4 ms·

Is the ISS really worth keeping in orbit even in the short term?

burgerbrain 15y ago
As far as international budgets go, it costs a pittance. It's worth keeping around for what it's costing us if only so that fathers can point to a moving dot in the sky and say to their kids, "There are people on that."
- absconditus 15y ago
  Why not divert all of that funding, even if it is not much, to useful space projects instead?
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    I'd be ok with that, provided they have similar or greater inspiration potential. Inspiration is like an investment, do it right and with any luck when all babyboomers die and are replaced you'll receive much more funding. For the same reason, that new project should be similarly international. I'd advocate defunding the ISS in a heartbeat if there was another project that I felt met those qualifications. However, without looking at the numbers, I fear that the cost of running the ISS would only pay for a fraction of the cost of launching a new project. So of course in either case you'll need to find new funding.
    - absconditus 15y ago
      The ISS budget for 2012 appears to be just under $3 billion. This could fund quite a few robotic missions.
      - burgerbrain 15y ago
        If you can squeeze that kind of inspiration and international cooperation out of a bunch of robotic missions, then great. Edit: Then again, this is what Cassini cost: "Cost of mission: $1.422 billion pre-launch development; $710 million mission operations; $54 million tracking; $422 million launch vehicle; $500 million ESA; $160 million ASI; total about $3.27 billion, of which U.S. contribution is $2.6 billion and European partners' contribution $660 million" http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/quickfacts/ http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/quickfacts/ So you could get just less than one funded Cassini a year for what we spend on the ISS. You would still need to find additional funding.
  - robryan 15y ago
    It is useful, there are a lot of science projects going on as well as studying the astronauts themselves to learn more about how people can survive for long periods without gravity. Sure robotic missions are great for exploration but I'd imagine for a lot of experiments going on on the ISS having a human there to make changes would dramatically cut the cost of having to send up fully automated experiments.
    - absconditus 15y ago
      This claim is often made, but it seems rather dubious. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/jul/21/space-shuttle-programme http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/jul/21/space-shuttle-...

As far as international budgets go, it costs a pittance. It's worth keeping around for what it's costing us if only so that fathers can point to a moving dot in the sky and say to their kids, "There are people on that."

absconditus 15y ago
Why not divert all of that funding, even if it is not much, to useful space projects instead?
- burgerbrain 15y ago
  I'd be ok with that, provided they have similar or greater inspiration potential. Inspiration is like an investment, do it right and with any luck when all babyboomers die and are replaced you'll receive much more funding. For the same reason, that new project should be similarly international. I'd advocate defunding the ISS in a heartbeat if there was another project that I felt met those qualifications. However, without looking at the numbers, I fear that the cost of running the ISS would only pay for a fraction of the cost of launching a new project. So of course in either case you'll need to find new funding.
  - absconditus 15y ago
    The ISS budget for 2012 appears to be just under $3 billion. This could fund quite a few robotic missions.
    - burgerbrain 15y ago
      If you can squeeze that kind of inspiration and international cooperation out of a bunch of robotic missions, then great. Edit: Then again, this is what Cassini cost: "Cost of mission: $1.422 billion pre-launch development; $710 million mission operations; $54 million tracking; $422 million launch vehicle; $500 million ESA; $160 million ASI; total about $3.27 billion, of which U.S. contribution is $2.6 billion and European partners' contribution $660 million" http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/quickfacts/ http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/quickfacts/ So you could get just less than one funded Cassini a year for what we spend on the ISS. You would still need to find additional funding.
- robryan 15y ago
  It is useful, there are a lot of science projects going on as well as studying the astronauts themselves to learn more about how people can survive for long periods without gravity. Sure robotic missions are great for exploration but I'd imagine for a lot of experiments going on on the ISS having a human there to make changes would dramatically cut the cost of having to send up fully automated experiments.
  - absconditus 15y ago
    This claim is often made, but it seems rather dubious. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/jul/21/space-shuttle-programme http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/jul/21/space-shuttle-...