3 ms·

I don't know much about space or the ISS so this might be a naive question. But why wouldn't NASA persue a "ship of Theseus" approach? What I mean is the ISS is

I don't know much about space or the ISS so this might be a naive question. But why wouldn't NASA persue a "ship of Theseus" approach? What I mean is the ISS is modular, why wouldn't it be feasible to keep taking on and decommissioning modules? I would assume this is because the ISS has a "core module" that all other modules tack on to, and that module is getting old? Right?

ijustlovemath 3y ago
The attitude control (Russian) modules and energy generation (USA) modules are getting very old, and showing signs of their age more every day. We've accomplished the mission of the ISS many times over, and to keep it aloft would essentially mean building a new one - exactly what they're doing with the Artemis Gateway. It's had a great run, and I'm among many who will be devastated when they finally deorbit it, but it's necessary at this point.
ericcumbee 3y ago
I think you could. the question is "is it it worth it?". the Station was built on the ground mostly in the 90s using 80s technology. I would think there are a lot of design decisions driven by 1980s technology that they are stuck with today. and its non-trivial to move an existing station away from that. Also I don't think NASA really wants to keep going with a Space Station. from my understanding with the Axiom Commercial Space Station and the Orbital Reef station , NASA is happy to buy services on those stations rather than operate their own. like they are doing with Commercial Crew and cargo. Plus with Lunar Gateway and a possible Mars gateway station. I would imagine that there is a lot of know how and talent on the ISS engineering and operations teams that NASA would like to put to work on the moon and mars projects under Artemis.
jccooper 3y ago
It's only kinda modular. The core modules would be rather difficult to separate, and replacing them would probably cost as much or more than a new station. And many of them are Russian, which is a problem for a whole host of reasons.
tomatotomato37 3y ago
At this point the core structural module is the truss, which I believe is doing fine, being essentially an unpressurized aluminum skeleton. You could eject the pressurized components and bolt a whole new set onto it, but at that point you might as well build a new station, and let's be honest the part of the station everyone is sentimental about isn't the scaffolding

ijustlovemath 3y ago

The attitude control (Russian) modules and energy generation (USA) modules are getting very old, and showing signs of their age more every day. We've accomplished the mission of the ISS many times over, and to keep it aloft would essentially mean building a new one - exactly what they're doing with the Artemis Gateway. It's had a great run, and I'm among many who will be devastated when they finally deorbit it, but it's necessary at this point.

ericcumbee 3y ago

I think you could. the question is "is it it worth it?". the Station was built on the ground mostly in the 90s using 80s technology. I would think there are a lot of design decisions driven by 1980s technology that they are stuck with today. and its non-trivial to move an existing station away from that. Also I don't think NASA really wants to keep going with a Space Station. from my understanding with the Axiom Commercial Space Station and the Orbital Reef station , NASA is happy to buy services on those stations rather than operate their own. like they are doing with Commercial Crew and cargo. Plus with Lunar Gateway and a possible Mars gateway station. I would imagine that there is a lot of know how and talent on the ISS engineering and operations teams that NASA would like to put to work on the moon and mars projects under Artemis.

jccooper 3y ago

It's only kinda modular. The core modules would be rather difficult to separate, and replacing them would probably cost as much or more than a new station. And many of them are Russian, which is a problem for a whole host of reasons.

tomatotomato37 3y ago

At this point the core structural module is the truss, which I believe is doing fine, being essentially an unpressurized aluminum skeleton. You could eject the pressurized components and bolt a whole new set onto it, but at that point you might as well build a new station, and let's be honest the part of the station everyone is sentimental about isn't the scaffolding