NASA selects SpaceX to help deorbit the International Space Station

Shawn Knight

Posts: 15,417   +193
Staff member
The big picture: NASA has select SpaceX to help deorbit the International Space Station once the facility reaches the end of its operational life in 2030. Several strategies on what to do with the ISS once its clock runs out were considered including pushing it to a higher orbit to delay reentry or waiting for it to decay naturally. Ultimately, a deorbit vehicle was decided upon.

When the time comes in early 2031, a SpaceX-made deorbit vehicle will dock with the ISS and help guide it down in a controlled manner. Pieces that don't burn up during reentry are expected to crash into an uninhabited part of the south Pacific Ocean.

NASA said the contract to build the deorbit vehicle has a total potential value of $843 million. That doesn't include the cost for launch services, which NASA said it will procure at a later date. Once SpaceX finishes construction, NASA will take ownership and operate it during the mission. The deorbit vehicle, like the space station, will be destroyed upon reentry.

Ken Bowersox, associate administrator for Space Operations Mission Directorate at NASA, said the plan will allow for the continued use of space near Earth.

The ISS is jointly operated by five space agencies including NASA, the CSA (Canadian Space Agency), the ESA (European Space Agency), JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency), and State Space Corporation Roscosmos (Russia). Each agency is responsible for controlling and managing the hardware it brought to the station, and is also responsible for its safe deorbit.

All countries involved except Russia have publicly committed to continue operating the space station until 2030, with Russia remaining committed through at least 2028.

Construction on components for the ISS started in the mid-90s, with the first module launching in late 1998. The first resident crew arrived at the tail end of 2000, and the ISS has been continuously crewed ever since.

NASA will be transitioning to commercially owned space destinations that are "closer to home," we're told, to help support deep space exploration missions to Mars and the Moon.

Permalink to story:

 
The end of an era. 😢

A pity they can't raise its orbit slowly over time to keep it intact as a museum piece if nothing else, though I know the cost for that would be extreme.
 
A pity they can't raise its orbit slowly over time to keep it intact as a museum piece if nothing else, though I know the cost for that would be extreme.

Can't park it up higher for more reasons than cost, just heads up. Orbits higher than the ISS's present LEO altitude have considerably more junk. It wouldn't take long for junk/ISS impacts to create detached ISS junk making things even worse. The ISS was made with a shelf life as well. Going into Sunlight and Earth shadow repeatedly runs a heating/cooling cycle per orbit. Eventually the expansion/contraction of components will break them, and again you got more junk. Keeping it in a higher orbit is just asking for a Kessler Syndrome scenario

To progress in human spaceflight, disposing of the ISS is a good thing. Its past its sell by date and costs substantial funds to maintain. It will cost more and more as time goes. Those funds can be better spent on other space research efforts. I don't know that they will, considering what was spent on SLS/Orion, but I hope so.

Also, I honestly don't even know what they do up there now. Have they researched everything that can be researched by the ISS in a quarter century? Its a genuine question for other's thoughts
 
Can't park it up higher for more reasons than cost, just heads up. Orbits higher than the ISS's present LEO altitude have considerably more junk. It wouldn't take long for junk/ISS impacts to create detached ISS junk making things even worse. The ISS was made with a shelf life as well. Going into Sunlight and Earth shadow repeatedly runs a heating/cooling cycle per orbit. Eventually the expansion/contraction of components will break them, and again you got more junk. Keeping it in a higher orbit is just asking for a Kessler Syndrome scenario

To progress in human spaceflight, disposing of the ISS is a good thing. Its past its sell by date and costs substantial funds to maintain. It will cost more and more as time goes. Those funds can be better spent on other space research efforts. I don't know that they will, considering what was spent on SLS/Orion, but I hope so.

Also, I honestly don't even know what they do up there now. Have they researched everything that can be researched by the ISS in a quarter century? Its a genuine question for other's thoughts
I don't like the conclusion, but that makes sense (edit: just to be clear since internet posts aren't always, I agree with the conclusions and the issues you raise, I just don't like that it makes it difficult to preserve the ISS).

I'm sure there's more research they could do, though. If there's one thing scientists never run out of it is questions.
 
Just load the thing up with cameras and push it towards the sun.
Done
It's actually easier to send something out of the solar system than it is to send it into the sun, and takes 55x the energy to go to the sun compared to Mars.


 
It's actually easier to send something out of the solar system than it is to send it into the sun, and takes 55x the energy to go to the sun compared to Mars.



Just shows you how dumb scientist are, and can't think outside the box
You just need to drop a big enough anchor to slow down.



/s
Never used the kerbal program. But also manflight to Mars must be a lot more energy intensive than unmanned. Ie to shorten flight time. Remember article or TV or somewhere in 70s how missions like Voyager used very economical flight paths to get planet flybys etc. And Voyager 2 quickly over took Voyager 1
 
Just load the thing up with cameras and push it towards the sun.
Done
There is a considerable difference in Potential Energy between low earth orbit where the ISS is, about 300km up, and being free of Earth's gravitational field. Low orbit is about 3*10^7 joules, escape is about 6*10^7 joules, so theoretically we'd need a huge burn to get it up there. Another way of looking at it is, escape velocity is 11.2km/sec, the ISS is doing about 7.6km/sec so we'd have to get it boosted with some considerable rocketry. Then, once done, it would have to be brought to rest or near to it relative to the sun, otherwise it's just going to float around up there in some weird, hard to predict and likely dangerous orbit. That's a further 29.7km/sec, though less than that would be needed, any speed resulting in a parabolic orbit where the pointy end is a curve less than the diameter of the sun would do it, but it would still be a huge, massively expensive undertaking. It's not easy, it *is* rocket science.
 
Well, I suppose it's a good choice. Who else has better experience destroying multi-billion dollar creation, but Elon...
 
Back