5 ms·

> NASA announced SpaceX has been selected to develop and [emphasis mine] deliver the U.S. Deorbit Vehicle that will provide the capability to deorbit the space

> NASA announced SpaceX has been selected to develop and [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. > 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. So...with $843M, what could SpaceX come up with? In Gwynne's shoes, I'd be looking to develop a vehicle with far wider application than a 1-off LEO deorbit burn. And, given the inability of most of SpaceX's competition to reliably delivery anything to orbit, I suspect that NASA has similar hopes.

rbanffy 2y ago
Such a shame. Can’t we dismantle it and bring the pieces down in Starship flights? The American parts would look great at the Udvar Hazi. As for others, each one can be delivered to its country of origin. I’m assuming anything that did fit in a shuttle could fit inside a Starship. Not sure Russians would like that though. I’m betting they would prefer their pieces deorbited.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- HPsquared 2y ago
  I'm not sure how much they can carry on re-entry. More heating etc., and more weight when doing the landing.
  - bilsbie 2y ago
    They’re going to enter mars atmosphere with a full payload at a faster speed so I think it could handle it.
    - dragonwriter 2y ago
      Mars has less gravity and less atmosphere, so its not a comparable situation.
    - senectus1 2y ago
      thats the intention, its hardly a proven.
    - wongarsu 2y ago
      Mars has less than 1% the atmosphere of earth. That makes it easier in some ways and more difficult in others. I don't think you can really judge the performance when landing on Earth by looking at the performance when landing on Mars.
  - mr_toad 2y ago
    Also they’d need more fuel for the de-orbit burn.
codeulike 2y ago
Its going to be Starship again surely, with the right docking stuff to attach to the ISS. Or a modified Dragon?
- abracadaniel 2y ago
  Modified Dragon seems like the simplest option. Dock and then burn retrogade while attached. Probably not nearly that simple in reality though.
- ShakataGaNai 2y ago
  You don't need a lot, just something lined up on the correct axis with enough engines and fuel to slow the station down enough to fall out of orbit. The station has its own propulsion (on Zvezda & Zarya, I believe) even with most of its station keeping being down by Progress etc. There's no reason they couldn't loft something with an F9 (23t to LEO) or maybe FH (64t to LEO). With the fact that it's going to burn up in atmo anyways, you can strip a lot out of the existing cargo dragon. You can slowly deorbit anything with enough time/fuel. It's just a matter of how fast NASA wants to make it happen to assure it lands in a specific spot and doesn't breakup too much while still in "orbit" (see also: atmo + solar panels). According to https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=56996.0;attach=2121440 https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;... (PDF) > The deorbit vehicle will need to provide at least 3236 N thrust to hit the target delta-v within a 60-minute time period. Each Draco on Dragon can deliver 400N, there are 16, that's 6400N. So unless I've missed some math somewhere, a Dragon could do the deorbit. Ignoring the fact that they probably haven't burned those engines for an hour. Also fuel required for that manuver.
  - ramesh31 2y ago
    >Also fuel required for that manuver. Ah yes, that pesky detail of the rocket equation.
    - ballenf 2y ago
      Super complex, but could the fuel & thrusters be staged -- waiting in lower orbits -- so you don't have the mass of all of them at once?
thebruce87m 2y ago
Couldn’t we put it in a super long orbit that means it will revisit earth in a million years or something? Might be a nice surprise for whoever is around at that point.
- adolph 2y ago
  Like Snoopy! https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-news/astronomers-might-have-found-apollo-10-snoopy-module/ https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-news/astronomers-might...
- nickff 2y ago
  It's considered unwise to leave uncontrolled vehicles in orbit, as they may hit other uncontrolled vehicles (or natural objects) and create debris.
  - idiotsecant 2y ago
    An orbit like parent post is talking about is barely an orbit and more like an escape trajectory that just barely fails to escape.
    - nirav72 2y ago
      Would need lot of extra fuel to raise altitude for an escape trajectory. Fuel either brought up the gravity well at launch or later refueled in orbit. Of course not all satellites are designed to allow in-orbit refueling. Maybe an reusable orbital tug might be something that someone will come up with.
      - elif 2y ago
        It doesn't have to be one vehicle. You can launch 10 falcon 9s (perhaps even using the same booster) and have them take turns pushing.
        grawp 2y ago
NortySpock 2y ago
> So...with $843M, what could SpaceX come up with? In Gwynne's shoes, I'd be looking to develop a vehicle with far wider application than a 1-off LEO deorbit burn. So that would probably point to "Starship, possibly with a lot of fuel loaded onboard, docks with ISS, and then feathers its maneuvering jets to push the ISS into a guided re-entry into the Pacific Ocean."
skellera 2y ago
Maybe the extra cost is to look into bringing it down without destroying it. Would be good to study it for data on long term spacecraft.
randerson 2y ago
If anything I'd like SpaceX to attach some cameras that live-stream the ISS breakup through Starlink the way they've been filming their re-entries.

rbanffy 2y ago

Such a shame. Can’t we dismantle it and bring the pieces down in Starship flights? The American parts would look great at the Udvar Hazi. As for others, each one can be delivered to its country of origin. I’m assuming anything that did fit in a shuttle could fit inside a Starship. Not sure Russians would like that though. I’m betting they would prefer their pieces deorbited.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
HPsquared 2y ago
I'm not sure how much they can carry on re-entry. More heating etc., and more weight when doing the landing.
- bilsbie 2y ago
  They’re going to enter mars atmosphere with a full payload at a faster speed so I think it could handle it.
  - dragonwriter 2y ago
    Mars has less gravity and less atmosphere, so its not a comparable situation.
  - senectus1 2y ago
    thats the intention, its hardly a proven.
  - wongarsu 2y ago
    Mars has less than 1% the atmosphere of earth. That makes it easier in some ways and more difficult in others. I don't think you can really judge the performance when landing on Earth by looking at the performance when landing on Mars.
- mr_toad 2y ago
  Also they’d need more fuel for the de-orbit burn.

codeulike 2y ago

Its going to be Starship again surely, with the right docking stuff to attach to the ISS. Or a modified Dragon?

abracadaniel 2y ago
Modified Dragon seems like the simplest option. Dock and then burn retrogade while attached. Probably not nearly that simple in reality though.
ShakataGaNai 2y ago
You don't need a lot, just something lined up on the correct axis with enough engines and fuel to slow the station down enough to fall out of orbit. The station has its own propulsion (on Zvezda & Zarya, I believe) even with most of its station keeping being down by Progress etc. There's no reason they couldn't loft something with an F9 (23t to LEO) or maybe FH (64t to LEO). With the fact that it's going to burn up in atmo anyways, you can strip a lot out of the existing cargo dragon. You can slowly deorbit anything with enough time/fuel. It's just a matter of how fast NASA wants to make it happen to assure it lands in a specific spot and doesn't breakup too much while still in "orbit" (see also: atmo + solar panels). According to https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=56996.0;attach=2121440 https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;... (PDF) > The deorbit vehicle will need to provide at least 3236 N thrust to hit the target delta-v within a 60-minute time period. Each Draco on Dragon can deliver 400N, there are 16, that's 6400N. So unless I've missed some math somewhere, a Dragon could do the deorbit. Ignoring the fact that they probably haven't burned those engines for an hour. Also fuel required for that manuver.
- ramesh31 2y ago
  >Also fuel required for that manuver. Ah yes, that pesky detail of the rocket equation.
  - ballenf 2y ago
    Super complex, but could the fuel & thrusters be staged -- waiting in lower orbits -- so you don't have the mass of all of them at once?

thebruce87m 2y ago

Couldn’t we put it in a super long orbit that means it will revisit earth in a million years or something? Might be a nice surprise for whoever is around at that point.

adolph 2y ago
Like Snoopy! https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-news/astronomers-might-have-found-apollo-10-snoopy-module/ https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-news/astronomers-might...
nickff 2y ago
It's considered unwise to leave uncontrolled vehicles in orbit, as they may hit other uncontrolled vehicles (or natural objects) and create debris.
- idiotsecant 2y ago
  An orbit like parent post is talking about is barely an orbit and more like an escape trajectory that just barely fails to escape.
  - nirav72 2y ago
    Would need lot of extra fuel to raise altitude for an escape trajectory. Fuel either brought up the gravity well at launch or later refueled in orbit. Of course not all satellites are designed to allow in-orbit refueling. Maybe an reusable orbital tug might be something that someone will come up with.
    - elif 2y ago
      It doesn't have to be one vehicle. You can launch 10 falcon 9s (perhaps even using the same booster) and have them take turns pushing.
      - grawp 2y ago

NortySpock 2y ago

> So...with $843M, what could SpaceX come up with? In Gwynne's shoes, I'd be looking to develop a vehicle with far wider application than a 1-off LEO deorbit burn. So that would probably point to "Starship, possibly with a lot of fuel loaded onboard, docks with ISS, and then feathers its maneuvering jets to push the ISS into a guided re-entry into the Pacific Ocean."

skellera 2y ago

Maybe the extra cost is to look into bringing it down without destroying it. Would be good to study it for data on long term spacecraft.

randerson 2y ago

If anything I'd like SpaceX to attach some cameras that live-stream the ISS breakup through Starlink the way they've been filming their re-entries.