ISS to the moon

[strkiky]

Let me know if this topic has already been done.

Could we simply push the ISS to an Lunar orbit?

[smoliarm]

Let me know if this topic has already been done.
...

IMSMR - yes.
Although I wouldn't take the job of finding the link to discussion.

Could we simply push the ISS to an Lunar orbit?

- no.

[MATTBLAK]

It would require hundreds if not thousands of tons of chemical propellants to do it and the stresses of doing the maneuvers would likely cause damage to the solar arrays and the connections between the pressurized modules. Also; the Van Allen belts would cause severe damage to the arrays unless the belts were moved through very quickly - and the stresses to do that would be detrimental to the arrays. Also, the ISS modules are not designed to provide adequate radiation protection for the crew beyond low Earth orbit.

And furthermore, the cooling systems for ISS are not really capable of being in constant sunlight all the time. Basically; many key ISS systems despite being upgraded and repaired are at least 20 years old. It is better that a newer, purpose built station was placed near the Moon.

[Jonathan_Blatter]

It would require hundreds if not thousands of tons of chemical propellants to do it and the stresses of doing the maneuvers would likely cause damage to the solar arrays and the connections between the pressurized modules. Also; the Van Allen belts would cause severe damage to the arrays unless the belts were moved through very quickly - and the stresses to do that would be detrimental to the arrays. Also, the ISS modules are not designed to provide adequate radiation protection for the crew beyond low Earth orbit.

And furthermore, the cooling systems for ISS are not really capable of being in constant sunlight all the time. Basically; many key ISS systems despite being upgraded and repaired are at least 20 years old. It is better that a newer, purpose built station was placed near the Moon.

I understand the structural integrity. is a problem. However, see the advantage that even if only parts are reused, we would have a financial advantage.
Would that be technically conceivable. and which modules would make sense there?

[MATTBLAK]

Spending billions to recycle the ISS into an arena outside of low Earth orbit makes no sense. After about another decade; if the facility cannot be completely bought up by Commercial concerns and refurbished into further use for low Earth orbit it will be game over - it will be splashed into the South Pacific. The oldest modules Zvezda and Zarya are already older than Mir was when that was discarded. Mir had collision and fire damage, yes - but it was leaking and it's electrical and life support systems were failing. ISS has already sprung a leak that is being fixed.

Forget it! All the modules will have endured many thousands of thermal cycles, and growing micro-meteorite and atomic oxygen erosion. The hatch seals and interfaces are ageing. The habitable modules could not easily or cheaply have their thermal, radiation and micro-meteorite protection upgraded... ISS is a good, ongoing test subject for how long a previous generation manned spacecraft can endure engineering-wise before it reaches a point of no return. Depending on who you talk to: that point will occur somewhere between 8-to-12 years from today.

Just adding the new concept of 'roller blind' solar arrays over the old ones should give the station at least another half-decade of life.  Sending ISS beyond LEO makes about as much sense as pulling the Shuttle Orbiters out of museums and refurbishing them to fly again. There are new, Commercial and 'Old Space' solutions coming to making space stations in Cislunar space. The 'Gateway' or similar facilities and even adapting a version of 'Starship' might give a decent Cislunar station option. I know it isn't always done; but choosing the simplest concept is usually the best...

[AnalogMan]

Let me know if this topic has already been done.
[...]

There have been a few threads related to this topic:

ISS moon base
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=10963.0
last post July 2008

The transfer of the ISS to the moon?
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41721.0
last post November 2016

Recycling ISS for Gateway
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=45530.0
last post April 2018

[libra]

ISS is 420 mt according to Wikipedia. You would need to add 4 km/s of delta-v to send it into lunar orbit, one-way trip obviously.

9.81*465*ln((800+420)/(80+420) = 4069 m/s

What does this mean ?  That taking the all time specific impulse record of the RL-10 (465 seconds) you would need a huge, monster rocket stage to push the ISS from Earth orbit to lunar orbit.

So 465 second specific impulse (probably impossible for a very big engine) and  800 mt, filled with 720 mt of LOX and LH2 propellant; leaving a 80 mt empty mass. Mass fraction 0.90, which is probably a little optimistic.

Can't remember how much a SLS can lift into orbit, but 800 mt is hugely huge.

The ISS would not resist high-thrust engines and would also get fried crossing the van Allen belts... also, lunar orbit is deep space and the station was not build for that: low earth orbit is nicer place (if merely).

[Forrest White]

It would be easier to use ISS as a lunar station, there is no difference between where they locate, so it would save much resources and time.

[Lodrig]

My crazy 'how to' MacGyver scenario.

Remove the crew and then fill the stations interior with Zenon gas and use Ion propulsion to move it over several years.  Might want to install some fresh solar panels first though as the Van Allen belts will cause a good deal of degradation.

*Above crazy idea should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the goal of moving ISS to the moon*

[TrevorMonty]

My crazy 'how to' MacGyver scenario.

Remove the crew and then fill the stations interior with Zenon gas and use Ion propulsion to move it over several years.  Might want to install some fresh solar panels first though as the Van Allen belts will cause a good deal of degradation.

*Above crazy idea should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the goal of moving ISS to the moon*

Once you get it there the $3B annual maintenance will be $10B due to extra DV needed by cargo vehicles.

[MATTBLAK]

Send a 20 ton Aluminum 'Hub' module with 6x docking ports on it out to the Moon: then dock 4x kevlar, inflatable 'Bigelow' modules to that Hub. One port could be left to a refuelable 'Service Module' for propulsion, attitude control and power. The other at the far end? Dock another, multi-hub aluminum module there so up to 5x spacecraft can dock there: Crewed and Logistics vehicles etc.

There - job done. A Modular, upgradable space station much cheaper than moving or refurbishing the I.S.S...