Political Crossfire Forums

[learn to swim]

GASP

[learn to swim]

ISS Oxygen Generator Fails for Good, Station Managers Say
By Todd Halvorson
FLORIDA TODAY
posted: 14 May 2005
10:05 a.m. ET

CAPE CANAVERAL - A balky Russian oxygen generator broke down on the International Space Station, but its two-man crew has a reserve air supply that would last about five months, NASA officials said Friday.

The station's primary generator, which has been operating in an on-again, off-again fashion for months, stopped working last week and the station's crew has not been able to fix it.

Mission managers say the unit has failed for good. Consequently, Russian cosmonaut Sergei Krikalev and U.S. astronaut John Phillips will be relying on reserves until replacement parts arrive at the station in late August.

Kylie Clem, a spokeswoman for NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston, said the reserves would last well beyond the scheduled mid-June arrival at the station of a Russian space freighter with additional supplies.

As it stands, oxygen supplies in a Progress cargo carrier now at the outpost will last until May 22 or May 23.

The crew also is equipped with oxygen generators that work like drop-down emergency air supplies on commercial airliners. Supplies from those would last until early July. Beyond that, there is a 100-day oxygen supply in tanks attached to the station U.S. Quest airlock.

Total air supply now onboard: About 140 days.

Krikalev and Phillips comprise the fifth two-person crew to live and work on the station since the February 2003 Columbia accident grounded NASA's shuttle fleet, cutting off a key supply line to the outpost.

NASA and its 15 international partners since then have been relying solely on Russian spacecraft to haul crews and cargo to and from the station.

The shuttle fleet now is expected to be back in service in mid-July.

Krikalev and Phillips are in the midst of a six-month tour of duty on the half-built station, which is a joint project of the U.S., Russia, Europe, Japan, Canada and Brazil.

The two launched from Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan on April 14, arrived at the station two days later and are due back on Earth on Oct. 7.

Story Link

[anselfir]

Again the stupidity of bureaucracy trumps collective intelligence. A minor component failure destroyed the intricate setup. In a private company this would happen with far less frequency.

[Warmonger]

I'm scared for those two up there. I'm confident that either we can get them down, or a new generator can be installed, before the situation becomes critical, though. Good luck to them.

[Locke25]

doesn't sound that bad to me. im sure they'll bring the replacement parts up soon or get the astronauts down.

[Sid]

That s*cks, hope they get them down or the parts up soon. :-(

[learn to swim]

This always amazes me. I love the mission of NASA and I love watching the shuttle go up (right in my back yard) but they have married themselves to the dead bird and wasted BILLIONS on what could have been used for a better - more advanced - safer - space exploration program.

We owned the space market and who have we been relying on since the last disaster? Russia. Russia? Pathetic.


We need to redesign the space program and quick. We need to get back to the quality and reliability standards that we were once known for.


The space station should not be in an emergency status EVER. It is bad things like this that add fuel to the ant-space exploration group and that is unacceptable.

They just retired the Titan 4 - why? (actually last launch from Florida has happened but one more from Cali in July I think) It was reliable as hell and could be sending smaller missions into space as we speak if they would just admit the shuttle is a cow. The turn around time on a rocket is way quicker than getting the shuttle prepared for launch.

I can only hope that they are seriously looking at Lockheed Martin's Atlas 5 and Boeing's Delta 4 and asking themselves - how can we consolodate equipment and cut cost while improving overall safety?

They say they are doing this but I haven't seen anything to make me believe it.


The ISS is amazing and a great achievement but if we cannot even keep that running properly then what does that say about our ability to explore deep space? When I read this story one thing entered my mind:

It has been working off and on for a while now so why wouldn't they just replace it?


Answer: How the heck are you going to get something up there to rplace it with and stay within your budget?


Pathetic. We are wasting money on the shuttle and need to scrap it fast for a better more reliable / more cost effective option.

[Dookiestix]

learn to swim wrote: This always amazes me. I love the mission of NASA and I love watching the shuttle go up (right in my back yard) but they have married themselves to the dead bird and wasted BILLIONS on what could have been used for a better - more advanced - safer - space exploration program.

We owned the space market and who have we been relying on since the last disaster? Russia. Russia? Pathetic.


We need to redesign the space program and quick. We need to get back to the quality and reliability standards that we were once known for.


The space station should not be in an emergency status EVER. It is bad things like this that add fuel to the ant-space exploration group and that is unacceptable.

They just retired the Titan 4 - why? (actually last launch from Florida has happened but one more from Cali in July I think) It was reliable as hell and could be sending smaller missions into space as we speak if they would just admit the shuttle is a cow. The turn around time on a rocket is way quicker than getting the shuttle prepared for launch.

I can only hope that they are seriously looking at Lockheed Martin's Atlas 5 and Boeing's Delta 4 and asking themselves - how can we consolodate equipment and cut cost while improving overall safety?

They say they are doing this but I haven't seen anything to make me believe it.


The ISS is amazing and a great achievement but if we cannot even keep that running properly then what does that say about our ability to explore deep space? When I read this story one thing entered my mind:

It has been working off and on for a while now so why wouldn't they just replace it?


Answer: How the heck are you going to get something up there to rplace it with and stay within your budget?


Pathetic. We are wasting money on the shuttle and need to scrap it fast for a better more reliable / more cost effective option.

The privatization of the space industry may be the best bet we have to further our technological advantage in this type of exploration. Granted, the "International Space Station" is probably as much a diplomatic mission as it is a technological one.

But in this case, intense competition in the private space industry would be a godsend...

[learn to swim]

I agree. A government agency will only work so hard because it is - well - a government agency.

[Locke25]

learn to swim wrote: We owned the space market and who have we been relying on since the last disaster? Russia. Russia? Pathetic.

Russia is second best. And their rocket is not that bad. It's been reliable, hasn't it? One thing fails and you assume their whole program is shot to hell?

learn to swim wrote: The ISS is amazing and a great achievement but if we cannot even keep that running properly then what does that say about our ability to explore deep space? When I read this story one thing entered my mind

The ISS is entirely too complex to keep everything working. There is always going to be some glitch that causes something to go wrong. They've got so many machines and gadgets up there, I can see how they might lose one. And when we explore deep space, I think we'll be more skilled at space technology. We're already exploring deep space & most of those missions have been fine. This oxygen failure is just a lesson to be learned, and the astronauts seem to be in no immediate danger since they have back-up.

[learn to swim]

Locke25 wrote: learn to swim wrote: We owned the space market and who have we been relying on since the last disaster? Russia. Russia? Pathetic.

Russia is second best. And their rocket is not that bad. It's been reliable, hasn't it? One thing fails and you assume their whole program is shot to hell?


No, you missed my whole point there. We have had to rely on the Russians because we cannot build a reliable way to get into space safely. I do not think the whole space station is shot to hell - I think our manned space program is shot to hell though and it needs to be overhauled quickly. When the rRussians are sending OUR men into space more reliably and safely than we can - that says something about the status of our space program. :-|

Locke25 wrote: learn to swim wrote: The ISS is amazing and a great achievement but if we cannot even keep that running properly then what does that say about our ability to explore deep space? When I read this story one thing entered my mind

The ISS is entirely too complex to keep everything working. There is always going to be some glitch that causes something to go wrong. They've got so many machines and gadgets up there, I can see how they might lose one. And when we explore deep space, I think we'll be more skilled at space technology. We're already exploring deep space & most of those missions have been fine. This oxygen failure is just a lesson to be learned, and the astronauts seem to be in no immediate danger since they have back-up.


Hey, there will be things that break but the one and only oxygen generating machine on the whole station that has been acting up for sometime now finally craps out completely and the only back up plan is some bottled oxygen and emergency masks?


Sorry, that isn't a back-up that is a band-aid to a problem that should have been fixed properly a long time ago. Our whole space program has gone from a forward thinking entity to a fix it when you have to bueacracy.


NASA seems to be a place of excuses instead of ideas - which is what it was founded on.

[Locke25]

learn to swim wrote: No, you missed my whole point there. We have had to rely on the Russians because we cannot build a reliable way to get into space safely. I do not think the whole space station is shot to hell - I think our manned space program is shot to hell though and it needs to be overhauled quickly. When the rRussians are sending OUR men into space more reliably and safely than we can do that says something about out space program.

They are reviving the US rocket though.


"Following the test, technicians will start getting ready to roll Discovery from the launch pad back to the Vehicle Assembly Building, where it will most likely be removed from its External Tank. The External Tank and Solid Rocket Boosters originally planned to fly with Atlantis on the STS-121 mission are now being prepped to fly with Discovery on STS-114, now targeted for a launch window of July 13-31..." (http://www.nasa.gov/returntoflight/main/index.html)

So our "manned space program is shot to hell" is not true.

learn to swim wrote: Hey, there will be things that break but the one and only oxygen generating machine on the whole station that has been acting up for sometime now finally craps out completely and the only back up plan is some bottled oxygen and emergency masks?


Sorry, that isn't a back-up that is a band-aid to a problem that should have been fixed properly a long time ago. Our whole space program has gone from a forward thinking entity to a fix it when you have to bueacracy.


NASA seems to be a place of excuses instead of ideas - which is what it was founded on.

yah, maybe it should have been fixed a long time ago, but if NASA wants to continue all its other space missions, it's not in our budget to fix the oxygen tank when it is still partially working. and at least they still have SOME kind of back-up. They'll have replacements up there soon. not fixing the oxygen tank is not going to - hopefully - kill the astronauts, so why waste their money when the oxygen tank was still partially working adn they had sufficient back up?

[Jufarius87]

oneofthem wrote: Again the stupidity of bureaucracy trumps collective intelligence. A minor component failure destroyed the intricate setup. In a private company this would happen with far less frequency.

considering we have 7 trillion dollars in debt the space program is a waste of time right now anyways.....

[learn to swim]

Locke25: I live right here - in Melbourne Florida - within miles of the Cape.


The shuttle has already been delayed - AGAIN. It was supposed to launch this month.

Why? Safety - broken parts.


Our manned space program is shot to hell.

Do you want to know the BIGGEST tragety of the Columbia disaster? There was no mission. It was launched because NASA felt like it needed to launch to keep critics quite and the public interested. Does that sound like the guys who ran the APPOLO missions? No, they actually had specific missions and specific goals. Today it is an organization of lost ideas that is just trying to keep it's funding.


The Shuttle is impressive - DO NOT GET ME WRONG ON THAT. I have watch it launch many times and was even lucky enough to get a launch pass for STS-106.



All that being said - it is a PIG and our manned space program is suffering because of it.


It has never delivered on the promises it was built for and costs HALF A BILLION DOLLARS PER FLIGHT. It was supposed to be 10.5 million.


Challenger was the final point at which we should have said enough is enough. It took off with so many critical problems that I cannot believe families haven't sued.


NASA used to be the standard when it came to space exploration. Now they are catching up because they are too proud to admit the shuttle DOESN'T work the way it was designed.

I would love to see it fly again - one last time. It is truly inspiring and I will be sad the day it is retired but that day should not come in 2010 - it should be in 2005.


I am not arguing here - I am giving you facts to which you are arguing back with emotions. All of my data is there to be found. The shuttle is a PIG and our manned space program is suffering because of it. It is time to move on and spend our money in R&D on a new system that will not only be safer to fly but less expensive as well.


I anxiously await the next flight - if it ever takes off - and I hope it is a safe one as well as the last one.

[Locke25]

And what do you propose? We get rid of our space shuttle & use RUSSIA'S? I'm not a big fan of the Russians. Or do you want to get rid of NASA all together...?

I think our shuttle is a work in progress.. and once we get over this problem we're having now.. I think they'll either improve our current shuttle or make a new one similar to the Russian's. It's not shot to hell. If everytime we ran into a problem & we quit, well I don't think we'd get too far..

[Dookiestix]

Locke25 wrote: And what do you propose? We get rid of our space shuttle & use RUSSIA'S? I'm not a big fan of the Russians. Or do you want to get rid of NASA all together...?

I think our shuttle is a work in progress.. and once we get over this problem we're having now.. I think they'll either improve our current shuttle or make a new one similar to the Russian's. It's not shot to hell. If everytime we ran into a problem & we quit, well I don't think we'd get too far..

I think the issue has more to do with how the Government runs/funds our space program. With the recent advent of serious competition for commercial space travel, the government should be in a position to actually promote that in order to expedite America's edge regarding space technology, as well as looking at lowering the cost for space travel without compromising safety. Look how far we've gotten on low cost space exploration with the twin Mars rovers which are STILL currently roaming the surface of the planet as we speak.

It is rather sad that we have to rely on the Russians in order to save our astronauts from the International Space Station if something serious went wrong, don't ya think?

[Locke25]

Dookie wrote: I think the issue has more to do with how the Government runs/funds our space program. With the recent advent of serious competition for commercial space travel, the government should be in a position to actually promote that in order to expedite America's edge regarding space technology, as well as looking at lowering the cost for space travel without compromising safety. Look how far we've gotten on low cost space exploration with the twin Mars rovers which are STILL currently roaming the surface of the planet as we speak.

we should lower the cost of space travel, but not lessen the amount of money given to NASA. if they lessen the amount of money, then fewer explorations will be able to be launched, while lowering the cost of space travel & keeping the amount of money given is the same will allow more explorations.

Dookiestix wrote: It is rather sad that we have to rely on the Russians in order to save our astronauts from the International Space Station if something serious went wrong, don't ya think?

At least someone is there to save them..

[anselfir]

learn to swim wrote: I agree. A government agency will only work so hard because it is - well - a government agency. The actual exploration was not market initiated, but Military initiated. Once the military get out of it, the peacetime developments just don’t do the job.

[DavidXV]

This is slightly off topic, but I think the space program and NASA needs to return to being a program for space exploration as it once was, and needs to be rescued from the hands of a delirious lunatic fringe. We saw with the Mars program that there was no longer a desire to discover whatever is beyond the horizon, but an agenda driven specific endeavor of mad scientist folly, in an easter egg hunt for life on other planets and the origins of the universe. This is sort of stupidity needs to be separated from what belongs to tax paying citizens, and if some freaked out fruitcakes want to waist billions of their own money on a treasure hunt fairy tale, then that would be fine, they deserve to lose all their cash, but wasting billions of our money has predictably and properly severely eroded popular support for the space program.

[Scribbler1]

Locke25 wrote: doesn't sound that bad to me. im sure they'll bring the replacement parts up soon or get the astronauts down. And they also have the escape vehicle. The Russians seem to have no problem bringing their spacecraft down to Earth.

NASA needs to stay. Even with the recent black eyes the agency IS America. The acronym has become a word that typifies the United States.