TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

SpaceX to deliver vehicle to deorbit International Space Station

106 点作者 ironyman11 个月前

21 条评论

bell-cot11 个月前
&gt; NASA announced SpaceX has been selected to <i>develop and</i> [emphasis mine] deliver the U.S. Deorbit Vehicle that will provide the capability to deorbit the space station and ensure avoidance of risk to populated areas.<p>&gt; The single-award contract has a total potential value of $843 million. The launch service for the U.S. Deorbit Vehicle will be a future procurement.<p>So...with $843M, what could SpaceX come up with? In Gwynne&#x27;s shoes, I&#x27;d be looking to develop a vehicle with far wider application than a 1-off LEO deorbit burn.<p>And, given the inability of most of SpaceX&#x27;s competition to reliably delivery anything to orbit, I suspect that NASA has similar hopes.
评论 #40805140 未加载
评论 #40805066 未加载
评论 #40805433 未加载
评论 #40805070 未加载
评论 #40806742 未加载
评论 #40805443 未加载
bell-cot11 个月前
For those unfamiliar with orbital mechanics &amp; aerospace engineering, who wonder about raising the ISS into a much-higher (long-term stable) orbit, or fixing it up and continuing to use it:<p>Trying to raise the orbit: The ISS orbits very close to the &quot;bottom&quot; of the zone of vaguely-stableish LEO orbits. Really-stable, &quot;vacant&quot; orbits, suitable for long-term inert storage - those are far, far higher. Think of having a reproduction Viking longboat on the beach. Pushing it &quot;down&quot;, into the sea, is work - but not too much. Vs. if you wanted to push that longboat uphill, to an elevation of a few thousand feet? <i>Vastly</i> more work.<p>Trying to keep using it, long after the lifetime that the Materials Engineering &amp; Mechanical Engineering experts designed it for, might turn out like this:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;admiralcloudberg.medium.com&#x2F;falling-to-pieces-the-near-crash-of-aloha-airlines-flight-243-18f28c03f27b" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;admiralcloudberg.medium.com&#x2F;falling-to-pieces-the-ne...</a><p>- except with all the astronauts dead.<p>As complex structures under load (like pressurized ISS modules) age, the properties of the materials they&#x27;re made of change - often for the worse. And microscopic cracks form &amp; grow, joints (intentional or not) work and wear, inelastic deformation accumulates and shifts stress to areas not designed to withstand it, and so on.
ShakataGaNai11 个月前
It&#x27;s a shame this has to happen. I always hope that something could be salvaged and used for Lunar Gateway, or... something. It&#x27;s still my hope that NASA uses the remaining return trips to bring back as many &quot;souvenirs&quot; as possible. The unfortunate reality is that it probably doesn&#x27;t make sense to do anything with the station other than de-orbit, with the declining costs and the age of whats up there.<p>When ISS was lofted the cost to get into space was crazy high. 1981 Space Shuttle was $65k per KG to LEO. Falcon 9 is somewhere in the range of $2500 per KG to LEO. Falcon Heavy is even less than that at around $1000 per KG to LEO. It wouldn&#x27;t surprise me if Starship is even cheaper.<p>So why spend millions of dollars trying to &quot;save a buck&quot; on components when you can launch newer&#x2F;better&#x2F;stronger&#x2F;lighter (ex: Sierra Space&#x27;s LIFE Hab) for orders of magnitude cheaper than you could &quot;back in the day&quot;.
评论 #40805807 未加载
panick21_11 个月前
Wow didn&#x27;t expect this to go to SpaceX.<p>$843 seems like way to much money for this job. Seems like about 400 million $ of that would just be mission assurance.<p>The whole Falcon 9 program didn&#x27;t even cost 400 million $ to develop initially. That includes developing a new engine.<p>Unless there are some crazy requirements here that I don&#x27;t see, this is a great deal for SpaceX.
评论 #40805423 未加载
评论 #40818828 未加载
评论 #40805455 未加载
评论 #40805392 未加载
CodeTheInternet11 个月前
Filming location for Waterworld 2 at Point Nemo?<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Pole_of_inaccessibility#Oceanic_pole_of_inaccessibility" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Pole_of_inaccessibility#Oceani...</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Spacecraft_cemetery" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Spacecraft_cemetery</a>
2OEH8eoCRo011 个月前
Aren&#x27;t they far behind on their Starship milestones? Why would Nasa grant them more contracts?<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;i.redd.it&#x2F;x998dcfi8sz71.jpg" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;i.redd.it&#x2F;x998dcfi8sz71.jpg</a>
评论 #40805694 未加载
评论 #40805885 未加载
评论 #40808605 未加载
评论 #40806379 未加载
评论 #40805866 未加载
评论 #40805959 未加载
评论 #40805698 未加载
neets11 个月前
The fall of the ISS will be a symbol of some kind that’s for sure
olliej11 个月前
with or without the Boeing Starliner Max still attached? :D
pmayrgundter11 个月前
Here&#x27;s hoping launch costs fall quickly and it gets absorbed and rebuilt as a much larger station, Ship of Theseus style.
评论 #40805598 未加载
ChumpGPT11 个月前
Is there any benefit landing it on the moon, create a yard of space junk and extra parts for future bases...never know....
elif11 个月前
I don&#x27;t get how spaceX builds it, but NASA &quot;owns and operates&quot; the vehicle. Surely spaceX rockets are chock full of proprietary internal tooling and services. They are an almost totally vertical company.<p>Does SpaceX just open their stack to NASA? Or does SpaceX just provide an &#x27;api&#x27; layer of control, making this &#x27;own and operate&#x27; a weird almost anachronistic distinction?
评论 #40805838 未加载
评论 #40805836 未加载
评论 #40811469 未加载
评论 #40805822 未加载
评论 #40805810 未加载
hindsightbias11 个月前
I wonder if the truss and other components could be harvested. Move to lunar orbit.
whycome11 个月前
Can’t they … ‘demodulate’ it? And bring it down (or up) in pieces? Maybe reconfigure a “mini iss” out of it. Like a giant Lego set. Ultimate off grid micro space station. Or boost key sections really really high…for reasons.
chalcolithic11 个月前
It is sad that ISS exists at all. After the Mir the world should have gone rotating station route - the next logical step. Instead we have wasted so many resources on something that has already been done before
ein0p11 个月前
The Gigachad move would be to land it, but of course that’s not even theoretically possible or worthwhile
评论 #40807060 未加载
aredox11 个月前
Wouldn&#x27;t the ISS make a nice station for Lagrange Points 4 or 5?<p>Hell, why can&#x27;t we use it as the Lunar Gateway?
评论 #40805710 未加载
caseyy11 个月前
The end of an era.
xikrib11 个月前
Still cheaper than the Baltimore Bridge
mensetmanusman11 个月前
Why not re-orbit? If $2B could be used to keep it going another decade, would we do that instead?
评论 #40805091 未加载
评论 #40805081 未加载
评论 #40805234 未加载
评论 #40805230 未加载
评论 #40805377 未加载
Nifty392911 个月前
Feels like folks are not making enough money maintaining the existing space station, so they need to get rid of it to make way for the next $100B space station project.
评论 #40808581 未加载
elif11 个月前
Why don&#x27;t they deorbit it to the moon? That way it&#x27;s debris field can be a monument&#x2F;grave site.<p>Hell this is spaceX, why don&#x27;t they just land the thing on the moon in tact?
评论 #40805878 未加载
评论 #40808118 未加载