fencethe900th

They'll probably use the same docking port. It's used by all the big suppliers so to use anything else would be foolish. I would imagine power and telemetry transfer is part of that so I doubt there would be any issues.

The 4th person wouldn't get anything, as usual. The second and third would both get silver. Better for everyone affected.

Just saw the blue angels last week, along with an air force F-22 solo demo. I would love to see them doing group maneuvers with that.

It is past the hardest part, but it would still take a huge amount of fuel, especially due to the size of it.

This is the most current experiment I'm aware of.

https://www.freethink.com/space/space-junk-fusion

It would require shielding on anything we put up, but that would only reduce the mass of the actual payloads we could launch. In LEO the debris would clear within a few decades due to atmospheric drag, and much less if we started cleaning it up ourselves, which we would.

A laser broom is the most promising method as far as I know. You hit the piece of debris with a laser that vaporizes the surface where it's hitting, turning the piece into a small rocket. You use that to slow it down so it drops into the atmosphere.

One is wrong, one is a loose term that technically could be misunderstood but is common grammar, even in the relevant field.

Right. He also mentioned that coming in under budget like that was getting rarer anyway because they were hampered by red tape and the regulations that were coming out. Understandable regulations for the most part I would assume, but still. And that was in the 70's and 80's I think.

However it is commonly understood that you are at the bottom of the group of people contained within that percentage, plus or minus the margin for error.

you set the new baseline price for future negotiations

And according to Skunk Works, a book about the head of said division of Lockheed that built the U-2, F-117, and SR-71, if you go too far under your bid you can be fined for overbidding.

And in that analysis they found it would take significantly more fuel to boost it high enough that the atmosphere wouldn't cause it to deorbit within a century, and that it would be hit even more with debris unless they pushed it even higher, taking an extreme amount of fuel to do so.

But it takes a lot more to push it higher.

Axiom, Axios is a news company, but yes.

And found a controlled deorbit would take less than half the fuel, while raising the orbit would increase impact risk.

That report says a controlled deorbit would take less than half the delta-V (57 m/s instead of 120-140 m/s to boost it to 640-680 km altitude) and that the higher you go the more risk of impacts due to the debris lasting longer up there.

Scott Manley talked about the possibility of Axiom taking something with them. Their modules will be launched in a couple years, and then they'll detach before the ISS is retired and will start their own station.

The worst is when you solve the problem and at most it just needs a little dialing in to be just right before you realize that. Then you have to choose between the clever solution you came up with or the super simple but objectively better bare bones version.

You can probably find new screws to replace them. I would guess they're a pretty standard size.