NASA plans to deorbit the ISS sometime around 2030. Building something the size of the ISS in orbit is a huge undertaking and NASA keeps talking about wanting to build new space stations or a moon base, so why not leave the ISS in space and reuse it rather than literally throw the whole thing away?
In: Planetary Science
It’s in an incredibly isolated location responsible for keeping crew alive. If its isn’t 99.999% safe, It isn’t going to be used.
Despite being in space, it is under constant wear and tear. At the very least due to the sun; half the hull is expanding while the other half is compressing due to sunlight.
At some point it’s just cheaper(and safer) to send up a new, upgraded and known to be safe station, rather than constantly inspect and re-inspect, repair, and upgrade an older station… in space.
If they won’t use it anymore why don’t they just yeet it towards the sun ?
Because NASA can do more science with their funding if it is spent on something other than the ISS. Every $1 spent on the ISS gives back $0.01 of value, whereas new technology and science missions give back $2 of value (I made those numbers up, but you get the point).
It would take enormous amounts of propellant to boost the ISS into a safe orbit. The ISS weighs 400 tons, and you’ll need a few km/s change in velocity to get it to a distant Earth or Solar orbit. From the rocket equation, using chemical rockets, the amount of propellant needed is 2-3 times the mass of the station.
In theory, a fully orbital-refuelled Starship could do this, if it existed. But why? Lots could go wrong.
Also, instead of sending up all those tankers, Starship could return some pieces of the ISS to Earth for museums.
Are they gonna start deorbiting in 2030 or have they slowly started already?
Latest Answers