| Page 1 of 1 |
[ 6 posts ] |
Theoretical or academic thought
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Moderator ![]()
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 11:23 am
Posts: 3745 Location: Hamburg, Germany |
What problems must be handled if the ISS would be dismounted and carried to the Moon piece by piece and landed there? What preparations would be required for such an installation since the ISS's components aren't designed for being installed on any surface?
The thought really is meant theoretical and academic only. ... ... ... Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist) |
| Back to top |
|
|
Moon Mission Member ![]() ![]()
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 5:38 pm
Posts: 1361 Location: Austin, Texas |
You would obviously need VERY large cargo vehicle to land with some of the big pieces. And LOTS of fuel to get them there. And as you say, the station is designed for zero gravity, so all kinds of things, like the solar panel unfurling and aiming mechanism would not work at all. In fact, I doubt all the parts would even have the structural strength to stay assembled in 1/6 G. It would probably collapse into a pile of broken parts on the surface, like a jellyfish out of water.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moon Mission Member ![]()
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 11:52 am
Posts: 1276 Location: Exeter, Devon, England |
How is it designed? are the computers etc all on one side? it would be a nightmare trying to sort things which would now be on ceiling, Inoperable perhaps.
The solar arrays etc could be used on the moon though right? if one day the ISS was taken aprt then those sort of things could be shuttled further to the moon. Perhaos it could be done in lunar orbit? _________________ > http://www.fullmoonclothing.com > http://www.facebook.com/robsastrophotography > robgoldsmith@hotmail.co.uk |
| Back to top |
|
|
Space Walker ![]()
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 5:18 pm
Posts: 124 Location: UK |
There is a definite 'up' and 'down' designed into the ISS, but windows are in the 'floor' so that the crew can look at the Earth.
A more reasonable 'second life' for the ISS might be as a cycling space station in the 2:1 resonant orbit proposed by Heppenheimer. Trips to the moon would then be like a sea cruise, rather than crossing the Atlantic in the Spirit of St Louis. I suspect that in practice, by the time there is a need for such a thing, the ISS will be completely knackered. _________________ We love Google. Google is our friend and protector. |
| Back to top |
|
|
Spaceflight Trainee ![]()
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 3:47 am
Posts: 35 Location: Adelaide, Australia |
The solar panels wouldn't survive lunar gravity
_________________ Fight drought - don't wash. |
| Back to top |
|
|
Moon Mission Member ![]() ![]()
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 5:38 pm
Posts: 1361 Location: Austin, Texas |
xiphius wrote: A more reasonable 'second life' for the ISS might be as a cycling space station in the 2:1 resonant orbit proposed by Heppenheimer. ... I suspect that in practice, by the time there is a need for such a thing, the ISS will be completely knackered. Frediiiie, I agree the panels cannot stand gravity, but astronauts COULD just lay them on the ground, very carefully and by hand. Still, ISS would need a LOT more batteries to last through a 2 week night. So really the only useful thing is the habitable volume, and that could be supplied much more easily by some Bigelow modules. It probably will be. |
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Page 1 of 1 |
[ 6 posts ] |
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests |





Gabitasoft Interactive. All Rights Reserved.