefully update the electronics and send it up into a higher orbit?
And give it a new things to do list?
Its todo list is packed out already years in advance
dv said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
With all these privatized flights….Any possibility of handing over the Hubble space telescope to another space agency or another astronomy observatory ?
Which could hopefully update the electronics and send it up into a higher orbit?
And give it a new things to do list?
Its todo list is packed out already years in advance
ok.
Then maybe some of the older satellites or ones that have run out of fuel?
I wonder if there are any possible candidates up there?
anyway, just a thought.
How to see SpaceX’s Inspiration4 spacecraft in the night sky
https://www.space.com/see-spacex-inspiration4-crew-dragon-night-sky?utm_source=notification
Tau.Neutrino said:
anyway, just a thought.
I mean if you mean “maybe these new manned craft can be used for Hubble service missions to extend its operating life” then yeah, sure.
dv said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
anyway, just a thought.I mean if you mean “maybe these new manned craft can be used for Hubble service missions to extend its operating life” then yeah, sure.
Yes, thats what I meant and other satellites.
Tau.Neutrino said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
With all these privatized flights….Any possibility of handing over the Hubble space telescope to another space agency or another astronomy observatory ?
Which could hopefully update the electronics and send it up into a higher orbit?
And give it a new things to do list?
This could open the gate for a lot of older satellites to be re-serviced or an electronic swap and refuelled, new missions with new things to do lists….
While I understand the Hubble telescope is a pretty specialised bit of kit, what advantage would repairing a normal satellite have over just bringing a new one up?
I didn’t know this was happening today, but early this morning I rediscovered a RatCat album that I bought on vinyl when it was released. Listening to it on Spotify, I took a liking to one of the songs, added it to my favourites and listened to it again a few more times. Then I come here to this thread, watched the YouTube video, then went searching for a video of my RatCat song. I found a live version that is better than the original, but better still, someone has posted a Remembering Challenger video using the original song. It’s quite nicely done.
Dark Orange said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
Tau.Neutrino said:And give it a new things to do list?
This could open the gate for a lot of older satellites to be re-serviced or an electronic swap and refuelled, new missions with new things to do lists….
While I understand the Hubble telescope is a pretty specialised bit of kit, what advantage would repairing a normal satellite have over just bringing a new one up?
Yes I was wondering that, the servicing mission would need to upgrade multiple satellites to break even as otherwise the launch costs would be higher
Dark Orange said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
Tau.Neutrino said:And give it a new things to do list?
This could open the gate for a lot of older satellites to be re-serviced or an electronic swap and refuelled, new missions with new things to do lists….
While I understand the Hubble telescope is a pretty specialised bit of kit, what advantage would repairing a normal satellite have over just bringing a new one up?
A lot of obsolete satellites have solar arrays and equipment storage racks which have weight, these are useful
maybe tourist space missions could have double duty, triple duty, send up a tech who can swap stuff in and out of a satellite, and on the way down eject the obsolete electronics to burn up
If countries can work towards standards, things could become more reusable etc
Cymek said:
Dark Orange said:
Tau.Neutrino said:This could open the gate for a lot of older satellites to be re-serviced or an electronic swap and refuelled, new missions with new things to do lists….
While I understand the Hubble telescope is a pretty specialised bit of kit, what advantage would repairing a normal satellite have over just bringing a new one up?
Yes I was wondering that, the servicing mission would need to upgrade multiple satellites to break even as otherwise the launch costs would be higher
Absolutely.
Maybe in the future space tourism orbits could be on the same orbit as an obsolete satellite they grab one or several of them as they go around the planet and then on the way down push them all into a de-orbit pattern.
Cymek said:
Dark Orange said:
Tau.Neutrino said:This could open the gate for a lot of older satellites to be re-serviced or an electronic swap and refuelled, new missions with new things to do lists….
While I understand the Hubble telescope is a pretty specialised bit of kit, what advantage would repairing a normal satellite have over just bringing a new one up?
Yes I was wondering that, the servicing mission would need to upgrade multiple satellites to break even as otherwise the launch costs would be higher
There must be quiet a few satellites that could be bought down this way.
Tau.Neutrino said:
Cymek said:
Dark Orange said:While I understand the Hubble telescope is a pretty specialised bit of kit, what advantage would repairing a normal satellite have over just bringing a new one up?
Yes I was wondering that, the servicing mission would need to upgrade multiple satellites to break even as otherwise the launch costs would be higher
There must be quiet a few satellites that could be bought down this way.
There would be ones to service.
and ones to bring down to de-orbit .
Tau.Neutrino said:
Dark Orange said:
Tau.Neutrino said:This could open the gate for a lot of older satellites to be re-serviced or an electronic swap and refuelled, new missions with new things to do lists….
While I understand the Hubble telescope is a pretty specialised bit of kit, what advantage would repairing a normal satellite have over just bringing a new one up?
A lot of obsolete satellites have solar arrays and equipment storage racks which have weight, these are useful
maybe tourist space missions could have double duty, triple duty, send up a tech who can swap stuff in and out of a satellite, and on the way down eject the obsolete electronics to burn up
If countries can work towards standards, things could become more reusable etc
Plug and play modules does make sense, even perhaps powers supplies you can swap out when one is nearly dead
Cymek said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
Dark Orange said:While I understand the Hubble telescope is a pretty specialised bit of kit, what advantage would repairing a normal satellite have over just bringing a new one up?
A lot of obsolete satellites have solar arrays and equipment storage racks which have weight, these are useful
maybe tourist space missions could have double duty, triple duty, send up a tech who can swap stuff in and out of a satellite, and on the way down eject the obsolete electronics to burn up
If countries can work towards standards, things could become more reusable etc
Plug and play modules does make sense, even perhaps powers supplies you can swap out when one is nearly dead
Yes, hot swappable designs exist, these could be put into newer designs or existing designs that have them.
Here’s a list of things space tourism missions could also do, I’m sure others could be added.
1 deploy micro satellites
2 replace batteries
3 lift small satellites into a higher orbit.
4 refuel satellites
5 regas satellites (keeping things cool)
6 Solar panel replacement (updating older panels)
7 General servicing
8 Replacing computers
9 Bring back space experiments
10 help to de-orbit satellites
11 help to de-orbit space junk
12 food delivers to space stations.
Tau.Neutrino said:
Here’s a list of things space tourism missions could also do, I’m sure others could be added.1 deploy micro satellites
2 replace batteries
3 lift small satellites into a higher orbit.
4 refuel satellites
5 regas satellites (keeping things cool)
6 Solar panel replacement (updating older panels)
7 General servicing
8 Replacing computers
9 Bring back space experiments
10 help to de-orbit satellites
11 help to de-orbit space junk
12 food delivers to space stations.
13 be cancelled and resources directed to pandemic control or global warming reversal
Obsolete satellites could be towed back with one or two others, maybe more, then de-orbited as a group.
With lots of rocket engines and ion engines being tried out, one could see mining interests selecting various rocket and ion engines for use in space.
Space tourism could also haul up mining rockets etc
If space tourism delivers food then they can bring back experiments and depose of rubbish for burn up.
Space tourism could also deliver robots for space construction projects.
Tau.Neutrino said:
Obsolete satellites could be towed back with one or two others, maybe more, then de-orbited as a group.
Sounds tricky. They might get knocked about accidentally, or knock into each other, before they can be towed into de-orbit position. They might break up into lots of little bits and pieces of satellite, which would be worse than leaving them up there.
party_pants said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
Obsolete satellites could be towed back with one or two others, maybe more, then de-orbited as a group.
Sounds tricky. They might get knocked about accidentally, or knock into each other, before they can be towed into de-orbit position. They might break up into lots of little bits and pieces of satellite, which would be worse than leaving them up there.
Yes, it does sound tricky, one way would be a rocket type body that extends 3 or 4 arms outwards and backwards like a fin.
Multiple towing will require precision manoeuvring, more accurate clocks and gps systems will allow for that.
automated grabbing by robot arms and wrap around magnets will probably do the close work
and the next generation of accurate clocks and gps systems is on the horizon.
I watched the video live from the first separation.
It certainly gave me some inspiration.
And the re-entry burn has been completed, it’s on its way back down. They should be landing in the ocean somewhere near Florida (I think) in about 35 minutes or so.
Could all space junk be made reusable in the future?
What percentage of space junk would be useful?
Could a space iron smelter get rid of a lot of it?
Tau.Neutrino said:
Could all space junk be made reusable in the future?What percentage of space junk would be useful?
Could a space iron smelter get rid of a lot of it?
Hmm. Good questions.
My first thought is that space junk burns up nicely in the atmosphere. This is fine for everything in low earth orbit but not for stuff in geosynchronous orbits. For geosynchronous orbits you would need to give it a negative velocity of 3.8 km/s to bring it back to Earth. That’s substantial, it’s more than a third of the velocity needed to get to low Earth orbit from Earth’s surface. Or perhaps that 3.8 could reduced to 1.6 to 1.9 km/s for a fast impact with Earth.
As for usefulness. There is a reward out for finding a Hasselblad camera accidentally lost in space by an Apollo crew. Another item worth recovering would perhaps be those radioisotope thermal generators containing expensive plutonium-238. ie. recover only small high value items, not full satellites … unless … unless you plan to sell recovered satellites as antiques. As antiques, they could demand a high price on the open market.
As for unrecoverable. Results of spacecraft explosions and collisions need to be considered unrecoverable. This includes most of the remaining 300 pieces of debris from the disintegration of the five-month-old third stage of the Chinese Long March 4 booster on 11 March 2000. To put it another way, the space junk in the “fragmentation debris” line on the following chart sould be considered unrecoverable.
For the antiques trade, the spacecraft in the following chart could be considered recoverable, at great cost. That’s up to about 25% of the total space debris.
Iron smelter, no.