I just love that Russian approach of: How can we deliver cargo if we have no vehicle that can carry and rendezvous it? -> Make the cargo the vehicle. I had never heard of the docking module and airlock progress. I did the same thing when faced with that problem in KSP. It just goes to prove, if you come up with some wacky idea, someone at NASA already thought about it, and the Russians already did it.
Pirs is approaching the 19th anniversary of it's launch on September 14, 2001. Had it launched a week earlier it would have gotten a lot more publicity - at least in the US.
Pirs and Poisk are virtually the same, with Pirs being launched in 2001 and Poisk in 2009. The Soyuz/Progress propulsion section was attached and then was undocked and burned up, which you can see at 5:03 . Both modules are airlocks and are docked to the top and bottom ports of Zvezda. They can have a Soyuz/ Progress docked to them. Later in 2020 a Progress will dock to Pirs and deorbit it, making room for Nauka (MLM) to dock. After Nauka is docked the NM (node module) will dock to the bottom of Nauka. The NM will also be delivered like Pirs/Poisk with a propulsion section from Progress/Soyuz. The idea of sending a module up into space on a propulsion section isn't new. Kvant 1, the first Mir module, had a propulsion section that docked it to Mir. Pirs and Poisk were designed from the beginning to use the propulsion section to dock them to the ISS. They just used what they had, and instead of having a fuel and cargo section ontop of the Progress propulsion section, they put Pirs and Poisk, and soon the NM.
@@mrmax128 The most amazing thing about these modules is that the docking sensors/antennas are part of module itself. Making them not only attached to the propulsion of a progress, but actually part of it.
there were diplomas, hustlers, there are hustlers and entrepreneurs and there will be wanders on that piece of metal, all alone in the night for every 45 minutes
I am a bit sad that ESA never continued with the ATV, it was such a neat design and the planned manned versions would have been grand. But oh well, here’s to hoping they do a different ship again at some point
ESA was only contracted to supply the 5 ATV's. Agreed it would have been nice to have seen the planned versions built (Including the free flying science modules and mini space station). But ESA is still involved with the ISS, it is suppling the arm for the new Russian module.
Another ATV fun fact, they're so large inside the later ones were approved as sleeping quarters. I read they were the nicest place on the ISS to sleep.
I ljke how on those old videos interior of space station looks so empty...like a new empty apartment... as opposed to now where all is full of computers..wires and gadgets. Now it looks much better, imho, but i like the comparison and change. XD
Also, the ATV's pressurised cargo section was based on the Italian-built Multi-Purpose Logistics Module (MPLM) that flew on the Shuttle as said earlier in the video. The European ATV was and i believe still is to this day the most capable vehicle for re-boosting the ISS, since it was able to bring up almost 5 tons of fuel, compared to less than 2 on the Progress.
John DoDo Doe Which is exactly what ATV was, except ATV could do it so much better than Progress. They used to boost the ISS as high as they could just before each ATV undocking.
@@owensmith7530 I believe one ATV push is close enough to the total boosting the ISS needs for a year Pretty impressive Between the new spacecraft, only Dreamchaser will probably get certified to do re-boosting...we'll see how capable that will be
Any secret vehicle would need to stay far away from the enemy crew on board that outpost. Any non-earthly visiting vehicle. Would also need to be very stealthy. Camouflage in the shape of a phone booth or retro diner would be too visible. [Edit: misspelled diner]
@@chyza2012 Nah, pop culture references mixed with standard military concerns about hiding stuff from the Russians. In one famous TV series, the Alien hero is disguised as a human and has a powerful spaceship disguised as a London phonebooth, a friend of his disguised their spaceship as an American diner.
@@RCAvhstape They could have done a lot better though e.g. better testing of their software before flight. It seems they weren't even trying. There's other examples that could have succeeded with better software testing. Boeing just doesn't have any good excuses with the technology available today. SpaceX seems to do a great job however. They probably use custom made software to test all their flight software/hardware and engineering designs in a simulated environment. Once those tests are done, they're also good at doing real world tests, and they don't cut corners when it comes to releasing the final product or even the demo. I say this because I know Elon wouldn't stand for anything less, and that is why SpaceX is the best :) i think Boeing is ran too much like a business and businesses like to cut corners.. They forget you have to spend money to make money and now they are stuck spending twice as much.
@@digi3218 I wasn't making excuses. Just pointing out that losing your spacecraft in...space...is not at all uncommon. Didn't read your long post, sorry.
One minor correction: The Dragons delivered the International Docking Adapters 2 and 3, not the larger Pressurized Mating Adapters, to which the IDAs were attached, as you noted in a recent video that was pretty informative on the PMAs and their weird shape.
@@oneperson7013 The new module is called Nauka. It's due to be launched in 2021. The arm is called the European Robotic Arm and will work on the Russian segments of the station.
@@RealityIsTheNow Has Canada been to space? In 1962, Alouette 1 was launched and was the first satellite in space that was constructed by a country other than the US or the USSR. It was the fourth man-made object orbited around our planet. We have had a number of astronauts that have flown on the Space Shuttle missions. A number of crew members on the ISS were Canadians as well, the most famous being a Chris Hadfield, who commanded the ISS in 2013, and did a great cover of Bowie's "Space Oddity". We also made major contributions to the Apollo program. When the Avro Arrow aircraft was cancelled, NASA jumped on the brains behind the project and hired a bunch of Canadian Engineers. For example, Jim Chamberlin, who became Head of Engineering for the Mercury program, was chief designer for the Gemini spacecraft and was an important behind the scenes person for Apollo. All totalled, thirty-two Canadians from the Avro Arrow program joined NASA and were major contributors to the US manned space flight programs. So, yeah, we have been to space. :-)
Don't know if you've heard yet, but it was announced to us last week and cleared for public, that CST-100 CM#2 is scheduled for 28DEC2020. Everything is coming along smoothly, and if our hard work pays off, she will see the Spacestation. Great video.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom The crew can't really do much throughout the day as they've to prepare for the docking and some science experiments can be interfered with if a spacecraft is firing it's thrusters near the ISS. (not engines, the little RCS ones)
I lost it with that intro because I've been binging Babylon 5 lately and just literally finished season 4 last night, and subsequently Scott makes that reference from a show over two decades old. : D
Tom Stafford in his book writes extensively about the negotiations (which he was part of) around the ISS and the difficulties. And Shuttle/Mir before that. Very interesting and didn't always go as smoothly as it sounds. Also just imagine Skylab docked to the ISS.... Staffords book is called "We have capture". Talking not just Freedom (ISS) but also Gemini (6,9) and Apollo 10. It also keeps track of a later friends career, called Alexei Leonov. And his later job as Edwards (and Area51) commander. Don't expect any deep insights there though. :)
Skylab used an Apollo-style artificial atmosphere, while ISS uses a space shuttle type atmosphere, so you couldn't just berth it to the ISS unless you had a special airlock module between them. Such a module was actually built to allow the Shuttle to operate with Skylab but never got used since the shuttle got delayed until after Skylab's orbit decayed. A great missed opportunity; had it worked out there would've been Skylab-STS missions through the 1980s and lots of data gathered on long term human spaceflight 15-20 years before ISS.
@@justrecentlyi5444 The Apollo spacecraft family, including Skylab, used a low pressure pure oxygen system. The space shuttle used a normal air system at much higher pressure, almost sea level, similar to what you breath in a jetliner. So if you wanted to transfer from the shuttle's cabin into Skylab, you'd have had to go into an airlock where you'd slowly lower the pressure and breath pure oxygen to keep you from getting the bends when you enter Skylab.
@@RCAvhstape I thought they changed the pure oxygen after the Apollo 1 fire? Also, how did the Apollo-Soyuz rendezvous work since Soyuz can dock with the ISS.
@@OCinneide They didn't change it, they just reworked it to make it more fireproof while changing procedures. Prior to launch, the cabin atmosphere was pumped up with normal air, and after launch as the air leaked out they would replace it slowly with low pressure oxygen. Apollo 1 was a firetrap because the cabin was filled with O2 at higher-than-sea level pressure, along with faulty wiring. As for ASTP, I think that model of Soyuz had a low pressure system, not sure.
Great images throughout this vlog. Gosh coming up to a hundred visits! What I really like is that we get to see the ISS from time to time. I always wave, just like I used to wave at trains when I was a child :D
"That new space station smell." Brilliant! Excellent video. Wow, 20 years. Amazing how long the Soyuz has been in service and how adaptable that platform is.
Speaking of space stations, I've often wondered if a station as apparently huge as the Death Star could orbit a planet without being torn apart by orbital dynamics. Love to hear your thoughts on that!
Great summary of ISS visits. One tends to forget how many spacecraft visited there. Time to build a large circular space station so it can be spun later? Each visitor can add a bit more to the circle!
The ATV is kind of a sad story: They designed a vehicle to fulfill multiple purposes in the future. But all we got was a handful of cargo launches. There were several design variants, one was a crew (return) vehicle. Ariane 5 got human spaceflight rated. So everything was basically ready for Europe to launch astronauts themselves. But nah... Also the ATV was designed so that later variants would've been able to dock to each other and so becoming a space station. Thanks to those designs it can now be used for the Orion project. But it's still a waste since it was capable of doing so much more. And that made it even more expensive. But that's not the first project that almost became awesome before being dropped. And not allowing the Chinese to cooperate due to political reasons is childish too. A lot more could be achieved together. But "international" obviously doesn't mean the same for politicians.
ESA has been in talks with Sierra Nevada to use Dream Chaser. So crew might still be in the future for Ariane 5/6 Also the ATV has a bright future as the Orion Service Module
It's hard to believe that Dreamchaser will finally fly. I can't wait to see it docked at the station. I hope they get shots from another vehicle nearby and not just station point of view. It's a pretty little ship :)
Columbia was going to be outfitted with the external airlock for ISS docking after STS-107, but that was the only real modification it really needed, though it would've been too heavy regardless to carry up major components and instead was carrying up a Spacehab module and a truss spacer.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Chinese docking system is fully compatible with the ISS. I mean the schematics are publicly available, and engineers tend to not play politics if they can get away with it. Think of a The Martian style supply ship rescue but in LEO
Lewis Massie Unlikely, given how many other options there are for a rescue, and the fact that the Chinese don’t have the rendezvous systems and have never trained with ISS crews.
International docking system is the upgrade version of russian APAS system which was already sold to Chinese 2 decades ago, so they were using the compatible mechanism from the very beginning of their program.
But now the ISS has no APAS89/95 ports since the only open ones are on PMA 2 and 3. Then APAS adapters came up and were connected to "modernize" the ports or something and they are not backwards compatible. Now the only chance of the Chinese docking are with the CBM or an updated APAS. But with China banned from the ISS, this won't happen. The only realistic way is for them to put a CBM on it and try to dock, but then they have to be grappled by the Canadarm 2 and berthed to an "opened" port, which requires definite permission.
@@mrmax128 China won't ever get CBM plans. Rather they can get probe and cone from Russia and dock like normal Souzes do. They won't even need docking system, actually since it's possible to dock by hand with that system.
Nice video, like always! I hope you continue with all of these wonderful videos since many people come here to learn the amazingness of space! You should legit start a space agency! I would work there!
The latest Progress to dock to the ISS will be returning to Earth with the first module of the Space Station to be decommissioned - Pirs. Nauka will dock where Pirs is currently located.
Since the Cargo Dragon 2 doesn't have a big enough hatch to carry large payloads, maybe the proposed Dragon XL capsule could be used to transport bulkier items. If that vehicle is designed to serve the Lunar Gateway, it can probably also serve the ISS with minimal modification.
At this time the HTV-X could take up payloads with a larger size. I would not be surprised to learn that NASA has asked for SpaceX to keep a couple of Dragon 1 cargo capsules as a potential way to ship down payloads that would not fit through the hatch of a Dragon 2.
@@KnightRanger38 HTV-X will also dock with the station, so you have the same limitations on the size of the hatch. Dream Chaser will be berthing with the station (it could be upgraded to dock later). There really aren't many payloads that need the extra hatch size. The only payloads that really need the size are experiment racks which aren't being replaced any more, and EVA suits apparently don't fit through the docking port either (maybe the next gen will). Dragon XL suffers from the same problem of hatch size. It is the size of the docking port, nothing you can do about it.
It was. Watching as each new module was added. AFAIK, Russia plans on keeping its segment in orbit when the USA ends its contribution to the station. So it may keep flying for many more years.
In the UK our press reported NASA didn't want any more ATVs even though ESA could build them, because NASA wanted to move all the cargo flights over to commercial cargo flights. Which left ESA with the problem of how to fulfill its obligations to the ISS, until the deal to build the Orion service module. This is a rather different spin from what Scott reported.
Re-watching this video 3½ years later, it's interesting comparing hopes and expectations then, with achievement and performance now. Plus politics on Earth messing with plans, mishaps with launches, spacecraft longevity limitations, tourists and actors! Starliner still hasn't delivered an astronaut , and New Glenn not launched yet. Starship test flight 4 due in a couple of weeks. I'll re-watch again in 4 years......
Hi! Watching the last starlink launch and was wondering: How flexible size-wise are fairings (*)? Going smaller is obviously an option, but are the fairings that we see basically as big (wide) as they can reasonable go on that specific rocket? Or could they go bigger, and what are the limits? What about the length? (*) obviously talking theoretically here, because even at "one size fits all" these seem incredibly expensive PS: my personal guess at limits is air resistance, as well as material strength, but could that be optimized with different shapes?
Excellent history of ISS transports. I think we all need to take a step back and reflect on how much has been learned about space flight in the opening decades of the 21st century. The stage is being set nicely for larger better stations. Definitely should be looking at large diameter rings with spin gravity for habitat.
Has there ever been any issues with the expandable activity module from Bigelow seems as if it's never had issue that it would be a mass efficient way of expanding the iss pun intended
Scott I just heard about Gravetricity (I think that's how you spell it) breaking ground. Wondering if you'll do a video about this Scottish company. Storing energy with gravity sounds like they're on the cutting edge of science.
And in terms of "we keep garbage and supplies down there" that'd be the PLM (permanent logistics module) and BEAM (Bigelow expandable activities module) and the Japanese logistics module.
Scott could you please do a video about the Mach effect engine being built by Dr. Woodward? Seems to be the first rival to the EM drive and at the surface level appears to be showing promise.
The Babylon Project was our last, best hope for peace. It failed. But in the year of the Shadow War, it became something greater: our last, best hope - for victory!
Scott, any chance you could try sls with some f9s instead of srbs in ksp? Say, 4 of them? Saw a thing on my fb feed and thought, why don’t they just?... would be really interesting to see if it would work. Love the content btw.
They can't do that because then the SRB manufacturers will have nothing left to do and they'll stop donating to people in Congress who voted for the SLS plan.
@@danieljensen2626 well aware of why this will not happen, sort of the reason why sls still exists and is being funded. Just wondering if it COULD be done. Just for fun, and just to make the sls look slightly more ridiculous. Btw, I think Jim would cancel it if he could, if he was on the edge before, if not a bit sceptical about private endeavours in space, he seems to be convinced now, what the right way is. Unfortunately, it’s to far down the rabbit hole, so it will probably fly a couple of times at a cost of 1.5 b a pop to please certain people. But even that is not certain, wouldn’t be at all surprised if starship flys first, which will make sls look like a model t compared to my accord. Anyway, Scott, please make sls with F9 boosters!!
+ one for the B-5 homage. I get how the cargo is transferred into the station from the pressurized sections of these ships, but how is it transferred from the un-pressurized sections?
Hi Scott, will you ever make a video about Vega laucher? It could be not such a stunning technology but hey, it's Made in Italy, must be somewhat fashion!
Scott Manley, say "Kounotori" 3 times fast.j/k 37 STS ISS visits: 12 ISS missions for both OV-105 Endeavour and OV-104 Atlantis with OV-103 Discovery flying for 13 ISS missions 2:20 "largest and most capable vehicle to visit ISS" that certainly is true, those Orbiter Vehicles were beautiful. They havent flown since 2011, but they are still used in advertisements to this day. When people see an orbiter vehicle they instantly think world class technology. I remember when the Soviets were contemplating using the Energia Super Heavyweight rocket to boost space station pieces. 220,000 pounds to LEO (51.6º inclination especially impressive mass for the ISS/Russian launch inclinations) Like the Buran and Energia, the Soviet Union didn't live to see 1992.
ESA was only contracted to build and fly 5 ATV's. It didn't turn around and tell NASA it didn't want to do anymore. At the moment it is supplying the arm for the new Russian module.
Columbia was originally suppose to fly a mission (STS-118) to ISS later in the same year that she was lost. It would have been Columbia's only visit to ISS and it was only being done because Discovery had just gone down for a major overhaul period and so Columbia was assigned a lightweight resupply and minor component assembly mission carrying a single module Spacehab, S5 truss segment, and an External Stowage platform. Columbia was normally not assigned to ISS assembly or resupply missions because it was 2.5 tonnes heavier than the other orbiters. This, despite having come back from an overhaul itself where some weight was shaved off due to removing old, obsolete equipment. The only hardware Columbia would've really needed was the external airlock, which would be taken out of Discovery and installed in Columbia. Everything else needed was installed as part of its last refit. Eventually Endeavour would fly STS-118 in 8 August 2007. The mission being nearly identical except for some extra cargo due to Endeavour's much lighter weight.
Gentelmen let us hope that the space station as time gose on transforms in to a Space Dock (Star Trek 3 the search for Spock) yes im talking about that mushroom looking oversized space tower it would be so awesome to have something like that in orbit tho so let's hope
update we love space x we traveled to Boca Chica to see the starship get built. & we got the S dual motor fsd last Christmas 🎄 😎 still have the cybertruck tri motor or 4 motor fsd on order, i got lots of solar & backup battery system to charge them both. i have tsla too. i just got tried of paying $5 for a gallon of gasoline.
I was surprised to hear Russia is launching a new segment when the ISS eol is on the horizon. Looked it up and the Nauka module was supposed to launch in 2007! It's been delayed practically on an annual basis and more recently they ran into issues with aging equipment that hadn't even been launched! Nothing against Russia, they have Nauka we have James Webb. It looks like an exciting addition and can't wait to see it launch in April.
How I was almost kicked out of the Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville and the whole state of Alabama I love space and space travel and have since I was a child skipping school when Shepard, Grissom, Glenn et al. left the launch pad (My school was 60 miles from the nearest network station and had almost no reception. My peers thought it was always snowing at Cape Canaveral.). I've traveled to most NASA Centers and even in my 60's, I still get giddy at the opportunity to see anything NASA or space-related. When my son was about six, after seeing the Air and Space Museum in DC, we went to Huntsville to check into the possibility of enrolling him in Space Camp in the future. Part of our trip to Huntsville was to watch the assembly of two ISS modules. The tour guide was very knowledgeable and it didn't escape me that this was still the hill country of Alabama with hay being bailed in a field next door. Being from about the same latitude of northern Georgia, I felt rather erudite in that entire state. The guide covered a lot of statistics and firsts of the ISS modules and related that the modules were 14 feet wide. In my best southern drawl and lower Appalachian English I interrupted the guide and asked, "Ain't 14 feet the same exact width of a single-wide trailer home allowed on the highways in this state? And since I'm pretty sure I'm right on that measurement, how many of them folks down there working either live in 14 foot wide trailers or plan to go back to their job at the mobile home plant when they launch these things?" ...
Hey I have a pretty cool behind-the-scenes government thing (one of those 1001 pieces that go into anything happening) for the upcoming Hyabusa-2 return I would like to share with Scott. What is a good way to contact him? PMs or emails please, lets not throw it to the wind for everyone in the world to bother him.
Nice video, I have a request, can you please make a video on iss orbit raising? i read somewhere that even space station experience some air drag and comes down, and must be raised higher timely. i always thought how they do that.
Orbit is all about velocity. It is more complicated, but the faster you go, the higher your orbit. Trace amounts of atmosphere cause drag on the station and slowly bring down the orbit, so every so often the station uses its thrusters, or the propulsion of another docked spacecraft to restore it's speed and raise the orbit.
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
Two objects, motionless sitting next to each other while falling around the earth at many kilometers per second... I love space
While falling ... Sideways at that.
Their going atleast 3km per hour
As Douglas Adams once said, the secret of flying is "learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
@@acadiant2756 3km per second*
@@hydroflare5037 im still correct, atleast 3km per hour
I just love that Russian approach of: How can we deliver cargo if we have no vehicle that can carry and rendezvous it? -> Make the cargo the vehicle.
I had never heard of the docking module and airlock progress. I did the same thing when faced with that problem in KSP. It just goes to prove, if you come up with some wacky idea, someone at NASA already thought about it, and the Russians already did it.
As a Russian, this cracked me up
Pirs is approaching the 19th anniversary of it's launch on September 14, 2001. Had it launched a week earlier it would have gotten a lot more publicity - at least in the US.
Pirs and Poisk are virtually the same, with Pirs being launched in 2001 and Poisk in 2009. The Soyuz/Progress propulsion section was attached and then was undocked and burned up, which you can see at 5:03 . Both modules are airlocks and are docked to the top and bottom ports of Zvezda. They can have a Soyuz/ Progress docked to them. Later in 2020 a Progress will dock to Pirs and deorbit it, making room for Nauka (MLM) to dock. After Nauka is docked the NM (node module) will dock to the bottom of Nauka. The NM will also be delivered like Pirs/Poisk with a propulsion section from Progress/Soyuz. The idea of sending a module up into space on a propulsion section isn't new. Kvant 1, the first Mir module, had a propulsion section that docked it to Mir. Pirs and Poisk were designed from the beginning to use the propulsion section to dock them to the ISS. They just used what they had, and instead of having a fuel and cargo section ontop of the Progress propulsion section, they put Pirs and Poisk, and soon the NM.
@@mrmax128 The most amazing thing about these modules is that the docking sensors/antennas are part of module itself. Making them not only attached to the propulsion of a progress, but actually part of it.
The US made the Vehicle the station... with Skylab.
For some reason I read that as “every space station Scott Manley has visited”.
Ryan, that will be the subject of a future video, stay tuned... ☺️
@@jamespaul2587... Fly safe!
Hundreds and hundreds... on computer screens
That genuinely made me laugh. Thanks. 😉
Too soon.
I loved your Babylon 5 Into.
Agreed, Sheridon would be proud to command the ISS
me too :)
there were diplomas, hustlers, there are hustlers and entrepreneurs and there will be wanders on that piece of metal, all alone in the night for every 45 minutes
I am a bit sad that ESA never continued with the ATV, it was such a neat design and the planned manned versions would have been grand.
But oh well, here’s to hoping they do a different ship again at some point
ESA was only contracted to supply the 5 ATV's. Agreed it would have been nice to have seen the planned versions built (Including the free flying science modules and mini space station). But ESA is still involved with the ISS, it is suppling the arm for the new Russian module.
Yeah, and they also supplied the Columbus module
Yeah, an all-terrain buggy would be sick!😂
Scott Manley always has a video for something you've been wondering about.
Another ATV fun fact, they're so large inside the later ones were approved as sleeping quarters. I read they were the nicest place on the ISS to sleep.
I ljke how on those old videos interior of space station looks so empty...like a new empty apartment... as opposed to now where all is full of computers..wires and gadgets.
Now it looks much better, imho, but i like the comparison and change. XD
Thank you for the B5 reference. One of my favourite series of all times
Yea me too :-)
Even now some 25 years later the B5 story still impresses although the CGI is showing its age (and lack of funds back then)
@@srenkoch6127 recently I've visited few old VHS tapes. Low resolution helps
Thumbs up for the B5 reference :)
Love the effort you put into these videos, scott. Cheers!
Also, the ATV's pressurised cargo section was based on the Italian-built Multi-Purpose Logistics Module (MPLM) that flew on the Shuttle as said earlier in the video.
The European ATV was and i believe still is to this day the most capable vehicle for re-boosting the ISS, since it was able to bring up almost 5 tons of fuel, compared to less than 2 on the Progress.
But the progress acts as a disposable station-pushing rocket.
John DoDo Doe Which is exactly what ATV was, except ATV could do it so much better than Progress. They used to boost the ISS as high as they could just before each ATV undocking.
Indeed. Its interior is huge judging from the ESA astronaut ISS tour videos.
@@owensmith7530 I believe one ATV push is close enough to the total boosting the ISS needs for a year
Pretty impressive
Between the new spacecraft, only Dreamchaser will probably get certified to do re-boosting...we'll see how capable that will be
@@Nielsblog Once the ATVs had their cargo unloaded some of the ISS crew would sleep there.
Every Spacecraft Which Has Visited The Space Station *That We Know Of*
x-files theme plays
😳👀
Any secret vehicle would need to stay far away from the enemy crew on board that outpost. Any non-earthly visiting vehicle. Would also need to be very stealthy. Camouflage in the shape of a phone booth or retro diner would be too visible. [Edit: misspelled diner]
So the James Bond movie "Moonraker" isn't a documentary???
Damn... I've been lied to...
@@chyza2012 Nah, pop culture references mixed with standard military concerns about hiding stuff from the Russians. In one famous TV series, the Alien hero is disguised as a human and has a powerful spaceship disguised as a London phonebooth, a friend of his disguised their spaceship as an American diner.
The Starliner got lost along its way, just like its fiscal responsibility.
LOL I thought the exact same thing. "Got lost" yeah, sure did!
Imagine making a multi-billion dollar spacecraft just to lose it in space
@@theseductivepotato7459 That's how most failed beyond-LEO missions end.
@@RCAvhstape They could have done a lot better though e.g. better testing of their software before flight. It seems they weren't even trying. There's other examples that could have succeeded with better software testing. Boeing just doesn't have any good excuses with the technology available today. SpaceX seems to do a great job however. They probably use custom made software to test all their flight software/hardware and engineering designs in a simulated environment. Once those tests are done, they're also good at doing real world tests, and they don't cut corners when it comes to releasing the final product or even the demo. I say this because I know Elon wouldn't stand for anything less, and that is why SpaceX is the best :) i think Boeing is ran too much like a business and businesses like to cut corners.. They forget you have to spend money to make money and now they are stuck spending twice as much.
@@digi3218 I wasn't making excuses. Just pointing out that losing your spacecraft in...space...is not at all uncommon. Didn't read your long post, sorry.
One minor correction: The Dragons delivered the International Docking Adapters 2 and 3, not the larger Pressurized Mating Adapters, to which the IDAs were attached, as you noted in a recent video that was pretty informative on the PMAs and their weird shape.
"robot arm" "manipulator arm" ... *Canadarm* intensifies
Europe is building the arm for the new Russian module.
As a Canadian subscriber...EH?
@@oneperson7013 The new module is called Nauka. It's due to be launched in 2021. The arm is called the European Robotic Arm and will work on the Russian segments of the station.
I hope Canada makes it to space someday.
@@RealityIsTheNow Has Canada been to space? In 1962, Alouette 1 was launched and was the first satellite in space that was constructed by a country other than the US or the USSR. It was the fourth man-made object orbited around our planet.
We have had a number of astronauts that have flown on the Space Shuttle missions. A number of crew members on the ISS were Canadians as well, the most famous being a Chris Hadfield, who commanded the ISS in 2013, and did a great cover of Bowie's "Space Oddity".
We also made major contributions to the Apollo program. When the Avro Arrow aircraft was cancelled, NASA jumped on the brains behind the project and hired a bunch of Canadian Engineers. For example, Jim Chamberlin, who became Head of Engineering for the Mercury program, was chief designer for the Gemini spacecraft and was an important behind the scenes person for Apollo.
All totalled, thirty-two Canadians from the Avro Arrow program joined NASA and were major contributors to the US manned space flight programs.
So, yeah, we have been to space. :-)
Don't know if you've heard yet, but it was announced to us last week and cleared for public, that CST-100 CM#2 is scheduled for 28DEC2020. Everything is coming along smoothly, and if our hard work pays off, she will see the Spacestation. Great video.
Good work
Over a year later.. I honestly though it would fly sooner but I've heard scheduling at the ISS can be a pain.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom The crew can't really do much throughout the day as they've to prepare for the docking and some science experiments can be interfered with if a spacecraft is firing it's thrusters near the ISS. (not engines, the little RCS ones)
I lost it with that intro because I've been binging Babylon 5 lately and just literally finished season 4 last night, and subsequently Scott makes that reference from a show over two decades old. : D
Love the BABYLON 5 reference! good on you Scott
Tom Stafford in his book writes extensively about the negotiations (which he was part of) around the ISS and the difficulties. And Shuttle/Mir before that. Very interesting and didn't always go as smoothly as it sounds.
Also just imagine Skylab docked to the ISS....
Staffords book is called "We have capture". Talking not just Freedom (ISS) but also Gemini (6,9) and Apollo 10. It also keeps track of a later friends career, called Alexei Leonov. And his later job as Edwards (and Area51) commander. Don't expect any deep insights there though. :)
Skylab used an Apollo-style artificial atmosphere, while ISS uses a space shuttle type atmosphere, so you couldn't just berth it to the ISS unless you had a special airlock module between them. Such a module was actually built to allow the Shuttle to operate with Skylab but never got used since the shuttle got delayed until after Skylab's orbit decayed. A great missed opportunity; had it worked out there would've been Skylab-STS missions through the 1980s and lots of data gathered on long term human spaceflight 15-20 years before ISS.
@@RCAvhstape What do you mean by "Apollo type atmosphere" compared to "space shuttle atmosphere"?
@@justrecentlyi5444 The Apollo spacecraft family, including Skylab, used a low pressure pure oxygen system. The space shuttle used a normal air system at much higher pressure, almost sea level, similar to what you breath in a jetliner. So if you wanted to transfer from the shuttle's cabin into Skylab, you'd have had to go into an airlock where you'd slowly lower the pressure and breath pure oxygen to keep you from getting the bends when you enter Skylab.
@@RCAvhstape I thought they changed the pure oxygen after the Apollo 1 fire? Also, how did the Apollo-Soyuz rendezvous work since Soyuz can dock with the ISS.
@@OCinneide They didn't change it, they just reworked it to make it more fireproof while changing procedures. Prior to launch, the cabin atmosphere was pumped up with normal air, and after launch as the air leaked out they would replace it slowly with low pressure oxygen. Apollo 1 was a firetrap because the cabin was filled with O2 at higher-than-sea level pressure, along with faulty wiring. As for ASTP, I think that model of Soyuz had a low pressure system, not sure.
Great images throughout this vlog. Gosh coming up to a hundred visits! What I really like is that we get to see the ISS from time to time. I always wave, just like I used to wave at trains when I was a child :D
This is the episode I didn’t know I needed to see! Thanks.
Watching at 34 seconds since posted, your easily my favorite youtuber Scott
I agree, it's the accumulated wisdom behind that amazing voice ..
“Columbia went and did its own thing” my face when he said that lol
The last time I was this early Skylab was still in space
"That new space station smell." Brilliant! Excellent video. Wow, 20 years. Amazing how long the Soyuz has been in service and how adaptable that platform is.
The basic Soyuz design has been flying for more than 50 years.
Speaking of space stations, I've often wondered if a station as apparently huge as the Death Star could orbit a planet without being torn apart by orbital dynamics. Love to hear your thoughts on that!
Scott Manley is fantastic, can't stop admiring this guy's effort! I watch every vid he publishes, so amazing
This is a wonderful episode. Thank you.
Great summary of ISS visits. One tends to forget how many spacecraft visited there.
Time to build a large circular space station so it can be spun later? Each visitor can add a bit more to the circle!
The ATV is kind of a sad story: They designed a vehicle to fulfill multiple purposes in the future. But all we got was a handful of cargo launches. There were several design variants, one was a crew (return) vehicle. Ariane 5 got human spaceflight rated. So everything was basically ready for Europe to launch astronauts themselves. But nah... Also the ATV was designed so that later variants would've been able to dock to each other and so becoming a space station. Thanks to those designs it can now be used for the Orion project. But it's still a waste since it was capable of doing so much more. And that made it even more expensive.
But that's not the first project that almost became awesome before being dropped.
And not allowing the Chinese to cooperate due to political reasons is childish too. A lot more could be achieved together. But "international" obviously doesn't mean the same for politicians.
I think Ariane 5 has been man-rated from the beginning because of the (also cancelled) Hermes.
ESA has been in talks with Sierra Nevada to use Dream Chaser. So crew might still be in the future for Ariane 5/6
Also the ATV has a bright future as the Orion Service Module
It's hard to believe that Dreamchaser will finally fly. I can't wait to see it docked at the station. I hope they get shots from another vehicle nearby and not just station point of view. It's a pretty little ship :)
You made me laugh out loud with the Bab-5 reference! Good on yah, mate!
Columbia was going to be outfitted with the external airlock for ISS docking after STS-107, but that was the only real modification it really needed, though it would've been too heavy regardless to carry up major components and instead was carrying up a Spacehab module and a truss spacer.
Thank you for sharing.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Chinese docking system is fully compatible with the ISS. I mean the schematics are publicly available, and engineers tend to not play politics if they can get away with it.
Think of a The Martian style supply ship rescue but in LEO
Lewis Massie Unlikely, given how many other options there are for a rescue, and the fact that the Chinese don’t have the rendezvous systems and have never trained with ISS crews.
International docking system is the upgrade version of russian APAS system which was already sold to Chinese 2 decades ago, so they were using the compatible mechanism from the very beginning of their program.
But now the ISS has no APAS89/95 ports since the only open ones are on PMA 2 and 3. Then APAS adapters came up and were connected to "modernize" the ports or something and they are not backwards compatible. Now the only chance of the Chinese docking are with the CBM or an updated APAS. But with China banned from the ISS, this won't happen. The only realistic way is for them to put a CBM on it and try to dock, but then they have to be grappled by the Canadarm 2 and berthed to an "opened" port, which requires definite permission.
@@mrmax128 China won't ever get CBM plans. Rather they can get probe and cone from Russia and dock like normal Souzes do. They won't even need docking system, actually since it's possible to dock by hand with that system.
Nice new intro brother. Keep at it. Love the content!
Nice video, like always! I hope you continue with all of these wonderful videos since many people come here to learn the amazingness of space! You should legit start a space agency! I would work there!
Thank you Scott for being a space type RUclipsr! Some of your videos help me to study space deeper and become an astronaut 👨🚀! Thanks!!
The latest Progress to dock to the ISS will be returning to Earth with the first module of the Space Station to be decommissioned - Pirs. Nauka will dock where Pirs is currently located.
That Babylon 5 reference made me subscribe. Keep up the good work.
Since the Cargo Dragon 2 doesn't have a big enough hatch to carry large payloads, maybe the proposed Dragon XL capsule could be used to transport bulkier items. If that vehicle is designed to serve the Lunar Gateway, it can probably also serve the ISS with minimal modification.
At this time the HTV-X could take up payloads with a larger size. I would not be surprised to learn that NASA has asked for SpaceX to keep a couple of Dragon 1 cargo capsules as a potential way to ship down payloads that would not fit through the hatch of a Dragon 2.
@@KnightRanger38 HTV-X will also dock with the station, so you have the same limitations on the size of the hatch. Dream Chaser will be berthing with the station (it could be upgraded to dock later). There really aren't many payloads that need the extra hatch size. The only payloads that really need the size are experiment racks which aren't being replaced any more, and EVA suits apparently don't fit through the docking port either (maybe the next gen will).
Dragon XL suffers from the same problem of hatch size. It is the size of the docking port, nothing you can do about it.
@@philb5593 There are different docking ports.
It must have been exciting for everyone to see the beginning of the ISS
XD 1) Nice username
2) It'll be even more exciting to see its mission end soon, knowing what the ISS had helped accomplish.
It really, truly was :)
Wtf it Shows the comment was Made 10 years ago??!
@@MrBlack-ei4jy That is his name, not when the comment was made.
It was. Watching as each new module was added. AFAIK, Russia plans on keeping its segment in orbit when the USA ends its contribution to the station. So it may keep flying for many more years.
it would be very cool to see Starship go to the ISS
I agree but I think that is unlikely to ever happen :/
One ship larger than the station they built for twenty years.. 😁
It would be a bit overkill.
All autonomously of course .... Powered by Tesla cars brains
The starship is probs bigger than the ISS lol
In the UK our press reported NASA didn't want any more ATVs even though ESA could build them, because NASA wanted to move all the cargo flights over to commercial cargo flights. Which left ESA with the problem of how to fulfill its obligations to the ISS, until the deal to build the Orion service module. This is a rather different spin from what Scott reported.
"Home away from home
Holiday house then?
It was part of Babylon 5 Intro.
More love an Airbnb lol.
Well, it is a tourist destination, isn't it?
ISS = I See Stars = It's So Spectacular
Re-watching this video 3½ years later, it's interesting comparing hopes and expectations then, with achievement and performance now.
Plus politics on Earth messing with plans, mishaps with launches, spacecraft longevity limitations, tourists and actors!
Starliner still hasn't delivered an astronaut , and New Glenn not launched yet.
Starship test flight 4 due in a couple of weeks.
I'll re-watch again in 4 years......
I love your videos!
Hi! Watching the last starlink launch and was wondering: How flexible size-wise are fairings (*)? Going smaller is obviously an option, but are the fairings that we see basically as big (wide) as they can reasonable go on that specific rocket? Or could they go bigger, and what are the limits? What about the length?
(*) obviously talking theoretically here, because even at "one size fits all" these seem incredibly expensive
PS: my personal guess at limits is air resistance, as well as material strength, but could that be optimized with different shapes?
"Look at the size of that thing!"
“Cut the chatter, Red 2!”
That's what she said! ☺️
"We're passing through the magnetic field, set your deflectors double front."
@gdpm don't sell yourself short! ☺️
Great stuff as always Scott.
Excellent history of ISS transports. I think we all need to take a step back and reflect on how much has been learned about space flight in the opening decades of the 21st century. The stage is being set nicely for larger better stations. Definitely should be looking at large diameter rings with spin gravity for habitat.
You have no idea how much of a happy scream i made when you mentioned Nauka.
Comprehensive information as per usual 👏🏻👌🏼👍🏼
thank you Scott Manley for this video it made my info bout ISS clear🙏
Scott, thanks to you I’m addicted to EVE Echoes 😁
I SAW IT THE SECOND IT WAS POSTED!!! AND NOT EVEN FROM A NOTIFICATION!
Has there ever been any issues with the expandable activity module from Bigelow seems as if it's never had issue that it would be a mass efficient way of expanding the iss pun intended
You did a great job, thank you, it was very interesting
8:13 種子島宇宙センター。Tane-ga-shima Space Center. コウノトリ。Kouno -tori.
Scott I just heard about Gravetricity (I think that's how you spell it) breaking ground. Wondering if you'll do a video about this Scottish company. Storing energy with gravity sounds like they're on the cutting edge of science.
Every hydroelectric power station does this?
@@scottmanley Sorry, they made it sound like something new when it's something that's been around for decades.
Hi Scott, a great video, thank you.
i like all your videos, but today's like was for the mention of Babs 5. :)
Where is the ISS version of "down below"? :D
Orbitally speaking, "nadir". ;)
And in terms of "we keep garbage and supplies down there" that'd be the PLM (permanent logistics module) and BEAM (Bigelow expandable activities module) and the Japanese logistics module.
@@gsmontag electric bigelow
I'm curious, what IS the down massing mentioned in regards to the Progress vehicle?
There was a version of the Progress vehicle that included a relatively small capsule that could take samples to Earth.
Very interesting, thank you!
I read the thumbnail as "enemy spacecraft that's visited the space station"...
Scott could you please do a video about the Mach effect engine being built by Dr. Woodward? Seems to be the first rival to the EM drive and at the surface level appears to be showing promise.
It has so far shown as much promise as the EM drive
The Babylon Project was our last, best hope for peace.
It failed.
But in the year of the Shadow War, it became something greater: our last, best hope - for victory!
Scott, any chance you could try sls with some f9s instead of srbs in ksp? Say, 4 of them? Saw a thing on my fb feed and thought, why don’t they just?... would be really interesting to see if it would work. Love the content btw.
They can't do that because then the SRB manufacturers will have nothing left to do and they'll stop donating to people in Congress who voted for the SLS plan.
@@danieljensen2626 well aware of why this will not happen, sort of the reason why sls still exists and is being funded. Just wondering if it COULD be done. Just for fun, and just to make the sls look slightly more ridiculous. Btw, I think Jim would cancel it if he could, if he was on the edge before, if not a bit sceptical about private endeavours in space, he seems to be convinced now, what the right way is. Unfortunately, it’s to far down the rabbit hole, so it will probably fly a couple of times at a cost of 1.5 b a pop to please certain people. But even that is not certain, wouldn’t be at all surprised if starship flys first, which will make sls look like a model t compared to my accord. Anyway, Scott, please make sls with F9 boosters!!
+ one for the B-5 homage. I get how the cargo is transferred into the station from the pressurized sections of these ships, but how is it transferred from the un-pressurized sections?
Canadarm reaches around and grabs the cargo from the unpressurized sections I believe.
Love seeing all of those early videos of the station where it really does look like a new house with no clutter.
@Scott Manley The HTV spacecraft is launched on the H2B rocket, not the H2 rocket
0:47 what launch was that? Why did it fail? Looked like bad separation or sum but I wanna see it
Soyuz MS-10
@@scottmanley thanks!
Almost did not click on this, So glad I did, as always Scott great video.
Hi Scott, will you ever make a video about Vega laucher? It could be not such a stunning technology but hey, it's Made in Italy, must be somewhat fashion!
Scott Manley, say "Kounotori" 3 times fast.j/k 37 STS ISS visits: 12 ISS missions for both OV-105 Endeavour and OV-104 Atlantis with OV-103 Discovery flying for 13 ISS missions 2:20 "largest and most capable vehicle to visit ISS" that certainly is true, those Orbiter Vehicles were beautiful. They havent flown since 2011, but they are still used in advertisements to this day. When people see an orbiter vehicle they instantly think world class technology. I remember when the Soviets were contemplating using the Energia Super Heavyweight rocket to boost space station pieces. 220,000 pounds to LEO (51.6º inclination especially impressive mass for the ISS/Russian launch inclinations) Like the Buran and Energia, the Soviet Union didn't live to see 1992.
ESA was only contracted to build and fly 5 ATV's. It didn't turn around and tell NASA it didn't want to do
anymore. At the moment it is supplying the arm for the new Russian module.
I can’t believe you forgot to mention the Pizza Hut logo on the Zvezda’s launch vehicle
you should make an updated version of this video including all of the new spacecraft.
thx for the video
Everyone likes that "new space station smell" you get on your first boarding. I have it as an air freshener in my car...
Columbia was originally suppose to fly a mission (STS-118) to ISS later in the same year that she was lost. It would have been Columbia's only visit to ISS and it was only being done because Discovery had just gone down for a major overhaul period and so Columbia was assigned a lightweight resupply and minor component assembly mission carrying a single module Spacehab, S5 truss segment, and an External Stowage platform.
Columbia was normally not assigned to ISS assembly or resupply missions because it was 2.5 tonnes heavier than the other orbiters. This, despite having come back from an overhaul itself where some weight was shaved off due to removing old, obsolete equipment.
The only hardware Columbia would've really needed was the external airlock, which would be taken out of Discovery and installed in Columbia. Everything else needed was installed as part of its last refit.
Eventually Endeavour would fly STS-118 in 8 August 2007. The mission being nearly identical except for some extra cargo due to Endeavour's much lighter weight.
Would love to see some videos in early space stations, the precursors to iss
Nice intro 😄
The Manipulator Arm = a Canadarm!
Are there any plans to upgrade the radiation shielding with any of the new advances in this area?
Gentelmen let us hope that the space station as time gose on transforms in to a Space Dock (Star Trek 3 the search for Spock) yes im talking about that mushroom looking oversized space tower it would be so awesome to have something like that in orbit tho so let's hope
What is the vehicle shown last, with the view of the whole station?
good stuff
update we love space x we traveled to Boca Chica to see the starship get built. & we got the S dual motor fsd last Christmas 🎄 😎 still have the cybertruck tri motor or 4 motor fsd on order, i got lots of solar & backup battery system to charge them both. i have tsla too. i just got tried of paying $5 for a gallon of gasoline.
Can you do a more indepth review of the soyuz poisk combination?
how can i calcule the delta V of a SRB powered spacecraft??
I was surprised to hear Russia is launching a new segment when the ISS eol is on the horizon.
Looked it up and the Nauka module was supposed to launch in 2007! It's been delayed practically on an annual basis and more recently they ran into issues with aging equipment that hadn't even been launched!
Nothing against Russia, they have Nauka we have James Webb. It looks like an exciting addition and can't wait to see it launch in April.
Rogozin (Director) ruined Russian Space Agency...
@Scott Manley >>> *THE B5 REFERENCE -- 👍👍!!*
Zarya (with the Unity node already attached) actually docked to Zvezda, not the other way around.
11:49 - One piece of useless trivia: IIRC, Nauka is the last-ever manifested Proton payload.
How I was almost kicked out of the Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville and the whole state of Alabama
I love space and space travel and have since I was a child skipping school when Shepard, Grissom, Glenn et al. left the launch pad (My school was 60 miles from the nearest network station and had almost no reception. My peers thought it was always snowing at Cape Canaveral.). I've traveled to most NASA Centers and even in my 60's, I still get giddy at the opportunity to see anything NASA or space-related.
When my son was about six, after seeing the Air and Space Museum in DC, we went to Huntsville to check into the possibility of enrolling him in Space Camp in the future. Part of our trip to Huntsville was to watch the assembly of two ISS modules. The tour guide was very knowledgeable and it didn't escape me that this was still the hill country of Alabama with hay being bailed in a field next door. Being from about the same latitude of northern Georgia, I felt rather erudite in that entire state. The guide covered a lot of statistics and firsts of the ISS modules and related that the modules were 14 feet wide. In my best southern drawl and lower Appalachian English I interrupted the guide and asked, "Ain't 14 feet the same exact width of a single-wide trailer home allowed on the highways in this state? And since I'm pretty sure I'm right on that measurement, how many of them folks down there working either live in 14 foot wide trailers or plan to go back to their job at the mobile home plant when they launch these things?" ...
Hey I have a pretty cool behind-the-scenes government thing (one of those 1001 pieces that go into anything happening) for the upcoming Hyabusa-2 return I would like to share with Scott. What is a good way to contact him? PMs or emails please, lets not throw it to the wind for everyone in the world to bother him.
Nice video, I have a request, can you please make a video on iss orbit raising? i read somewhere that even space station experience some air drag and comes down, and must be raised higher timely. i always thought how they do that.
Orbit is all about velocity. It is more complicated, but the faster you go, the higher your orbit. Trace amounts of atmosphere cause drag on the station and slowly bring down the orbit, so every so often the station uses its thrusters, or the propulsion of another docked spacecraft to restore it's speed and raise the orbit.