Space junk problem rising to new heights [EAS jettison, mid-2007]

Disposal of piano-sized space station piece poses challenges

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15817106/

By James Oberg, NBC News space analyst // Special to MSNBC

This week, a spacewalking cosmonaut will tee up a golf ball just
outside the international space station and let loose with a
publicity-generating drive - a shot that has already generated a debate
over the dangers posed by orbital debris. But if you think one
foam-rubber "golf ball" is a cause for concern, how about a concert grand
piano?

That's roughly the size and weight of the piece of equipment NASA plans
to throw over the space station's side next spring - if they can figure
out which way it'll go once it's cast away.

The 1,430-pound (650-kilogram) unit is called the EAS, or Early Ammonia
Servicer. It was installed in mid-2001 as an emergency reserve for the
station's coolant system. Once the mature thermal control system is
activated next month during Discovery's STS-116 mission to the space
station, the EAS becomes surplus space hardware.

.....



photo: The Early Ammonia Servicer, a piece of equipment that weighs as
much as a heavy grand piano, sits on a rack inside a shuttle cargo bay.
The EAS was delivered to the international space station aboard the
shuttle Discovery in 2001, and will soon be jettisoned into space.

"Jim Oberg" <jameseoberg@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1go8h.1241$Gk5.1145@tornado.texas.rr.com...
Space junk problem rising to new heights [EAS jettison, mid-2007]

Disposal of piano-sized space station piece poses challenges

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15817106/

Why don't they just bring it back on the shuttle? Or is that idea too
easy?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15817106/

"George" <george@yourservice.com> wrote in
news:xEs8h.3838$k6.3318@bignews8.bellsouth.net:


"Jim Oberg" <jameseoberg@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1go8h.1241$Gk5.1145@tornado.texas.rr.com...
Space junk problem rising to new heights [EAS jettison, mid-2007]

Disposal of piano-sized space station piece poses challenges

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15817106/

Why don't they just bring it back on the shuttle? Or is that idea too
easy?

Why don't you just read Jim's article? Or is that idea too hard?


--
JRF

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15817106/

Good article.

Of course, an object this big is easy to track by radar, so in that
sense it is an easier case than the golf ball. But I'm sure that
working out the first few orbits (before the radar would give accurate
orbital elements) is a bit tricky.

Sorry. I did go back and read it, and, silly me, the article contained the
answer I was seeking. My bad. It still seems to me that once they remove
the cargo from the shuttle, they could mount that ammonia contraption into
the bay.

Space junk problem rising to new heights [EAS jettison, mid-2007]

Disposal of piano-sized space station piece poses challenges

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15817106/

By James Oberg, NBC News space analyst // Special to MSNBC

This week, a spacewalking cosmonaut will tee up a golf ball just outside
the international space station and let loose with a publicity-generating
drive - a shot that has already generated a debate over the dangers posed
by orbital debris. But if you think one foam-rubber "golf ball" is a cause
for concern, how about a concert grand piano?

That's roughly the size and weight of the piece of equipment NASA plans
to throw over the space station's side next spring - if they can figure
out which way it'll go once it's cast away.

The 1,430-pound (650-kilogram) unit is called the EAS, or Early Ammonia
Servicer. It was installed in mid-2001 as an emergency reserve for the
station's coolant system. Once the mature thermal control system is
activated next month during Discovery's STS-116 mission to the space
station, the EAS becomes surplus space hardware.

.....



photo: The Early Ammonia Servicer, a piece of equipment that weighs as
much as a heavy grand piano, sits on a rack inside a shuttle cargo bay.
The EAS was delivered to the international space station aboard the
shuttle Discovery in 2001, and will soon be jettisoned into space.

Why jettison it? Why not either leave it there or take it home?

"George" <george@yourservice.com> wrote:

Sorry. I did go back and read it, and, silly me, the article contained
the
answer I was seeking. My bad. It still seems to me that once they
remove
the cargo from the shuttle, they could mount that ammonia contraption
into
the bay.

I would imagine the problem is mounting it to the cargo bay - it
requires a unique handling fixture, which takes up volume and mass on
the uphill run. Volume and mass to and from the ISS are at an
*extreme* premium over the next few years.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

"Derek Lyons" <fairwater@gmail.com> wrote in message

I would imagine the problem is mounting it to the cargo bay - it
requires a unique handling fixture, which takes up volume and mass on
the uphill run. Volume and mass to and from the ISS are at an
*extreme* premium over the next few years.


So what is more important, volume and mass issues, or concerns that
throwing this object overboard will result in catastrophe? Apparently the
former.

"George" <george@yourservice.com> wrote:


"Derek Lyons" <fairwater@gmail.com> wrote in message

I would imagine the problem is mounting it to the cargo bay - it
requires a unique handling fixture, which takes up volume and mass on
the uphill run. Volume and mass to and from the ISS are at an
*extreme* premium over the next few years.


So what is more important, volume and mass issues, or concerns that
throwing this object overboard will result in catastrophe? Apparently
the
former.

Given that it has been shown that the fears of catastrophe are
somewhat over stated, all I can say is 'duh'.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

I would imagine the problem is mounting it to the cargo bay - it
requires a unique handling fixture, which takes up volume and mass on
the uphill run.

I think that this is an exercise in proving that the shuttle isn't needed,
to demonstrate that they can jettison large bulky items.

Another thing, news says a Cosmos spacecraft was deliberately destroyed in
orbit recently.. why? Surely if they had deorbited it it would have burned
up, Now presumably, there is a cloud of debris.