There is a reason they keep two Soyuz ships docked on the ISS at all times as lifeboats, in case they need to evacuate in a hurry. Those things are bloody expensive; if jumping overboard was a reasonable alternative, it'd be vastly preferable to keeping ten tons of ironmongery and heat shields on hand.
They have lifeboats on ferries crossing the English Channel. That's not because it's physically impossible to swim the channel (it's quite clearly possible, and is done on a fairly regular basis), but because most people couldn't do it, and even if they could the lifeboat is a safer way of managing an evacuation from a sinking ship.
I'm not saying that it is possible to jump from the ISS, just that the presence of a lifeboat doesn't demonstrate that any other evacuation route is impossible.
why do you need to type that? I think it is irrelevant, rude and condescending. Otherwise your comment was quite informative and I would have upvoted it.
There are a number of comments on that site that are eye roll worthy. There are even a few comments that show cluelessness about the magnitude and implications of orbital velocity.
> When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. E.g. "That is an idiotic thing to say; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."
from the site guidelines. Granted, this was in reply to an article rather than another commenter, but I think the principle is the same.
I think the question was asking if survival would be at all possible, rather than whether it's a reasonable course of action in the event of an evacuation.
It looks like, for now at least, the answer is no.
Comments
Rolls eyes
There is a reason they keep two Soyuz ships docked on the ISS at all times as lifeboats, in case they need to evacuate in a hurry. Those things are bloody expensive; if jumping overboard was a reasonable alternative, it'd be vastly preferable to keeping ten tons of ironmongery and heat shields on hand.
Having said that, see 1963's Project MOOSE:
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/moose.htm
They have lifeboats on ferries crossing the English Channel. That's not because it's physically impossible to swim the channel (it's quite clearly possible, and is done on a fairly regular basis), but because most people couldn't do it, and even if they could the lifeboat is a safer way of managing an evacuation from a sinking ship.
I'm not saying that it is possible to jump from the ISS, just that the presence of a lifeboat doesn't demonstrate that any other evacuation route is impossible.
There are a number of comments on that site that are eye roll worthy. There are even a few comments that show cluelessness about the magnitude and implications of orbital velocity.
You do realize that knowledge of these things is an attribute of a tiny minority?
That's no reason to be condescending and rude. Not everybody knows about that stuff.
Really?
It's stuff I was taught about in physics lessons at grammar school, circa age 15, back in the 1970s. Have things slipped so far?
The way I see it, "rolls eyes" is a violation of
> When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. E.g. "That is an idiotic thing to say; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."
from the site guidelines. Granted, this was in reply to an article rather than another commenter, but I think the principle is the same.
In the US, 15-year-olds are typically going to be in High School, not grammar school, and have a choice of classes. Not everyone takes physics.
> Have things slipped so far?
Yes. :(
I think the question was asking if survival would be at all possible, rather than whether it's a reasonable course of action in the event of an evacuation.
It looks like, for now at least, the answer is no.
> Rolls eyes
In the real world knowledge of this stuff is vanishingly thin actually. Real world - the thing out there, with people and trees and stuff.