ISS Construction Resumes

avtchillsboro writes "The NY Times has an article detailing new construction on the International Space Station (ISS) and the additions via coming Space Shuttle missions through 2010. From the article: 'For more than three years, the International Space Station has floated half-built above the Earth. Maintained by a skeleton crew, the station — an assemblage of modules and girders — has not come close to its stated goal of becoming a world-class research outpost. But now construction, which has hung in limbo since NASA's space shuttle fleet was grounded after the 2003 Columbia disaster, is scheduled to resume. The shuttle Atlantis is scheduled to lift off next Sunday carrying a bus-size segment of the station's backbone that includes a new set of solar-power arrays.'"

Re:Awesome!

[revolu7ion]

[e-mail]

Re:Cost Versus Utility

[halibatsuiba]

"And why is it that construction grinds to a halt when only one of the member nations involved grounds its shuttles?"

There is only one member nation with shuttles...
Nasa's shuttle is the only vehicle able to carry big enough loads up there.

That's why.

Re:but...

[Decaff]

How's about the rest of the world waste some of their cash to build rockets to pick up the slack?

They have been. Since the Columbia disaster the station has been largely serviced by Russian Soyuz spacecraft.

Re:Cost Versus Utility

[korbin_dallas]

OK self-correcting my comment.

Heres a nice table of vehicles:
http://www.tbs-satellite.com/tse/online/thema_lanc eur.html [tbs-satellite.com]
STS is the heavy lifter currently to LEO.

What I cannot find is size and weight tables of each part of ISS. Not that it matters, the whole ISS plan is DESIGNED around the STS. If it were instead designed around the Proton D1...or Energia.

Anyway STS is not the only game in town.

Re:Cost Versus Utility

[WalksOnDirt]

Maybe, but a number of scientific projects have been canceled after a lot of money was invested. The superconducting super collider was canceled after it was partially built, and at least one NASA mission that was nearly ready to fly just recently got killed to cover the cost overruns in the manned space program.

Re:but...

[Decaff]

That's a bit of a straw man isn't it? Why don't they build some heavy lift vehicles?

They have. Several pieces of the ISS have been launched by Russian Proton and Soyuz rockets. The problem is that the entire launching strategy was pre-planned, with some parts launched and deployed by Shuttle, some by other vehicles.

MOD PARENT TROLL... PLEASE!!!!

[RockClimbingFool]

Wow, what a bunch of bullshit. You sir know jack about shit. Hate to break it to you, but the Space Shuttle is the heaviest lift launcher available today. Nothing today can lift as many tons at one time. All most all of the modules were designed and built with this fact in mind. That is the main reason only the Space Shuttle can finish construction. We don't have any other vehicles to put the modules up there. Period. And btw, Boeing built almost every module and truss in the good ol US of A. So fuck off with your condensending bullshit and get a life.