Propose your ISS extensions here!

[Aghanim]

Title is pretty much self-explanatory

Here is my try:

1. Centrifuge habitat

Well a centrifuge wheel to test human tolerances to artificial gravity, and general gravity so they could use the toilet like on Earth, eat food like on Earth, sleep like on Earth, well you get the idea

2. Refuelling station

Basically a large fuel tank to test the idea of space refuelling

3. Reactor module

For backup power, to augment the storage battery, for VASMIR firing, and to test high temperature radiator heat rejection system. It will come with shadow shield that reduces the amount of radiation coming to the crew quarters, and core ejection system that hopefully bring it as far as possible from Earth and the station itself

4. Greenhouse module

To experiment with closed ecological system, growing food, recycling water, converting CO2 to O2, and to reduce VOC

5. Laser debris annihilator

To annihilate space debris

[Nibb31]

Nice ideas in an ideal world, but where's the money going to come from?

#1 costs too much.

#2 is done on the Russian segment. Progress and ATV refuel the Zvezda service module.

#3 is too dangerous. Remember that anything in LEO reenters one day and things can go wrong.

#4 is already done in the various experiments on board.

#5 isn't possible. Giant lasers can burn holes, but they can't "annihilate".

Also, the ISS has been extended to 2024. There isn't enough time left in the ISS program to design and launch new modules.

[kiwiak]

#5 isn't possible. Giant lasers can burn holes, but they can't "annihilate".

You can easily avoid bigger debris, so laser woudl probably be used for some small ones... put enough holes in something and there is nothing left except holes.

[Klingon Admiral]

You can easily avoid bigger debris, so laser woudl probably be used for some small ones... put enough holes in something and there is nothing left except holes.

So you made a lot of debris from on piece of debris. Kessler syndrome, you don't get it.

[kiwiak]

So you made a lot of debris from on piece of debris. Kessler syndrome, you don't get it.

I get it. But if its this sized

Wont few shots completly vaporize such debris? Thats what i meant, shoot it until its nothing left.

I dont really know how laser works in detail so im asking if its possible... i read somewhere that there were plans for laser antidebris systems for space stations, so it was at least considered... Probably.

[crazyewok]

Centrifuge habitat

The most important priority as far as Im concerned.

[crazyewok]

Nice ideas in an ideal world, but where's the money going to come from?

#1 costs too much.

#2 is done on the Russian segment. Progress and ATV refuel the Zvezda service module.

#3 is too dangerous. Remember that anything in LEO reenters one day and things can go wrong.

#4 is already done in the various experiments on board.

#5 isn't possible. Giant lasers can burn holes, but they can't "annihilate".

Also, the ISS has been extended to 2024. There isn't enough time left in the ISS program to design and launch new modules.

O look the great Nibb31 shows up.

Why dont we just pack every up and not bother. I mean what the point if we all thought like you?

If we were all like you we would still be in caves and the staus quo would not be worth changing.

You do get the purpose of the thread is only to discuss what we would LIKE? . It may not be possible but its FUN to speculate and discuss but I guess thats not allowed either.

Edited January 18, 2014 by crazyewok

[Kryten]

Wont few shots completly vaporize such debris? Thats what i meant, shoot it until its nothing left.

It takes a lot of energy to completely vapourise something, but vapourising small amounts of material creates thrust that can ultimately change the orbits of objects and cause them to re-enter; that's the kind of thing people usually mean when they talk about anti-debris lasers. It'd still take much more energy than is available at the ISS, but there's nothing fundamental from stopping this kind of facility being at ground level.

O look the great Nibb31 shows up.

It may not be possible but its FUN to speculate and discuss but I guess thats not allowed either.

Crazyewok logic in a nutshell. Saying things I don't like=trying to censor people's threads.

[Nibb31]

You do get the purpose of the thread is only to discuss what we would LIKE?

I'd like an interstellar warp drive module, a Star Trek transporter, and a space brewery.

Sorry, but I find discussions about real possibilities more interesting than conjecture about things that have zero chance of happening.

[kiwiak]

It'd still take much more energy than is available at the ISS, but there's nothing fundamental from stopping this kind of facility being at ground level.

Well, nothing fundamental, but it seems lot harder except energy avability on ground.

Unless its something on geo, you woudl have to place hundreds of thes laser stations to keep given object protected... and detection equipment probably woudl have to be onboard station, some 1-cm objects are too small to be detected from earth, right?

So, upon detection, probably seconds woudl count, you woudl have to aim laser at this fast moving debris, make sure that there is no any plane over fire path...

[crazyewok]

Sorry, but I find discussions about real possibilities more interesting than conjecture about things that have zero chance of happening.

1st Well first of all something like a Centrifuge module is a REAL possbility. I dont see why its not? Please explain? I dont see why its a zero chance. Its not even in the same league as warp and other crazy ideas.

If you don't discuss and push boundary you are just stuck with the satus quo. Hell what even is a REAL possibility in your eyes as you seem to dissmiss everything?

2nd If you dont like open disccuions like this then leave them be and start and thread on your own intrest.

Edited January 18, 2014 by crazyewok

[crazyewok]

Crazyewok logic in a nutshell. Saying things I don't like=trying to censor people's threads.

Nibb31 and Kryten Logic in a Nutshell. Saying things we dont like = trying to ridccule them and calling them crazy (compareing them to insane things) without explaining why in any detail except "wont work" "stupid"

By the way do you even know what censor means? Im not stoping either of you from posting. I just strongly disagree with of your view points and think your attitudes impede rather than contribute.

Edited January 18, 2014 by crazyewok

[Kryten]

Your reading comprehension is as poor as your logic. Read what I quoted; you were complaining about nibb supposedly deciding speculating and discussing were 'not allowed', and in the post after you're saying he 'doesn't like open discussions'. He hasn't called for anything to be removed or for anybody to shut up; he's simply discussed people's ideas.

[Seret]

I could suggest we install a trebuchet and a brothel in the ISS, but it doesn't really lead the conversation anywhere particularly illuminating. If you can defend your suggestions then go for it, but you can't stop people from commenting on them.

Personally I'd back an expanded platform for closed circuit life support research, although I suspect anything too big for the current ISS isn't flight ready. A centrifuge should probably wait for a custom-designed station, so it could be larger and better integrated.

[Nibb31]

1st Well first of all something like a Centrifuge module is a REAL possbility. I dont see why its not? Please explain? I dont see why its a zero chance. Its not even in the same league as warp and other crazy ideas.

Sure, the centrifuge module would have been a great addition. One was even planned and partially built: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifuge_Accommodations_Module

However, it was cancelled for budgetary reasons in 2005 and the ISS has moved on. Designing and building a new one, ground testing, launch, etc... would take a decade. The ISS will be deorbited before then. Even if you could accelerate the development to 7 or 8 years, you wouldn't have time to get much science out of it before the end of the program.

If you don't discuss and push boundary you are just stuck with the satus quo.

I'm all for pushing boundaries within the limits of reality. Government agencies, research organizations, and the aerospace industry actually push those boundaries every day. Because their progress isn't as spectacular as in the movies doesn't mean it isn't real.

Edited January 18, 2014 by Nibb31

[crazyewok]

Your reading comprehension is as poor as your logic. Read what I quoted; you were complaining about nibb supposedly deciding speculating and discussing were 'not allowed', and in the post after you're saying he 'doesn't like open discussions'. He hasn't called for anything to be removed or for anybody to shut up; he's simply discussed people's ideas.

I just see lots of cants, wont happen and impossible from him yet rarely see what he thinks would be a good idea.

[kiwiak]

Well i woudl like to have science power station because it looks cool.

[Kryten]

I just see lots of cants, wont happen and impossible from him yet rarely see what he thinks would be a good idea.

That's because most ideas are bad. That's how life works; 90% of everything is crap.

[crazyewok]

Sure, a centrifuge module would have been a great addition. One was even planned and partially built: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifuge_Accommodations_Module

However, it was cancelled for budgetary reasons and the ISS has moved on. Designing and building a new one, ground testing, launch, etc... would take a decade. The ISS will be deorbited before then. Even if you could accelerate the development to 7 or 8 years, you wouldn't have time to get much science out of it before the end of the program.

See this more the discussion I like. Ok we have reasons now. Good I accept them. Now the question I have is what monkey in suite at NASA decided to cancel the module as it would in my opinion have given us some of the best data on possible effects of not just centrifugal gravity but also possible the adaptation of Earth organisms to Lunar and possibly mars gravity as such I think other projects should have been cancelled first.

My problem is not with the scientists at NASA who I think do great work with the little they have but rather the Admins and polticans in charge that seem to waste money.

I work in Pharma, if the companys I have worked for opperated like NASA we would have had a number of big compnays go bust by now.

[crazyewok]

That's because most ideas are bad. That's how life works; 90% of everything is crap.

I agree but it would be nice to hear what he and even you think would be a good idea. Plus just because I or even you think its a bad idea doesnt mean its good and vice versa.

what has rubbed me up the wrong way is the fact is just because you guys think something is a bad idea seem to indicate that one is a moron or kid and as such should be dimissed or spoken down too when reality with me is far from it, I just have a diffrent opinion. Now Im not a physicist or Aerospace engineer so my opinions are not the be all and end all. But unless you guys are too then your in the same boat and ypur opinions really are no more valid.

Maybe we should just call a truce? Maybe I have just been rubbed up the wrong way.

[Comrade Jenkens]

A centrifuge module would be excellent for research. And that thing could be designed, built and orbited within a couple of years if companies actually new how to work efficiently!

[Klingon Admiral]

Instead of proposing new modules for the ISS; I would start working on a new space station.

[Nibb31]

Now the question I have is what monkey in suite at NASA decided to cancel the module.

Actually, CAM was built by JAXA, although I don't know how the exact funding went. It was probably part of a barter agreement.

There was a lot of shuffling around after the Columbia accident. Flights were suspended, there were delays, budget overruns, and it became clear that some modules wouldn't fly. Sometimes you have to accept to cut off a leg to save the patient. The CAM module and the USOS habitation module took the hit. It was a tough decision, but which module of the ISS would you have sacrificed?

The prioritization of ISS science payloads is usually done by international science committees who have to work within a given budget and given launch slots. It's not a single "suit at NASA".

But yes, I agree that the cancelling of CAM was very unfortunate, because we know very little about partial gravity and its possible benefits.

Edited January 18, 2014 by Nibb31

[Comrade Jenkens]

Instead of proposing new modules for the ISS; I would start working on a new space station.

I'm hoping that there will be a new ISS after the old one is deorbited but there are no current plans for one. Russia wants to build OPSEK but that is just one space agency.

[Kryten]

I'm hoping that there will be a new ISS after the old one is deorbited but there are no current plans for one. Russia wants to build OPSEK but that is just one space agency.

Don't forget China's planned one, which they've stated they'd be open to co-operating on. Sure, NASA or JAXA won't exactly be chomping at the bit, but ESA are very differently interested and Roskosmos and ISRO might be as well.