3 ms·

> Most ISS components were less than the Falcon 9's capacity. I want to see the attempt of building the ISS with a Falcon 9. Some assembly launches would be wi

by mikejb 8y ago

> Most ISS components were less than the Falcon 9's capacity. I want to see the attempt of building the ISS with a Falcon 9. Some assembly launches would be within lift capacity (especially on the expendable configuration). Some payloads would actually fit in the fairing. But when you have it in orbit - what then? The Space Shuttle not only lifted the modules into space, it berthed them to the station, and carried the crew together with the payload to execute the assembly operations and be able to react in time. As much as I agree that the Space Shuttle was way too expensive, it was irreplaceable for building the ISS, and had it existed back then, the Falcon 9 wouldn't have changed that.

avar 8y ago
If it was irreplaceable how did the Soviet Union / Russia build Mir? A space station 1/3 the weight of the ISS and incrementally assembled in space from multiple modules.
- mikejb 8y ago
  They built it with a lot of drawbacks: Small modules, complex assembly, requiring modules to have their own propulsion systems, etc. Plus, since this seems to get forgotten a lot, size matters. I find the best size comparison between the ISS and MIR is with the Space Shuttle attached: ISS [1] vs Mir [2]. [1] https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width_feature/public/images/557885main_iss027e036716_full.jpg https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width_f... [2] https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0210/shuttlemir_nasa_big.jpg https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0210/shuttlemir_nasa_big.jp...
  - avar 8y ago
    That's if anything an argument for a Saturn V carrying some platform that would look like the flight deck / cargo bay / Canadarm part of the Space Shuttle to orbit to help with in-orbit assembly. Sure, you might need some such platform to construct something in orbit. That's basically a space forklift with thrusters. It isn't an argument for Space Shuttle system as a whole, i.e. propulsion system, heat shield, solid rocket boosters & external tank, being needed. For what it cost to launch the shuttle such a platform could have been entirely expendable with astronauts returning in capsules, and they'd still have saved money, and been able to take up 3-4x the amount of cargo up on each trip.

by mikejb 8y ago

avar 8y ago

If it was irreplaceable how did the Soviet Union / Russia build Mir? A space station 1/3 the weight of the ISS and incrementally assembled in space from multiple modules.

mikejb 8y ago
They built it with a lot of drawbacks: Small modules, complex assembly, requiring modules to have their own propulsion systems, etc. Plus, since this seems to get forgotten a lot, size matters. I find the best size comparison between the ISS and MIR is with the Space Shuttle attached: ISS [1] vs Mir [2]. [1] https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width_feature/public/images/557885main_iss027e036716_full.jpg https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width_f... [2] https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0210/shuttlemir_nasa_big.jpg https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0210/shuttlemir_nasa_big.jp...
- avar 8y ago
  That's if anything an argument for a Saturn V carrying some platform that would look like the flight deck / cargo bay / Canadarm part of the Space Shuttle to orbit to help with in-orbit assembly. Sure, you might need some such platform to construct something in orbit. That's basically a space forklift with thrusters. It isn't an argument for Space Shuttle system as a whole, i.e. propulsion system, heat shield, solid rocket boosters & external tank, being needed. For what it cost to launch the shuttle such a platform could have been entirely expendable with astronauts returning in capsules, and they'd still have saved money, and been able to take up 3-4x the amount of cargo up on each trip.