Thanks folks.
How about a spring-loaded or mass driver system reachable through the JEM airlock? Reboost as well as trash disposal!
NASA is already considering a proposal to deploy small re-entry capsules from the JEM A/L in order to return regular science samples, so conceivably a similar process could be used for small amounts of trash.
Regarding the software problem that Orbital had in the sim, the article seems to indicate that it was caused because "they do not have any telemetry in X2_R9,″ and "Orbital thought their software update would solve the problem..." Does that mean that they tested with R11 and the problem still exists, or that Orbital had upgraded Cygnus to try and compensate for the problems in R9, but were unable?
That's a good question, one which I myself thought of when writing the article. The L2 notes don't specify whether the telemetry problems are limited to R9 or not - so I don't know.
Why can't they fill each departing vehicle with trash? What are the constraints?
Centre of Mass constraints, which affect the thruster performance of the spacecraft - especially for Dragon, which must re-enter and land.
NASA is already considering a proposal to deploy small re-entry capsules from the JEM A/L in order to return regular science samples, so conceivably a similar process could be used for small amounts of trash.
I wonder if inflatables would make sense for trash disposal.
NASA is already considering a proposal to deploy small re-entry capsules from the JEM A/L in order to return regular science samples, so conceivably a similar process could be used for small amounts of trash.
I wonder if inflatables would make sense for trash disposal.
I had the same thought, using a ballon of some sort to increase the cross section and decrease the balistic coefficient, speeding up descent. The big issue, however, is probably getting it out of the pressurized environment and released in a stable manner, without doing an EVA. Can the SSRMS reach into an airlock?
Of course, this is OT for the discussion of a possible "de-crew"
Why can't they fill each departing vehicle with trash? What are the constraints?
CG, as noted, constraints imposed by the vehicle (for example, ATV is EXTREMLY conservative in their vehicle constraints so we can hardly get much in it) and available trash. We are actually pretty clean at the moment.
Let's continue with some advanced thinking......
"A major area of concern relates to the atmosphere of the ISS, both in event of a Micro Meteoroid Orbital Debris (MMOD) strike"
The robotics should be left in a ‘standby” mode if they can be controlled from the ground. Connected to a decent camera this could serve as a decent set of eyes on the condition of the ISS.
A great comment!
If there is a de-crew, what is the capability of robonaut in so far as 1) scouting (or more accurately being able to visually inspect the entire habitable space in the ISS), 2) passive reading of the surrounding, and 3) active manipulation of possibly needed buttons, or switches in the ISS from the ground?
Let's continue with some advanced thinking......
"A major area of concern relates to the atmosphere of the ISS, both in event of a Micro Meteoroid Orbital Debris (MMOD) strike"
The robotics should be left in a ‘standby” mode if they can be controlled from the ground. Connected to a decent camera this could serve as a decent set of eyes on the condition of the ISS.
A great comment!
If there is a de-crew, what is the capability of robonaut in so far as 1) scouting (or more accurately being able to visually inspect the entire habitable space in the ISS), 2) passive reading of the surrounding, and 3) active manipulation of possibly needed buttons, or switches in the ISS from the ground?
No need for Robonaut to do anything. ISS can be controlled from the ground to maintain attitude control and environmental systems ect. Cameras would be hooked up to display areas that would be of interest.
Let's continue with some advanced thinking......
"A major area of concern relates to the atmosphere of the ISS, both in event of a Micro Meteoroid Orbital Debris (MMOD) strike"
The robotics should be left in a ‘standby” mode if they can be controlled from the ground. Connected to a decent camera this could serve as a decent set of eyes on the condition of the ISS.
A great comment!
If there is a de-crew, what is the capability of robonaut in so far as 1) scouting (or more accurately being able to visually inspect the entire habitable space in the ISS), 2) passive reading of the surrounding, and 3) active manipulation of possibly needed buttons, or switches in the ISS from the ground?
No need for Robonaut to do anything. ISS can be controlled from the ground to maintain attitude control and environmental systems ect. Cameras would be hooked up to display areas that would be of interest.
Not what the external Robotic Arm can see with a decent camera.
Let's continue with some advanced thinking......
"A major area of concern relates to the atmosphere of the ISS, both in event of a Micro Meteoroid Orbital Debris (MMOD) strike"
The robotics should be left in a ‘standby” mode if they can be controlled from the ground. Connected to a decent camera this could serve as a decent set of eyes on the condition of the ISS.
A great comment!
If there is a de-crew, what is the capability of robonaut in so far as 1) scouting (or more accurately being able to visually inspect the entire habitable space in the ISS), 2) passive reading of the surrounding, and 3) active manipulation of possibly needed buttons, or switches in the ISS from the ground?
Also, even if Robonauts could reliably throw switches, there are none to throw. The only siwtches on ISS are the power on/off for the lights. No need to have him do anything.
