-2
$\begingroup$

Will US Policy be that there should be two Boeing CST-100 Starliner or SpaceX Dragon V2 craft attached to ISS at all times for the American segment of the station? Will Soyuz continue to be used?

$\endgroup$
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Do you have any source that indicates NASA will 'kick out' Soyuz? $\endgroup$ – Hobbes Jul 14 '16 at 14:45
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Soyuz flights are currently expensive and NASA would certainly prefer to have the ability to reach the ISS on its own, but Russia is a partner in the ISS project and its vehicles will always be welcome. $\endgroup$ – kim holder Jul 14 '16 at 14:51
  • $\begingroup$ Plus, the commercial partner vehicles are untested and slipping. Don't expect Soyuz to go away any time soon. NASA just bought more seats due to the commercial partner slips. $\endgroup$ – Organic Marble Jul 14 '16 at 14:52
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I assume a new US crewed vehicle will work like the shuttle days - with both nationalities using their own systems. The ISS has room for both to berth there. $\endgroup$ – Andy Jul 14 '16 at 16:45
  • $\begingroup$ Only time will tell. At top of everything comes safety. If everything work out fine which will with time and we will see next level competition and progress in space travel to iss and beyond. $\endgroup$ – Isrorian Sep 7 '16 at 6:34
5
$\begingroup$

The current plan is that the Russians will maintain a Soyuz vehicle at the station at all times there is crew aboard, allowing for 3 crew members.

US Commercial Crew (Boeing CST-100 Starliner, or SpaceX Dragon V2/Crew) will be maintained on the station at all times there is a crew aboard, allowing for 4 crew members.

Currently with 2 Soyuz the maximum (Though of course, there are 4 Russian docking ports, so potentially 4 Soyuz, but usually 2 Soyuz, a Progress or two, and possibly an ESA ATV is the compliment of vehicles) there is a maximum crew size of 6.

By moving to 7, (3 on Soyuz, 4 on Commercial Crew) they gain one more member, and since after maintenance, exercise, and other administrivia on station, the entire crew of six, only manage to accomplish about 40 hours of science experiments a week total. Thus adding one more person, should add 40 more hours a week of available work time, which could double the science throughput. (Assuming that their time is not consumed in incremental tasks based on 6 vs 7 in the crew).

Thus no one is getting kicked out until the Russians decide to leave the station.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Don't make the 40h sound so "only" - that's a standard work of 8h/day monday-friday. And most people spend the rest of time on leisure, not mandatory exercise, maintenance and other administrativia! $\endgroup$ – SF. Jul 14 '16 at 15:57
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Sf You misconstrue. From a crew of 6 they get a total of 40 hours. I.e. The other 5X40 work hours are consumed by other stuff, not science related. $\endgroup$ – geoffc Jul 14 '16 at 16:00
  • $\begingroup$ May you add that 40h stuff to your answer with reference if possible. $\endgroup$ – MolbOrg Jul 15 '16 at 3:19
  • $\begingroup$ @geoffc Then, how would adding one more person double the science throughput? There is no guarantee that the one person could work the majority of their time on science either. $\endgroup$ – called2voyage Jul 15 '16 at 17:16
  • $\begingroup$ @called2voyage I know, but that is how they spin it whenever I read about it. The assumption seems to be that each Astro can work 40 hour weeks. Then the incremental cost to maintenence of 1 more user is close to zero. I.e. Everything they are already doing stll needs to be done, if 6 or 7 crew. Apparently the unstated assumption is little to no incremental cost. $\endgroup$ – geoffc Jul 15 '16 at 17:23

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.