Astronauts Throw Trash Into Space 138
MattSparkes writes "The International Space Station is home to an increasing amount of unwanted goods, and NASA has just approved a policy where these could be thrown out of the door into space. 'Tools and other gear have accidentally floated away during spacewalks. But NASA has shied away from intentionally jettisoning gear off the ISS in the past because of the threat of space junk hitting the station or other spacecraft.' The loosening of the rules on this comes just as Russian cosmonaut Mikhail Tyurin is about to take a space walk where he will hit a golf ball from the ISS in a promotional stunt for a golf company."
Re:Randomly dump their trash would be stupid (Score:3, Informative)
Let me help you understand what's at stake here. This quote is from the TFA, that you obviously haven't read:
Total cost of the ISS (so far): close to US$35 billions (source [www.abo.fi]). The collective face NASA is going to make when the ISS is made unusable by some medium-sized space junk: priceless. Added points for the irony of being hit by space junk that comes from the ISS itself. So, yes, allow me to say it again: throwing junk overboard without thrusting is bad policy, and it is stupid.
Oh wait, are you talking about the same ISS that needs an extra orbital boost [sciencedaily.com] from time to time due to atmospheric drag? Hmmm... Interesting... That means the ISS is slowly being dragged toward the earth. Amazing, isn't it? Who would have thought?
Which, of course, is in complete contradiction with what you just wrote about the ISS, right? Oh well, what's a few inconsistencies between friends? Besides, the goal is precisely to avoid filling the Earth outer space with dangerous, slow moving bags of trash. If you had read TFA, you would know that the golf ball that was to be putted by a russian cosmonaut is no danger, precisely, because hitting that little golf ball with a gold club is enough to send into the atmosphere, where it will burn harmlessly. Which, again, completely contradicts your previous statement that it takes a lot of thrust to de-orbit trash.
On the other hand, the real heart of the matter is, of course, that even if there is never another rocket launch, the outer space around the Earth will be filled with junk until at least 2055:
That was one [nationalgeographic.com] of the the links I posted. But, let me guess: you did not read any of these either, right?
Fine, that sentence should have been: ... there is no reason not to incinerate their trash IN THE UPPER ATMOSPHERE . Happy? I may sound dumb, but I am not THAT dumb, thankyouverymuch.
Still, there i
Re:Randomly dump their trash would be stupid (Score:5, Informative)
There is only one safe direction to throw anything out of an orbiting spacecraft - backwards, in the opposite direction of your orbit. By doing this you reduce the orbital velocity of the object relative to your spacecraft thereby guaranteeing that the object will enter a lower orbit from which it is guaranteed not to climb. At this point atmospheric drag will continue to degrade the objects orbit until it eventually burns up.
Re:Randomly dump their trash would be stupid (Score:3, Informative)
No, you don't lose it (otherwise every little tidal perturbation would be knocking satellites from the sky), you just change it. To actually immediately leave orbit from the ISS you'd need more than 100m/s delta V, which you're not going to get from someone throwing a bag of trash by hand even if they're not in a bulky space suit.
So the plan here isn't to throw trash out of orbit, it's to throw it into a slightly lower orbit and let atmospheric drag eventually do the rest. They seem to be relying on the fact that if the trash doesn't break into many small pieces, there's only a tiny probability of it hitting anything during the hundreds of orbits before drag finally wins. Well, best of luck to them, but I'd hate to be the decisionmaker responsible for any accidents.