×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Video Tour of the International Space Station

timothy posted about a year ago | from the look-for-the-new-kitchen-tiles dept.

ISS 71

SternisheFan writes with an excerpt from Bad Astronomer Phil Plait, writing at Slate: "Before she came back to Earth in a ball of fire surrounding her Russian re-entry capsule, astronaut Sunita Williams took time out of her packing for the trip home to give a nickel tour of the International Space Station. ... I know the video's long, but if you have the time I do suggest watching the whole thing. I have very mixed feelings about the space station; it cost a lot of money, and in my opinion it hasn't lived up to the scientific potential NASA promised when it was being designed. But watching this video reminded me of the good that's come out of it: There is science being done there; we're learning how to design and build hardware for long-term space travel; we're learning just how to live in space (and NASA just announced it will be sending humans into space for an entire year, an unprecedented experiment); and we're finding new ways for nations and individuals to cooperate in space."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

71 comments

unprecedented ? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42304243)

unprecedented /npresdntid/
Adjective
Only been done 4 times before

Re:unprecedented ? (5, Informative)

stephanruby (542433) | about a year ago | (#42304341)

They probably meant unprecedented for the US.

When it comes to manned space exploration, the US is lowering the bar lower and lower every day.

Valeri Vladimirovich Polyakov (Russian: , born Valeri Ivanovich Korshunov on April 27, 1942) is a former Russian cosmonaut. He is the holder of the record for the longest single spaceflight in human history, staying aboard the Mir space station for more than 14 months (437 days 18 hours) during one trip.[1] His combined space experience is more than 22 months.[2]

Hopefully, the Russians will help us. I don't think we'd be able to do this without their help anyway.

Priorities (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42304375)

Hopefully, the Russians will help us. I don't think we'd be able to do this without their help anyway.

Just take all that money we spend catching, prosecuting, and imprisoning nonviolent drug users. Then stop doing that because it's total bullshit. Then use the money instead to explore space. Then the Russians will be begging US for support.

Unless of course telling adults what to do with their own bodies and minds is more important than exploring the greatest frontier imaginable... but the point is, there are lots of great things we could do if we had the will to do it, if we stopped wasting so much time and effort on stupid efforts to control people that never really worked in the first place.

Re:Priorities (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42305465)

See, that's why drugs are illegal. This story is about space, not drugs.

Re:Priorities (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42306679)

Shut the fuck up stoner, the adults are talking.

Re:unprecedented ? (2, Interesting)

jonadab (583620) | about a year ago | (#42304865)

Something about Russian culture makes long periods of isolation more tolerable for them somehow (or perhaps their society is more accepting of the mental irregularities that result from overdoing it, which I guess ultimately amounts to basically the same thing). Their Antarctic teams routinely winter-over at Vostok two years in a row; whereas, the Americans at Amundsen-Scott have to cycle out every summer.

Re:unprecedented ? (1)

manu0601 (2221348) | about a year ago | (#42305137)

Something about Russian culture makes long periods of isolation more tolerable for them somehow

The US has ballisitic missile submarines, with crew members that get isolated for months.

Re:unprecedented ? (1)

lucm (889690) | about a year ago | (#42306033)

Something about Russian culture makes long periods of isolation more tolerable for them somehow

The US has ballisitic missile submarines, with crew members that get isolated for months.

Sometimes they get to live on nice islands and sleep with cute native bar owners. And since there is not a single non-NATO army that has at the moment the naval capability to sink them they have it good.

Re:unprecedented ? (1)

manu0601 (2221348) | about a year ago | (#42306529)

And since there is not a single non-NATO army that has at the moment the naval capability to sink them they have it good.

I am pretty convinced that US navy does not take for granted that their submarines could not be sunk by Russia or China

Re:unprecedented ? (1)

lucm (889690) | about a year ago | (#42307957)

In blue water, no they can't. Russia used to, China will someday, but right now it's pretty safe out there except for friendly fire.

When you get closer to the coast it's a different story, but then, unless there is a war it should not happen.

Research (5, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | about a year ago | (#42304269)

Research is rarely profitable. Most of our knowledge of how to do it right comes from testing out all possible ways of doing it wrong. So when you point and say "Well, this particular project didn't pan out" as a reason not to undertake any future projects, you're misrepresenting the facts. It's true, most research fails. But the research that succeeds more than makes up for the costs of all that other research before it. Every technology within your range of vision right now was developed through a iterative process of failure.

And yet, here we are, and I am thankful that, unlike the editor and submitter, I can see the big picture. The space program has contributed way more in commercial developments than it has cost us. Way, way, massively way more. And that's in spite of its bureaucratic failures (of which many have written small books on -- see Appendix D of the Challenger Disaster report for one such example). Research is essential. If you want to argue about the cost of the space program, pick something else -- there are juicier targets than that.

Re:Research (4, Informative)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about a year ago | (#42304415)

Research is rarely profitable. Most of our knowledge of how to do it right comes from testing out all possible ways of doing it wrong. So when you point and say "Well, this particular project didn't pan out" as a reason not to undertake any future projects, you're misrepresenting the facts. It's true, most research fails. But the research that succeeds more than makes up for the costs of all that other research before it. Every technology within your range of vision right now was developed through a iterative process of failure.

And yet, here we are, and I am thankful that, unlike the editor and submitter, I can see the big picture. The space program has contributed way more in commercial developments than it has cost us. Way, way, massively way more. And that's in spite of its bureaucratic failures (of which many have written small books on -- see Appendix D of the Challenger Disaster report for one such example). Research is essential. If you want to argue about the cost of the space program, pick something else -- there are juicier targets than that.

Submitter here:, just FYI, I or Timothy didn't offer our opinion here, it's the author of the article's opinion. I happen to like anything space related, and submitted this because it's an interesting video, and thought other people here would think it is too.

Re:Research (2)

girlintraining (1395911) | about a year ago | (#42304523)

Submitter here:, just FYI, I or Timothy didn't offer our opinion here, it's the author of the article's opinion. I happen to like anything space related, and submitted this because it's an interesting video, and thought other people here would think it is too.

My apologies. As I'm sure you're aware, slashdot doesn't exactly go through a lot of effort to delineate quotes by the author, submitter, or editor. You just have to guess on those quotation marks a lot of times. Well then, my comments are directed towards the Bad Astronomy blogger, who should know better because I regularly read his work. The whole space station was an experiment, on many levels both technical, scientific, and cultural. I don't think its value is in whether or not we succeeded in any of those areas, but in how much we learned about each of those things.

Re:Research (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#42304651)

"Well then, my comments are directed towards the Bad Astronomy blogger, who should know better because I regularly read his work."

Phil Plait ("Bad Astronomer") is a genuine scientist and astronomer, and has done much to foster an appreciation of science in young people particularly. He gets kudos for that.

Unfortunately, there is a bad side: Phil often displays a blatant tendency toward bias on certain subjects; his objectivity has been severely wanting.

Re:Research (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about a year ago | (#42312693)

Surely the whole point of blogs is that you can read what interesting people actually think, and not a watered-down recitation of facts as you could get in any newspaper?

Re:Research (1)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about a year ago | (#42307151)

No worries here. :) I don't know if I'd want the job of a /. editor, can't be easy when, if you make a mistake or omission, you got the entire internet community that'll call you on it. I agree with all that you said, though reading through Phil Plait's article, his thoughts on NASA seem to be,... "evolving"?

Re:Research (1)

Steve Hamlin (29353) | about a year ago | (#42313463)

"I don't think its value is in whether or not we succeeded in any of those areas, but in how much we learned about each of those things."

A fair enough point: that fundamental research is worth pursuing even without a specific profit motive.

But the ISS has cost $150 billion.

Is it impolite to even ask if what we've learned is worth $150 billion, or if that knowledge might have been gained in a more cost-conscious manner?

Re:Research (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42304569)

Submitter here:, just FYI, I or Timothy didn't offer our opinion here, it's the author of the article's opinion.

Nice afterthought, but that should have been made clear in the submission where you failed to note it.

Re:Research (1)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about a year ago | (#42304755)

Submitter here:, just FYI, I or Timothy didn't offer our opinion here, it's the author of the article's opinion.

Nice afterthought, but that should have been made clear in the submission where you failed to note it.

Well, I think Timothy did give the proper credit : " SternisheFan writes with an excerpt from Bad Astronomer Phil Plait, writing at Slate:"

If I submit a story I do try to credit the author since all I do is a copy/paste from the article, not being a writer myself. Sometimes it doesn't always happen, though the story's always linked somehow to the article.

I do think it's a cool video though, closest I'll ever get to the real thing. You can see she makes no quick movements in zero gravity, must be real easy to bang your head if you do. Nice.

Re:Research (1)

MisterSquid (231834) | about a year ago | (#42308051)

I happen to like anything space related, and submitted this because it's an interesting video, and thought other people here would think it is too.

As an adjective to describe this video the word "Interesting" is a radical understatement. Thanks for linking this amazing video. I was fully expecting to see a small claustrophobic can and instead I got the real life 2012 version of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

An even bigger picture (2)

Okian Warrior (537106) | about a year ago | (#42304665)

Those of us old enough to remember times before the space station will recall that scientists at the time felt that the space station would be a waste. They felt that more important and useful science could be accomplished by spending the money in other areas of space research.

Furthermore, when various sources of research are ranked by "return on investment", government research always lands on the bottom of the list. Government-funded research is always more expensive and less controversial than research from the private sector. (One reason why research competitions are effective.)

People here may recall those times when, a decade-or-so ago, NASA was euphemistically called "No Access to Space for Anyone" because they stood four-square against anyone from the private sector making any attempts at space launch.

The big picture is good, and the space station has rewarded us with many new research results, but I have to wonder whether those $150 billion would have been better spent as prize money for private-research breakthroughs.

Re:An even bigger picture (2)

OolimPhon (1120895) | about a year ago | (#42306495)

I wish people would stop focusing on "research" and "science" and look at the bigger picture.

Before anyone could get into space in order to do those things comfortably, a whole lot of engineering needed to be done.

I reckon the space station has more than paid its way in the amount learned in the design, construction and operation of large, multi-section structures in orbit, much of which will be re-used or built on when future orbital habitats are proposed.

Re:An even bigger picture (2)

Zen Punk (785385) | about a year ago | (#42308875)

"Government-funded research is always more expensive and less controversial than research from the private sector."

Right. Like those long-range missile programs. What did any of that ever lead to? And that ARPANET stuff? Pretty useless that all turned out to be, huh? And that Manhattan project, that was a real flash in the pan, wasn't it?

Re:An even bigger picture (1)

lennier (44736) | about a year ago | (#42309057)

Right. Like those long-range missile programs. What did any of that ever lead to?

Yeah! We were promised a world-ending atomic holocaust back in the 1950s! When DO we get our world-ending atomic holocaust, you lazy government missile researchers?

Good ol' Reagan tried his best to unleash the forces of capitalism in the nuclear arms race in the 1980s, but the Democrats in Congress and that pinko-lefty Gorbachev blocked him. The Soviet Union fell apart and there wasn't even a single kiloton-level detonation. Talk about government incompetence! That's what Communism did for the Russians. Couldn't even blow up Kazakhstan. And under Clinton's watch? He threw out perfectly good working missiles. Inefficient, wasteful, utterly unproductive.

I'll tell you this, if we had a fully privatised nuclear arms race right from the beginning, we'd have had a gosh-darned made in the USA atomic holocaust by 1959 and it would have been awesome.

Re:Research (1)

DerekLyons (302214) | about a year ago | (#42307033)

The space program has contributed way more in commercial developments than it has cost us.

Other than satellite communications and weather forecasting... not so much.
 
Despite decades of NASA propaganda and uncritical fanboy echoing of the same... When you look into it NASA 'contributions' to the commercial/private sector - it frequently turns out to be someone else's idea/process/technology that NASA has co-opted or adapted for it's own needs and then turned around and taken credit for.

Re:Research (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42307607)

Uh oh, you're very close to the high crime of lèse majesté here on Slashdot. Space Nutters will tell you how we only have computers because of NASA and other intellectual droppings of the same nature. Rockets must be worshiped and astronauts are the highest type of human on the planet.

Re:Research (1)

hackertourist (2202674) | about a year ago | (#42307751)

So you're saying "other than a $100B industry, not so much?"
What does it take to impress you?

The "space economy" was estimated at about $180 billion in 2005, according to a report by the Space Foundation released in 2006. More than 60 percent of space-related economic activity came from commercial goods and services.

( from here [nasa.gov] and here [google.com])

unprecedented experiment? (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42304283)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valeri_Polyakov

Wow (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about a year ago | (#42304299)

Firstly I noticed how loud it is in there. I read read about that in the past but the video really makes that clear. Also I would absolutely want to shoot along that long passage we see early in the video. I reckon you could build up a lot of speed and probably do a lot of damage too.

Re:Wow (1)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#42304981)

First thing I notices is the claustrophobia. I actually couldn't watch the whole thing.
Cub Scout pup tent has more room than that sleeping hole.
I'm glad there are people who can do that type of work. I'm not one of them.

A Year is Not Unprecedented (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42304329)

"NASA just announced it will be sending humans into space for an entire year, an unprecedented experiment"

Russia has had multiple people on Mir for over a year. It's not unprecedented, it's just that an American hasn't done it.

unprecedented experiment? (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42304379)

> NASA just announced it will be sending humans into space for an entire year, an unprecedented experiment

This guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valeri_Polyakov have some comments about it....

Well I thought this was cool. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42304387)

I hadn't seen really much of the ISS in terms of what it's like inside. Maybe a guy playing with a yo yo and such, but this walkthrough actually gave me an idea of what the hell NASA is doing with our tax dollars... Pretty cool, and sure beats the days when you'd see some tightly-controlled scratchy film. I finally got a sense of why everything looks like it's in slow motion in space too :)

If you like this, ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42304479)

... be sure to take a look at the 2002 film "Space Station 3D". It's a 47-minute documentary made in IMAX 3D; since it's not likely to be showing in IMAX currently, you can check it out in 2D on DVD. Narration by Tom Cruise, if that matters to you.

Re:If you like this, ... (1)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about a year ago | (#42307067)

... be sure to take a look at the 2002 film "Space Station 3D". It's a 47-minute documentary made in IMAX 3D; since it's not likely to be showing in IMAX currently, you can check it out in 2D on DVD. Narration by Tom Cruise, if that matters to you.

Found a couple links for "Space Station 3d". Here's the movie's trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5cGHk7hSp0 [youtube.com]

Bad scientest Phil Plaitt review has a video link: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/05/14/extremely-cool-3d-space-station-video-taken-from-the-ground/ [discovermagazine.com]

Google search has some download links: http://www.google.com/search?q=space+station+3d&hl=en&safe=off&tbo=d&nota=1&biw=1067&bih=640 [google.com]

We are already over 10 years too late... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42304505)

... for the 2001 Space Station.

I want to see a space station I can dock into to the sound of the Blue Danube, one where I can get cleared through voice-print identification, walk the corridors to my Hilton suite and chat to a few Russian space engineers coming back down from spending three months calibrating the new antenna at Tchalinko....

Compare and contrast (5, Informative)

Ford Prefect (8777) | about a year ago | (#42304521)

IMAX (!) video [youtube.com] from inside the Russian Mir space station. Dark, cramped and most likely very smelly - still an incredible achievement. International Space Station? Some kind of progress!

Re:Compare and contrast (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about a year ago | (#42304719)

Thanks for this link man! It's awesome, incredible.

At some point I startled -- when there's mention of John Blaha.
Got an autographed picture of him maybe 20 or 25 years ago!

bjd

Who cares? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42304549)

We built the thing, we know what it looks like. Unless this counts as the "exploration" you idiots keep talking about?

Missing fake-gravity module (3, Insightful)

u64 (1450711) | about a year ago | (#42304605)

What about adding a module that spins - to simulate gravity.

But i guess it has to be carefully balanced to avoid wobbling. Maybe this can be compensated somehow with liquids?

Re:Missing fake-gravity module (4, Informative)

jonwil (467024) | about a year ago | (#42304733)

They had plans to build such a module but it was canceled along with other modules due to costs and due to the lack of Space Shuttle launch slots thanks to the Columbia disaster.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifuge_Accommodations_Module [wikipedia.org]

Re:Missing fake-gravity module (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42305025)

They had plans to build such a module but it was canceled along with other modules due to costs and due to the lack of Space Shuttle launch slots thanks to the Columbia disaster. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifuge_Accommodations_Module [wikipedia.org]

IMO, Nasa should never have tried to launch Columbia in the freezing cold. I remember watching video of the gantry, pre-launch, and there were icicles hanging off of it! It was a big p.r. deal then, with American schoolchildren all watching it live on tv, and the launch had already been put off 2 different times (due to bad weather I think). My thinking has always been that the cold made the o-rings contract, which caused that explosion. They should have scrubbed that launch for another, warmer day, but I suppose no one knew that then.

It delayed the space program greatly, but seeing this video makes me proud and thrilled to see how far we have come. Colonizing Mars must be one of our next endeavors!

Re:Missing fake-gravity module (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42305225)

That was challenger. Which didn't affect the ISS in any direct way, as it was 10 years well before the ISS was designed.

Re:Missing fake-gravity module (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42306903)

That was challenger. Which didn't affect the ISS in any direct way, as it was 10 years well before the ISS was designed.

Of course you are correct, and I knew something was 'off' when I was replying. I was tired when I hit the submit button. My bad. :>/

Re:Missing fake-gravity module (1)

hackertourist (2202674) | about a year ago | (#42306345)

You'd have to have a module at the end of a tether that's several hundred m long. If the tether's too short, the coriolis force would make it a very unsettling place to be.
So if you want a station that has both freefall and simulated-gravity environments, you end up with a very large station.

What a mess! (1)

FridayBob (619244) | about a year ago | (#42304647)

That was my first impression. It's probably all pretty well organized, but necessarily compact. As a very temporary resident, I think it would be impossible for someone (like myself) to ever know everything about the ISS -- it's so incredibly complex. Think of all the different components needed to make life possible on the station, keeping track of all the consumables and trash, the ship to ground communications, the space suits, the myriad science experiments, needing to know everything in both Russian and English. The crew will depend heavily on manuals for everything and on almost continuous support from knowledgeable staff on the ground.

Thanks very much to ISS commanders Sunita Williams and Kevin Ford for making a great video!

Another by Mike Fincke (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42304871)

That was a great video. The station is amazingly big! And Sunita Williams was inspiring - NASA really picks their people well. She just seemed so smart, unaffecting, competant and good-natured.. I just might have a crush on her.

FYI, there is another video tour, this one by Mike Fincke (another amazing person - look at his wiki page, he has about 6 advanced degrees). It's in two parts:

Part 1 [youtube.com]
Part 2 [youtube.com]

Thanks to the submitter - it was half an hour well spent!

Re:Another by Mike Fincke (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42305269)

I love it when someone can't spell "competent".

Re:Another by Mike Fincke (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42305419)

I'll just go ahead and shoot myself now...

Re:Another by Mike Fincke (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42305469)

I'm half serious, too. The fact that I can't even spell just underlines what an utter moron I am. 'Astronauts are so inspiring', blah blah. You know the difference between me and them? About 100 IQ points.

If community standards have any weight, then you are entirely in the right to mock me and heap scorn upon me. At least I made you feel better about yourself.

Re:Another by Mike Fincke (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42306929)

I'm half serious, too. The fact that I can't even spell just underlines what an utter moron I am. 'Astronauts are so inspiring', blah blah. You know the difference between me and them? About 100 IQ points.

If community standards have any weight, then you are entirely in the right to mock me and heap scorn upon me. At least I made you feel better about yourself.

Don't be so hard on yourself for an honest mistake, we all do it at times. I wish I had a dollar for every spelling/grammar mistake I've seen and done myself on the internet. That ac had no right to be so insulting, IMO. :-)

Re:Another by Mike Fincke (1)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about a year ago | (#42305493)

...FYI, there is another video tour, this one by Mike Fincke (another amazing person - look at his wiki page, he has about 6 advanced degrees). It's in two parts:

Part 1 [youtube.com] Part 2 [youtube.com]

Thanks to the submitter - it was half an hour well spent!

Thanks for those links, very cool to see. Way more informative than the spelling nazi's post! :-)

About the spacesuits (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42304969)

Why does the helmet have the three seperate white sliders?

Re:About the spacesuits (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42305007)

I was wondering the same thing.

Maybe to act in conjunction with the 'sunglasses', and block out light from the sides, like 'glacier glasses' do?

Scuttle (1)

thereitis (2355426) | about a year ago | (#42305043)

Weren't there plans to scuttle the ISS at one point?

Re:Scuttle (1)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about a year ago | (#42305329)

Weren't there plans to scuttle the ISS at one point?

You may be thinking of "Freedom", a Reagan era space station proposal that never happened. From Wikipedia:

"The new Space Station configuration was named Freedom by Reagan in June 1988. Originally, Freedom would have carried two 37.5 kW solar arrays. However, Congress quickly insisted on adding two more arrays for scientific users. The Space Station programme was plagued by conflicts during the entire 1984–87 definition phase. In 1987, the Department of Defense (DoD) briefly demanded to have full access to the Station for military research, despite strong objections from NASA and the international partners. Besides the expected furore from the international partners, the DoD position sparked a shouting match between Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and powerful members of Congress that extended right up to the final Fiscal 1988 budget authorisation in July 1987. Reagan wanted to invite other NATO countries to participate in the U.S-led project, since the Soviet Union had been launching international crews to their Salyut space stations since 1971. At one point, then-anonymous disgruntled NASA employees calling themselves "Center for Strategic Space Studies" suggested that instead of building Freedom, NASA should take the back-up Skylab from display in the National Air and Space Museum in Washington and launch that." http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station [wikipedia.org]

OMG! I love her hair! (2)

stevegee58 (1179505) | about a year ago | (#42305057)

Seriously how can you face coming back to earth and NOT having hair like that!

Re:OMG! I love her hair! (1)

Ol Biscuitbarrel (1859702) | about a year ago | (#42305407)

She's like Yahoo Serious with oobages. Seems kinda like that would get in the way - be distracting to crewmates, maybe. Don't they have room for Scunchies or hairnets in the budget?

Re:OMG! I love her hair! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42305517)

Crazy hair, great looking legs... I wouldn't mind joining the "6 mile high club" with her. :)

Very cool, some thoughts (1)

Faizdog (243703) | about a year ago | (#42305089)

That was one of the coolest things I have ever seen! Thanks for sharing that Slashdot!

Some interesting observations/thoughts I had watching that (most of them centered around things I never thought about but are obvious once you think it through):
1) Never thought about it, but of course without any gravity, hair does not fall straight down, so her hair is flying in all directions giving a slightly âoecrazedâ look.
2) Very cool to see how they sleep, and the cozy little cubbies they have
3) Again never thought about it, but all the exercise equipment like bikes are not rigidly but rather loosely attached so the walls of the station, otherwise the force they exert during exercise will actually be exerted on the station itself, which would not be good, so they exert force, and the machines just kind of bounce around a bit. I wonder how that affects the quality of the exercise as you have to constantly adjust to a moving platform.
4) It was fascinating to see some of the mundane things like the bathroom shown. One could argue it is not the most PR/polished thing to show, but it was very cool to see how they have thought through everything. Again, something else that did not occur to me but is obvious in hindsight is that the waste disposal tubes have a little bit of suction in them so that the waste matter is pulled away from the person and the station.
5) The port for solid, #2 waste is really small, and she made a good point about aiming well. I shudder to think about occasions when somebody has more of a liquid #2 waste due to indigestion or other problems.
6) They have clips everywhere to clip things on to so they do not fly away. All the spare parts were tied down with rope. They also have strips of cloth or something to clamp down their feet so they do not fly around everywhere
7) She can identify the different cloud and soil types and can figure out what part of the world they are over by just those!

She is a funny, very personable and good guide. Definitely worth watching!

Some other questions I had after watching that they did no get into are how they handle dust, and other matter shed by the human body, hair, skin, etc. There is little to no bacteria there to decompose it and it will get lodged into places.

Also, what about laundry? Water tends to float around, so what about sweat, while working hard or exercising?

Scientific Potential vs. Engineering Realization (5, Insightful)

ausoleil (322752) | about a year ago | (#42305119)

I really like Phil Plait but he consistently misses one of the major points of ISS was building and operating a working spacecraft in space. That knowledge in and of itself will prove invaluable for longer term missions where resupply and spare parts will be impossible to provide.

That attitude seems to be all too common among scientists: the constantly overlook engineering and take it for granted.

Loved it! Always wanted to see the docking tech. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42305155)

Up close.

You can really tell the difference between the Russian side and the US side. The US side seemed vastly more spacious and "new", the Russian side had a very utilitarian "be thankful it works, feel". That bathroom situation must suck if you got some explosive shits, taco bell style. They must feel like janitors have the time they are free...but man for that view, I think it would be worth it.

Re:Loved it! Always wanted to see the docking tech (1)

arth1 (260657) | about a year ago | (#42306779)

That bathroom situation must suck if you got some explosive shits, taco bell style.

Where would the germs come from?

Anyhow, we lived with outhouses or worse for a long time. This is a big step up from that.

Utilitarian isn't a four letter word. I'd rather have something that works reliably than something that looks good. Especially when you can't just hop down to the store to buy a replacement.
And, honestly, the extra white paint does not make the US side a lot better. Unless you're a fan of white, and granted, there are a lot of those these days...

Re:Loved it! Always wanted to see the docking tech (2)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about a year ago | (#42306957)

And those fluorescent lights are going to get replaced soon. I read that they think the current lighting may be the cause for the ISS residents having insomnia problems.

Re:Loved it! Always wanted to see the docking tech (1)

Dunbal (464142) | about a year ago | (#42307275)

Where would the germs come from?

Yes another person who doesn't know what's currently living in his intestines. Let's not even get into the evil that's lurking in his nose.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...