NASA Says ISS Coming Down in 2016
Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: International, Space, Station, Crash, Pacific | Themes: Business
Although the International Space Station won't be completed until the end of 2010, NASA is already planning to plunge the station into the Pacific in 2016.
A Washington Post article is reporting that NASA plans to close shop on the International Space Station (ISS) in 2015, and dump the entire station into the Pacific Ocean in 2016. Even more, the space station is only now nearing completion, costing taxpayers and "government partners" a whopping $100 billion to construct thus far. Orbiting just 220 miles above the earth, the space station has serves as a symbol of humanity's desire to reach beyond the atmosphere, to eventually explore and conquer its rugged neighbors. Now NASA wants to bring that icon down in a huge fiery ball.
According to Michael T. Suffrendini, the NASA space station program manager, NASA is steadfast in its plans to de-orbit the space station, throwing away years of progress and taxpayer money. "In the first quarter of 2016, we'll prep and de-orbit the spacecraft," said Suffredini.
So why bring it down? Apparently, there's a lack of funds to keep the station alive. After all, the metallic beast has already cost $100 billion. NASA also plans to retire the decrepit Space Shuttle fleet by the end of 2010, forcing each astronaut to hitch a $51 million ride skyward with the Russian Soyuz spacecraft; the American-made replacement won't be available for flight until 2014.
However, many disagree with NASA's plans for the ISS, especially when considering the investment. "If we've spent a hundred billion dollars, I don't think we want to shut it down in 2015," said Senator Bill Nelson in a statement to the Washington Post. "My opinion is it would be a travesty to de-orbit this thing. If we get rid of this darned thing in 2015, we're going to cede our leadership in human exploration."
Although NASA is not officially lobbying to extend the ISS' mission, it is trying to determine what resources will be needed to extend its lifespan well into the 2020s. But for now, there's no long term funding for the space station beyond 2015. The last components are expected to be installed by the end of next year.
-
Previous News Article
This is What the Black Wii Box... -
Next News Article
IBM Masking Technology Hides Data
We can spend how many hundreds of billions of dollars on the Middle East, but we can't spend anything on the space program?
Nice to know where our priorities are.
If they found oil on Mars we would have a colony there in a heartbeat.
NASA seem to be very good at burning up lots of money.
This is, by far, the dumbest thing Ive heard this year.
$100 billion to get it up and working and were gonna just drop it in the ocean? WTF!?!? Get the EU and Japan to help foot the maintenance bill if need be, but you cant kill this thing so quick.
If this means that the US is giving up on weaponizing space, it might not be so bad... Paying the Russians to take us to space is a rather large slice of humble pie to swallow....
Sell it to the Chinese or better yet Ebay it!
Seriously though... I am sure some investors will step up. Who knows maybe the ISS will sport a Walmart flag or a Castrol motor oil decal haha.
Very sad to let it go.
"If they found oil on Mars we would have a colony there in a heartbeat"
We have oil right here on US soil and can't drill for it due to environmentalism. We have actually *had* the capability to sustain teh majority of our oil/energy needs for decades, but every time someone brought up that we need to drill our for own resources (like Russia does), it gets shot down due to politicians saying "well it will take over a decade to start seeing results, so what's the point?" Imagine if we had actually started the process back in 1994 when Clinton shot down a proposal where we would be today. Got news for ya on another front: the current crop of politicians wanting to kill coal isn't going to help our energy needs either. We can't drill, we can't build nuclear plants (like France), and yet people continue whine about us being dependent on foreign oil. Amazingly mindless.
wtf? i though the iss was going to be built up until it becomes the death star? we spend billions on the war, trillions to rebuild the economy, and millions to bail out companies that just use the money to have gold toilets and we don't have enough to spend on space? i guess we are doomed to stay on earth forever until we get pwned in the face by one of the many things discovery channel keeps on talking about.
Sad.
It's cool. We'll be out of this financial mess by 2014, and this will be back on the menu.
Aside from the monumental waste of money killing the ISS is, how bout the blatant environmental impact. For some reason I have a feeling not everything inside the ISS is "eco-friendly" and biodegradable.
Good idea NASA, lets spend billions of dollars just to dump it in the ocean. If that had been their original proposal, I think a lot of people would've told them to get bent.
I'd say keep the station at least for spare parts!
50 to 75% of that 100billion dollars probably was for getting all that material out of orbit!
Instead, build a second one, and use spare parts of the old station for the newer if possible, worst case scenario, cut it to pieces and use it as a shield for the newer space station!
The baby boomers have lost their mind, wasting all that money, and the X generation will inherit their curse; not a very thoughtful action!
Nasa is a farce,they probably already have a base on the moon anyways.
On a second thought, even if we'd just abandon station,and let it rotate around the earth like the moon, it'd cost us next to nothing.
Bring in some plants and perhaps one could use it as a bio plant in space!
But even if we'd just abandon the station,and leave it for the next generation, that'd probably be the wisest thing to do.
Just make sure it'snot going to fall into orbit with earth,and everything will be ok.
atleast send it out on recon or something... its bound to find something or to be foudn by someone... don't just plunge it into the ocean
10tacle...
Sitting on your own oil is not a bad idea.
Right now humans are using more oil than we are producing, at our current pace we will see HUGE oil price increases in the next couple years due to this fact. The big oil companies have reduced exploration something like 60% because the massive oil finds have pretty much been located already, unless there in some horrifically difficult place like the middle of an ocean.
I live in Canada, Alberta to be specific and we are Oil driven here. We are the richest Canadian province and guess what? Exxon bought a majority share into our Oil. Fucken Canadian Government, I still can’t believe they sold!! So you also have our oil….Sorta.
Imagine for a moment ten years from now, the world’s oil is CRAZY expensive and USA decides to tap into your own resources for personal use only… What is the oil worth then?
I think USA is smart to not drill that oil, Just yet. Although, I bet it could bail you out of the economic crisis. MEGA high paying jobs to be had in the oil patch.
It is probably because the astronauts watched a ripped DVD in it, and the MPAA issued a takedown notice. (sorry, horrible pun).
[citation][nom]ProDigit80[/nom]On a second thought, even if we'd just abandon station,and let it rotate around the earth like the moon, it'd cost us next to nothing.citation]
You realize everything in orbit will eventually plummet to earth on its own? We can’t leave it unattended…
[citation][nom]ProDigit80[/nom]On a second thought, even if we'd just abandon station,and let it rotate around the earth like the moon, it'd cost us next to nothing.citation]You realize everything in orbit will eventually plummet to earth on its own? We can’t leave it unattended…
But if we did, the ISS would truly deserve the name Death Star!
Lol what a bunch of idiots, why destroy something unique?
Like the 1st poster said, if they found oil on Mars they would establish trade routes Mars-Earth in 1 year carying crude oil.
Stupid NaSa .
Taco Bell gonna put another target out in the ocean, and give us all a free taco if NASA can hit it?
i thought we were using OUR money, OUR resources, and OUR time to launch JAPANESE things up to this thing right now. So I hope that the EU and Japan and other countries get involved and say no.
To bad they couldn't use the gravity of the earth to slingshot it to mars orbit.
To bad they couldn't use the gravity of the earth to slingshot it to mars orbit.
Yea, but it is supposed to be manned by people... I wouldn't want to be slingshot to Mars!
I didn't know they had space stations in the year 201.
hmm, would be a huge waste to see it fall like a fireball. The problem with the ISS is that there's little to no use for it. All experiments are made via shuttle and everything else is unmanned rockets. Unless mankind is serious about reaching the moon / mars the ISS would serve as a great waypoint. If it was the American Space Station, it would serve as a great launchpad for anti ballistic missile and spy platform.
There are plenty of uses for the station, but the funds have never been
made available to maintain a full crew, without which proper research
cannot be carried out since what crew there are spend almost all their
time on station maintenance.
This is the dumbest idea I've heard of from NASA in years, 2nd only to
going back to the moon instead of heading for Mars, or better still Europa
where there's a much better chance of finding life under the surface ice
next to sea floor volcanic vents.
Humans are so narrow minded. What a shame.
Ian.
Greg_77, every space flight beyond our orbit needs to be slingshot, not exactly a new thing.
We have a perfectly good moon to land the damn thing on.
Greg_77, every space flight beyond our orbit needs to be slingshot, not exactly a new thing.
I was more or less joking. Besides, do you really want to be slingshot around Mars in the ISS, seriously? Something like the ISS was not meant for that sort of treatment. It could break apart.
If you know you are going to drop it in 2016 (what a waste) then why put any more money into it for the next 6 years or so? Why send up more parts and people to work on it until then? I'm sure rocket fuel cost more than $2.42 a gallon. You either keep it or you don't, but don't piss away my money for 7 years only to drop it all into the ocean.
umm, isn't it the Iss, the INTERNATIONAL space station?? its ok NASA, you go ahead and do this tho, the rest of the world isn't using it... thanks for deciding for us.