The final years of the International Space Station

It’s kind of shocking to think that the International Space Station—which is still not complete—is scheduled to be retired and de-orbited in 2016.

And some are questioning whether it will even make it that long. Also, how can such a huge structure be safely de-orbited?

ISS: Will we throw it away shortly after completing it?

First, a few words about the planned retirement. It seems silly. Why? Why throw away a huge investment? Will it be unsafe…so quickly after it reaches completion? Isn’t anything you do in space “unsafe”?

Say no to retirement

In my opinion, if it can be saved, save it. Getting to the station will be getting cheaper and easier with new space vehicle being developed by governments and private companies. We made fun of the Russian’s aging Mir space station in 1990s—but it still functioned.

The Mir was retired because the United States insisted, as part of the cooperative program to develop the ISS. But, the Mir still worked more than 15 years after its first mission.

Re-supply crisis

I’m not sure there anything to this, but I’ve read a commentary that the ISS is threatened by a potential shortfall in supplying it. Of course, the biggest supply ship for the ISS is the space shuttle. But the shuttle is due to retire shortly.

Then, the responsibility passes to others, including two private companies who have won NASA contracts to do the job. Orbital Science and SpaceX are said to be behind schedule in getting their supply ships operational. Maybe. But we will have more options, not less, after the shuttle retires.

Remember, the Russians also have supply ships (in addition to the Soyuz) that can be sent to the big station in the sky. That said, there are no plans to use the Russian Progress supply ship in the future. Still, I think plans can be changed, if needed.

De-orbit crisis

We had a tough time bringing down the old Skylab station. It was done and nobody was injured, but big pieces did fall on inhabited continents. We had hoped to put it safely into the ocean.

And the ISS is much bigger. Estimates say that 80% or so should burn up in the atmosphere. That would leave really big pieces to land who knows where. I’d rather not think about it, but NASA must.

A better solution, I think, is to keep the station running. NASA is studying the possibility of keeping the ISS running—but just until 2020. Thank goodness there are critics in Washington who opposed retiring the ISS. Only an idiot throws away $100 billion.