The "Escape corridor" from an airlock is generally downwards and away from the station, so an airlock for CubeSATs on Node 3 Zenith is probably not feasible.
All in all, it would likely be more trouble that it's worth, so I doubt we'll ever see it happen. If ISS really needs more ports, a better idea would be to allow industry to design their own module, with it's own internal, external, and airlock/deployer facilities, and possibly even separate power/ECLSS capabilities to cut down integration with ISS. Put it on Node 2 Forward (with PMA-2 moved to the forward end of the new commercial module).
I am wondering if the new design is large enough to accommodate an astronaut in a space suit.
Quote from: Danderman on 02/03/2016 05:30 pmI am wondering if the new design is large enough to accommodate an astronaut in a space suit.You'd have to be in a pretty desperate situation to consider using it for such a purpose...
Quote from: arachnitect on 02/04/2016 01:49 pmQuote from: Danderman on 02/03/2016 05:30 pmI am wondering if the new design is large enough to accommodate an astronaut in a space suit.You'd have to be in a pretty desperate situation to consider using it for such a purpose...Apart from there being no resources for either Orlan or the US suit, what are the other issues that would make it desperate? If the prime US airlock were to suffer some sort of off-nominal situation, could this be used as a backup?
Soyuz does not have a hatch that cannot EVA any more, except in the movie "Gravity".
Simple design is great, but that also means no provisions for handling small cargo delivery vehicles, or their cargo.For example, a powered hard stand that can grapple the bell cap and a small delivery vehicle (grabbed by the arm and placed at the hardstand), allowing transfer of an external payload capsule from the delivery vehicle to be stuffed into the bell, which can then be reberthed for final delivery.Simple example might be something like delivering an Intuitive Machines TRV, or an upmass only minimal pressuized cylinder to haul small sized cargos (food, gas/liquids) that are flexible or not dimensionally challenged (which would otherwise require a full sized cargo delivery vehicle).This would essentially create an additional secondary cargo services market ecosystem, which would allow all those smallsat launchers to compete as small cargo delivery launch providers (and provide them with an anchor customer). Hell, the actual payload+service module delivery vehicle set could be made by the smallsat launcher folks or a thirdy party contracting with them.This isn't all that far from a rumored proposal for a small cargo vehicle coming to ISS, getting locked down on the JEM porch, then passing the cargo through the JEM airlock.
Quote from: Asteroza on 02/09/2016 06:28 amSimple design is great, but that also means no provisions for handling small cargo delivery vehicles, or their cargo.For example, a powered hard stand that can grapple the bell cap and a small delivery vehicle (grabbed by the arm and placed at the hardstand), allowing transfer of an external payload capsule from the delivery vehicle to be stuffed into the bell, which can then be reberthed for final delivery.Simple example might be something like delivering an Intuitive Machines TRV, or an upmass only minimal pressuized cylinder to haul small sized cargos (food, gas/liquids) that are flexible or not dimensionally challenged (which would otherwise require a full sized cargo delivery vehicle).This would essentially create an additional secondary cargo services market ecosystem, which would allow all those smallsat launchers to compete as small cargo delivery launch providers (and provide them with an anchor customer). Hell, the actual payload+service module delivery vehicle set could be made by the smallsat launcher folks or a thirdy party contracting with them.This isn't all that far from a rumored proposal for a small cargo vehicle coming to ISS, getting locked down on the JEM porch, then passing the cargo through the JEM airlock.Would your proposed small items fit through a suit port?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suitport
In theory, a cargo container delivered by a small vehicle could be grappled by Dextre using a micro square fixture, transferred to an facility on the exterior of ISS, and then transferred into ISS via the Bishop hatch.
This would essentially create an additional secondary cargo services market ecosystem, which would allow all those smallsat launchers to compete as small cargo delivery launch providers (and provide them with an anchor customer). Hell, the actual payload+service module delivery vehicle set could be made by the smallsat launcher folks or a thirdy party contracting with them.
Quote from: Asteroza on 02/09/2016 06:28 amThis would essentially create an additional secondary cargo services market ecosystem, which would allow all those smallsat launchers to compete as small cargo delivery launch providers (and provide them with an anchor customer). Hell, the actual payload+service module delivery vehicle set could be made by the smallsat launcher folks or a thirdy party contracting with them.How much attention from the crew would this take? Thought there were already issues with crew time spent on cargo operations rather than science....