this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2024
71 points (94.9% liked)

World News

32316 readers
942 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
all 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] sunzu@kbin.run 49 points 4 months ago (2 children)

This job seems to be more fitting for Boeing

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

they have to build it from scratch to do that though.

[–] Num10ck@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] sunzu@kbin.run 4 points 4 months ago

Guy is a better businessman than entire Boeing executive team tbh

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 26 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If a chunk of ISS falls and damages something or hurts a person, who is liable: the organization that put it up there or the one paid to take it down?

[–] ken27238@lemmy.ml 28 points 4 months ago

Per the contract once spacex builds and docks the deorbit vehicle to the ISS they are hand over ownership of it to NASA. So NASA would be responsible.

[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 20 points 4 months ago

Plot twist: deorbit vehicle will be cybertruck

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 17 points 4 months ago

The ISS is aging, and for safety’s sake, NASA intends to incinerate the immense facility around 2031. To accomplish the job, the agency will pay SpaceX up to $843 million, according to a statement released on June 26.

See you guys in 2040

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Once ISS deorbits, China will have the only space station around.

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

There is already planning to have a replacement in place by then.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Burgerland can't even build a bridge, you think it's capable of building a whole space station? 😂

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Huh? We are constantly building bridges, what a weird claim. But of course the US is quite capable of launching another space station.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

So what you're saying is that the US can build bridges?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago

If you think that taking a decade to build a bridge illustrates US capacity to build bridges effectively, then sure.

[–] LarkinDePark@lemmygrad.ml 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This is the international one that the US refuses to allow China to participate in?

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

SpaceX has won the right to tackle a monumental task: destroying the International Space Station (ISS). The demolition will shove the iconic and enormous station down through Earth’s atmosphere in a fiery display. And if anything goes wrong, a cascade of debris could rain down on our planet’s surface.

Conceived and built in a post-cold-war partnership with Russia, the ISS, like so many of NASA’s major projects, has lasted far longer than its initial design life of 15 years. Nothing lasts forever, however, especially in the harsh environment of outer space. The ISS is aging, and for safety’s sake, NASA intends to incinerate the immense facility around 2031. To accomplish the job, the agency will pay SpaceX up to $843 million, according to a statement released on June 26. The contract covers the development of a unique deorbit vehicle to usher the unwieldy ISS to its doom yet excludes launch costs.

[–] fox@hexbear.net 11 points 4 months ago

They're gonna fuck it up and crash it into Lima, I'm calling it

[–] doubtingtammy@lemmy.ml 10 points 4 months ago

Perfect metaphor for the US space program as a whole

[–] Lexam@lemmy.ca 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Not from the Onion. Also that seems a little low for a space mission.

[–] weew@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

Because it isn't a Boeing contract

[–] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 3 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Isn’t it in a low enough orbit that it should just come down and burn up eventually anyway? Seems like they could save a lot of money that way…

[–] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It's big enough that not all of it will burn up. And you don't want the debris to hit someone.

[–] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 5 points 4 months ago

Gotcha, makes sense.

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

To add to what others have said already, much smaller batteries, though think like lantern sized, didn't burn up on re-entry and damaged someone's house. NASA is already paying for that.

[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 4 months ago

There will be shit falling down due to it's size, so the deorbit has to be controlled

[–] WorkingClassCorpse@hexbear.net 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Ngl, $843M seems kinda low for something like this

[–] doubtingtammy@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago

That's like 1-2 urban highway interchanges

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Just give it to some KSP players lol.

They'll figure out a cheap way to either send it on a near vertical entry path into the ocean, or a 150 year multi planet gravity sling into the sun.