Yes, it's very pretty. But pretty much useless as well and obsolete, like the Shuttle.

Investigations on cosmic radiation and other space physics can be accomplished on unmanned satellites and platforms.

These brave volunteers risk their lives for the sake of learning the effects of long durations in space.

Beyond that....

Onboard systems are failing and can't be upgraded to new technology as it's design prevents easy retrofitting.

Electrical as well as other systems hardware would need to be completely replaced throughout the station.

What I believe is, it's main mission is secret and a pick-up point for other missions kept under wraps as well.

A Home Depot in space....

...supplying food, fuel and other equipment to space stations and craft on secret missions.

I believe what we see on TV is a "public program" only.

And the trillions of dollars missing from the US Treasury Dept. is being used for secret projects.

Of course I can't prove this yet but what else is all the stuff going up there for?

I concede some of the equipment is for the station to maintain it's integrity.

It needs to stay operational until another system goes online or this one is replaced.

I'm still gathering information so more follow-ups are coming.

But look at what The NASA Channel and web site is showing about it's mission.

All you ever see is short, selected external video of the station orbiting

the Earth in one minute segments. And internal video of personnel banging away on computers

or eating Jell-O and M&M's in micro-gravity. Some organic experiments on vegetation growth and seed reproduction.

As far as the ISS being an "ideal environment" for medical studies is pure fantasy. The ISS is a "bacterial haven"

because of it's closed system and human habitation. Read what I posted about the Life Support System. (below)

Major problems are mold, human biological secretions (odor, sweat, skin flakes and other impurities),

chemical body secretions, (methane, ammonia, acetone, methyl alcohol etc) just to mention a few.

Any "clean room" on Earth can control impurities much better and be the size of a Blimp Hanger.

The Lab Module on the ISS is limited to a few square feet for a "clean room" box,

about the size of a small dog house.

Most of their precious time is devoted to staying alive!

Look what Jeff Foust* said about the ISS:

The magazine The American Enterprise reports, for instance,

that ISS astronauts "now spend 85 percent of their time on construction and maintenance alone".

*Dr Jeff Foust is an aerospace analyst, journalist and publisher.

His is the editor and publisher of The Space Review and has written for Astronomy Now and The New Atlantis.

He has a Ph.D in planetary sciences from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology

and a bachelor's degree in geophysics from the California Institute of Technology.

NASA has been spouting about the new High Definition Television cameras all over the station, pointing to different areas and Earth.

Well, why don't they have a Hi-Def channel for us to see this amazing footage? Or even broadcast any footage?

NASA does broadcast the Shuttle launches and interviews at the ISS in HD on the HDNet channel but...

....we never get to see any Shuttle footage when it reaches orbit insertion, on it's way to the station or on it's way back.

Why?.....Because they're seeing and doing things they don't want us to see.

Whether it be other space craft rendezvous, docking at "other" space stations, or possibly...even UFO's.

More on this farther below.

M-61 and Soyuz U Launch Vehicle:

According to Russian and American Space agencies, all the transports are de-orbited and burn-up upon re-entry.

These transports are huge. This would be seen re-entering and would not burn-up completely before slamming into the ocean.

I haven't heard or seen any reports of them being observed on re-entry.

And I'm sure the inhabitants of the South Pacific would have something to say about this practice.

Especially Australia and New Zealand.

I believe, and will try to prove, these cargo transports are being re-used for other missions.

Stay tuned.

Russian Launches to the ISS in January, May & August 2007:

Now it seems to me, this is an extraordinarily large amount of food and water for three people.

How would they keep fruit and vegetables from spoiling? You can't freeze fresh fruit and vegetables.

Well, you can...but freezing would ruin them. And it was fresh, not dehydrated, cooked or freeze dried.

Source references to the fresh fruit are in the articles below.

Progress-M 59...

Progress P 26

The ISS Progress 26 (P26) craft launched Thursday from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan at 1:34 p.m. EDT.

The P26 vehicle is loaded with 5,111 pounds of food, fuel, air, water and supplies. P26 is scheduled to dock with the station on August 5.

(3 days after lift-off)

Progress M-61

Moscow (RIA Novosti) Aug 06, 2007

Timeline:

Again, M-61 didn't dock until 73 hours after lift-off.
The Progress M-61 cargo spacecraft carrying food, water, and fuel supplies for the crew,

and equipment to repair onboard computers has automatically docked with the global orbital station, mission control said.

The cargo ship docked with the International Space Station (ISS) on schedule at 22:40 Moscow time (18:40 GMT) Sunday

delivering much needed additional equipment to fix the onboard laptops of the Russian segment,

which crashed on June 11. The Russian crew, Fyodor Yurchikhin and Oleg Kotov,

had temporarily repaired the damage but extra equipment was required.

The Progress also delivered equipment to conduct space experiments as part of the Japanese program.

This is the third Russian cargo spacecraft sent to the ISS this year, and by the end of 2007,

the Soyuz cargo ship will  make another scheduled flight to the ISS.

Related Energia report on M-61:
Korolev, Moscow region.

Following a three-day free flight, Russian cargo transport vehicle

Progress M-61 docked to the International Space Station.

"The vehicle delivered more than 2.5 tons of cargoes. They encompass oxygen, water and food supplies,

propellant, consumables, science hardware and equipment, including 459 kg of equipment for the US Segment."

Again, no break-down of the individual contents and weights, except for the US Segment in weight.

The Russian Segment of the ISS is made up of the Functional Cargo Module Zarya,

Service Module Zvezda, docking compartment-module Pirs, transport vehicles Soyuz TMA-10,

Progress M-60 and Progress M-61 cargo transport vehicles. Progress M-59 cargo transport vehicle operating

as part of the station on August 1, 2007 was undocked from Pirs module and deorbited into the Pacific Ocean.

The unburned vehicle structural elements landed at 23:28.

Landed? Don't they mean...."Slammed into the Pacific Ocean with a force of a mini nuke

scattering unwanted ISS garbage from Fiji to New Zealand!"

Progress M class Automatic Cargo Carrier Is An Unmanned Craft.

What is the 1.4 tons of "dry cargo" in the May flight?

I haven't been able to find any reference to it except that.

And 100lbs of air? The station makes it's own air that's part of the life support system.

Although the Russian built oxygen generator Elektron failed in Jan.'07,

it's was repairable after extensive diagnosis and spare parts were employed.

A hundred pounds would keep you alive for about 5 minutes.

Uncompressed, a cubic yard of air weighs about 2.5 lbs

Didn't know that did you?

A typical divers air tank can hold between 1700 and 2400 lbs of compressed air.

Of course not in actual weight, that's 2400 lbs of pressure per square inch within the tank.

That's enough air to fill a hot-air balloon.

At a depth of 33 feet, a diver consumes 50 lbs per minute.

So what is 100 lbs being used for? The fuel system? I doubt that very much.

The station only has attitude thrusters for orientation.

The station is dependent on visiting vehicles to adjust it's altitude when needed.

The station already has back-up air supplies on hand and enough for several months.

Although some air is lost every time air-locks are opened to do an EVA.

There are references to that but 100lbs wouldn't even make a dent in air lock loss.

And the 100 lbs would have to be compressed in a tank of some kind. You could

get that little air in a tank the size of a small automobile fire extinguisher.

About a 12" x 3" diameter size.

Over 12 tons of cargo has supposedly been delivered to the ISS in 8 months.

Just from Progress and Soyuz.

And this doesn't include Shuttle cargo. You can add another 5-7 tons per mission from the Shuttle

since the beginning of 2007 to the time of this post in mid-August, '07.

Not counting external modules and parts to expand the station.

That's an amazing amount of stuff to stow in a limited space. And by hand.

Approximately 1/4 to 1/3 of it is propellant.

I just don't see where they're putting it all!

M-61 is still docked at the station and will be for

several months until the next Progress due to launch in October.

Where is M-60? Docked in May. Is it still docked?

P-26 docked August 5 (5,111 lbs of cargo)

M-61 docked August 6 (2.5 tons of cargo)

(Over 5 tons of cargo in two days)

Here are the specs and launch date of M-60:

Last Flight Date: 2007-05-12.

Design Life: 30 days.

Orbital Storage: 180 days.

Typical orbit: 225 km x 258 km at 51.6 degrees inclination.

Length: 7.23 m (23.72 ft).

Maximum Diameter: 2.72 m (8.92 ft).

Span: 10.60 m (34.70 ft).

Mass: 7 450 kg (16 420 lb).

Main Engine: KTDU-80.

Main Engine Thrust: 3.920 kN (881 lbf).

Main Engine Propellants: N2O4/UDMH.

Main Engine Propellants: 900 kg (1 980 lb).

Main Engine Isp: 305 sec.

Electrical System: Solar panel span: 10.60 m; area 10.00 sq.m.

Electric System: 0.60 average kW.

I don't think this and the other Progress vehicles were ever in "orbital storage".

The Russians can't afford to throw away cargo carriers at a rate of 4 or 5 a year.

The cost of the M-60 flight is as follows:

The head of Russian spacecraft manufacturer Energia, Nikolai Sevastyanov said:

"It had cost more than $64,000,000 to ship the 2.5-ton cargo to the ISS. With the delivery of

one kilogram of payload by a Progress freighter costing on average, $22,000 to $25,000".

Note:

I copied the article and made a pdf from it because posted articles don't stay

on the same page for too long. Sources are in the article.

Source: Progress M-60 Cost pdf (13Kb)

Look at the last sentence in the Kommersant article.

Progress M60_kommersant.pdf (20Kb)

And the 3rd paragraph in the US article.

Progress M60_launch.pdf (19Kb)

This article also shows the timeline.

The last three paragraphs show the M-60 was not on an ISS course.

There were nine separate major thruster-burns in the three days before docking.

Do you see how one can find discrepancies with innocent comments?

We are finding alot of information this way.

You'll never find anything asking a direct question about a specific subject

when it comes to government agencies.

One needs to look at the overall data of any subject and break-down

the subtleties and you'll find inconsistencies and information that

normally aren't available.

UPDATE:

I watched the Hi-Def 30 minute broadcast of an "interview" with one of the

crew members of the ISS on Discovery HD channel on 08/15/07. (on all this week at different times)

Ten minutes of it was on what they eat. No mention of fresh fruit or vegetables.

The Commander showed dehydrated food packets, fruit juice packets and

everything was in packets. Not a banana, apple or veggie in sight or even mentioned.

Now that is intriguing.

I also watched the broadcast of STS 118 crew member Barbara Morgan on 08/16/07,

talking to Idaho students via HAM radio. One student asked about her favorite food she eats on the station.

M&M's was her choice and she explained that all their food was in packets and vacuum sealed.

Some was dehydrated and some in cooked form which they could heat-up for meals.

Again...no mention of fresh fruit and veggies. So I ask you again....

....where is the fruit and veggies going? And there's alot of it.

Look at the US Patents, starting at #5,092,545 farther down the page and maybe we have an answer.

Russian Segment of ISS Life Support System

Neither the Russian nor Americans have ever mentioned fresh fruit & veggies.

The table below shows part of the LSS about the food storage.

Below the table is the complete documents on the Russian LSS.

The Russian LSS is in two parts. Pay attention in Part 2, page 13 & 14.

That is Section 5 about the food storage and preparation.

Everything is in packets. Most is dehydrated. Some is cooked.

But none of it is fresh.

In Humans, methane and carbon dioxide are produced in the intestines, and ammonia is created by the breakdown of urea in sweat. Humans also emit acetone, methyl alcohol, and carbon monoxide, as the byproducts of metabolism through urination and breathing. Currently, activated charcoal filters are the primary method by which these chemicals are removed from the air.

U.S. segment ECLSS pdf (270Kb)

A Parable

There is a story about a man who left this Earth and was taken on a tour of the inner realms.

He was shown a room where he saw a large group of hungry people trying to eat dinner,

but because the spoons that they were trying to eat with were longer than their arms,

they remained frustrated and hungry.

"This," his guide told him, "is Hell."

"That's terrible!" exclaimed the man.

"Please show me Heaven!”

"Very well" agreed the guide, and on they went.

When they opened Heaven's door, the man was perplexed to see what looked very much like the same scene:

there was a group of people with spoons longer than their arms.

As he looked more closely, however, he saw happy faces and full tummies,

for there was one important difference: the people in Heaven had learned to feed each other.

From: The Dragon Doesn't Live Here Anymore,

by Alan Cohen

From:

Chapter 7: Upper Stages

The space tug will have the capability to deliver and retrieve payloads to high altitude, particularly geosynchronous orbit, to inject payloads into planetary trajectories and to conduct in-orbit servicing of payloads. It is being designed to be recoverable and reusable.

(21Kbs) JPG

Do you know how long it takes a manned mission to reach the Moon?

Saturn V Launch Vehicle: 9 minutes to reach Low Earth Orbit (LEO) after lift off.

Two days to reach the Moon after they leave low Earth orbit.

And this was Apollo 17, in 1972.

The Shuttle also reaches LEO in about 9 minutes.

So why does it take 4 days to reach the ISS which is also in LEO?

Reusable Agena Space Tug pdf (1.3Mb) /U.S. Version

Lockheed-Martin 1974

Section I

INTRODUCTION

The Shuttle /Agena Upper Stage interim tug concept which is emphasized in this summary report is based on a building block approach. These building block concepts are extensions of existing ascent Agena configurations.

Several current improvements incorporated or in development since 1970, have been used in developing the Shuttle/Agena Upper Stage concepts.

5.5 SPECIAL MISSION CONSIDERATIONS

A servicing mission involves the replacement of expended components on four widely separated spacecraft at synchronous equatorial positions, as shown in Fig. 5-13.

This figure presents a typical mission profile for a servicing mission accomplished by the Agena Upper Stage core vehicle (no SOT option) with 351 pounds (159 kg) of rendezvous equipment and a 300 pound (136 kg) servicing module containing 1800 pounds (815 kg) of replacement components.

The Agena rendezvous with each spacecraft in turn, and replaces 450 pounds (204 kg) of components at each spacecraft. The mission requires twelve days to accomplish, including phasing time between spacecraft.

The Agena program was originally a 2nd stage for Atlas

 launch vehicles. It's design was modified and reconfigured

for an orbiting space tug. This was done from what's called the

building-block concept as described in the above pdf. What's interesting about this is the vehicle has never been announced as being part of the payload on any Shuttle

missions. The above pdf describes in detail how it can fit in the Shuttle bay

and still have more than half the bay for other cargo.

Does anyone find this fact interesting?

AGENA-D Mission Capabilities and Restraints Catalog Vol. II  pdf  Large (28Mb)

The last monthly report on AGENA before conversion.

Marshall Agena Systems Office.

operating responsibility on January 28, 1963, and therefore, all future

Agena reporting will be generated and distributed from Lewis Research

Center, Cleveland, Ohio

amr_jan_1963.pdf (1.14Mb)

The Parom Orbital Space Tug & Ferry/Russian Version

Source: http://www.russianspaceweb.com/parom.html

"The concept of the spacecraft, which would later evolve into Parom, apparently originated at the turn of the 21st century, when Russia first pondered the possibility of launching space station modules, originally designed to ride into orbit onboard the US Shuttle. The idea was to have a highly maneuverable space tug parked in orbit or at the space station, from where it could conduct multiple sorties to meet with recently launched payloads and then deliver them to the space station. The concept later merged with the Kliper Project and became known as Parom (Ferry)".

Notice it has docking ports at both ends.

Progress GVK or (M-2) Reusable and Re-Entry Vehicle

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/progress_gvk.html

"Although the original Progress cargo ship was designed as a one-way transport, to be destroyed on the reentry into the Earth atmosphere, Russian designers looked at various schemes to give the vehicle the ability to return cargo to Earth".

Jules Verne ATV (Automated Transfer Vehicle)

The ATV is designed to complement the Progress spacecraft, having three times its capacity. Like the Progress, it carries both bulk liquids and relatively fragile freight which is stored in a cargo hold kept in a pressurized shirt sleeve environment so that astronauts can have access to it without putting on a spacesuit. The ATV pressurized cargo section is based on the Italian-built Multi-Purpose Logistics Module (MPLM), which is already in service as a Shuttle-carried ‘space barge’ transporting equipment to and from the Station. It is also an autonomous Space Tug.

Each ATV weighs 20.7 tons at launch and has a cargo capacity of 8 tons.

Jules Verne PDF (57 pages)

No larger image

The MSS (Mini Space Station) concept. A Jules Verne ATV evolution proposal under consideration for the future. It proposes multiple ATVs with two docking ports, one at each end. The current version of the ATV is already prepared with a docking port at the back, with the main propulsion system arranged in a cylindrical fashion leaving room for a tunnel through the middle. This concept would allow Soyuz, Progress and other ATVs to dock to the back of the ATV, allowing a steady flow of Russian vehicles using the available docking ports whilst an ATV is docked for an average of around 6 months at a time at the ISS.

(My Note) The MSS is suspected to be in operation now. The image (far right)

is a photograph, not an illustration.

No larger image

A Multi-Purpose Logistics Module (MPLM) is a large pressurized container used on Space Shuttle missions to transfer cargo to and from the (ISS). It is carried in the cargo bay of the Space Shuttle and berthed to the Unity Module, where supplies are offloaded and finished experiments and waste are loaded. The MPLM is then re-berthed in the Shuttle for return to Earth.

http://mplm.msfc.nasa.gov/

The modules are provided to NASA under contract by the Italian Space Agency (ASI). Three MPLMs were built and delivered to NASA and have names chosen by the ASI to denote some of the great talents in Italian history: Leonardo, Raffaello, and Donatello. While built by ASI, the modules are owned by NASA. In exchange for building the MPLMs, ASI receives access to U.S. research time on the ISS.

What do you make of the patch/insignia (far right) for the MPLM's?...Ninja turtle...?

...for an Italian product?

This is a little known patch worn on;

STS 28, 33, 36, 38, 39, 44 and 53.

The other DoD and NRO patches below were in other missions.

The mission descriptions did not include any information on the DoD flights because they're classified.

But after checking a few shuttle payload lists, these satellites were onboard;

STS 38...Magnum-3 (NRO-CIA SIGINT) reconnaissance;

USA-66 (GPS)

STS 39...CRO-satellites (Chemical Release Observation) and SDI satellite MPEC (Strategic Defense Initiative) (Multipurpose Release Canister)

STS 44...DSP-16 (Defense Support Program) reconnaissance.

Also, the patch is not seen on any of the group astronaut photo sittings prior to launch.

Most people I've shown this patch, don't recognize the letters as reading, "DOD", in the smoke plume.

But there is a drawing of the patch that clearly depicts the letters.

(far right image)

Source credit for drawing: http://spacefacts.net/english/flights.htm

(266Kbs) JPG

Hmmm.....sounds like there is more happening up there than is reported.

Do Black Budget Trillions Support A Secret American Space Program?

Excerpts:

"Michael Schratt has a theory about where all the black budget DOD trillions have been going over the past

60 years: to fund a top secret space program that no citizen in the United States knows about – including most of Congress."

American Space Program

PDF (44Kbs) 9 pages

USAF Disk PDF

(1Mb) 26 pages

 LOK-1 pdf (25Kb)

The LOK, which stands for Lunar Orbital Craft in Russian, could be called the Soyuz on steroids. While from the outside it looked like a stretched version of the original (7K-OK) version of the Soyuz, inside the LOK featured a number of upgrades and unique systems, which enabled it to support manned lunar expedition.

Source:

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/lok.html

Notice its shape is very similar to Progress also.

The Advanced Crew Transportation System  pdf (148Kb) ACTS, also known as "Euro-Soyuz," emerged during 2006, when Russian company RKK Energia realized that its proposals to replace the workhorse Soyuz spacecraft with the Kliper reusable glider would be too ambitious for the current level of funding of the Russian space program.

As of 2006, Russian Space Agency expected to get nine billion rubles (355 million U.S.) until 2012 for the development of the next generation manned transport, of which, only 500 million (19.7 million U.S.) would be allocated for the task before 2010.

As a result, the agency decided to focus on the development of a modified Soyuz, capable of reaching lunar orbit. Potentially, such spacecraft could serve as a bridge paving the way to Kliper. http://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz_acts.html

This next document is most compelling and direct evidence of

another type of space vehicle that could be in use today.

The craft already exists, the Shuttle external fuel tank.

In the transporter patent below you can see a

space launch and recovery platform depicted in the drawings.

The following is the abstract of the patent along with the drawings.

Remember the dates in the above DoD budget for; "Other Aircraft"?

United States Patent 5,092,545
Butterfield, et al. March 3, 1992
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Method of delivering lunar generated fluid to earth orbit using an external tank

Abstract
A method and apparatus are provided for delivering lunar generated fluid to Earth orbit from lunar orbit. Transport takes place in an external tank of a shuttle which has been suitably outfitted in Earth orbit for reusable travel between Earth orbit and a lunar orbit. The outfitting of the external tank includes the adding of an engine, an electrical system, a communication system, a guidance system, an aerobraking device, and a plurality of interconnected fluid storage tanks to the hydrogen and oxygen tanks of the external tank. The external tank is then propelled to lunar orbit the first time using Earth-based propellant. In lunar orbit, the storage tanks are filled with the lunar generated fluid with the remainder tank volumes filled with lunar generated liquid oxygen and hydrogen which serve as propellants for returning the tank to Earth orbit where the fluid is off-loaded. The remaining lunar generated oxygen and hydrogen is then sufficient to return the external tank to lunar orbit so that a subsequent cycle of fluid delivery is repeated. A space station in a higher Earth orbit is preferably used to outfit the external tank, and a lunar node in lunar orbit is used to store and transfer the fluid and liquid oxygen and hydrogen to the external tank. The lunar generated fluid is preferably .sup.3 He.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inventors: Butterfield; Ansel J. (Newport News, VA), Goslee; John W. (Newport News, VA)
Assignee: The United States of America as represented by the Administrator of the (Washington, DC)

My note: The rest of the Assignee sentence is missing from the text.

But in the actual patent included in the pdf, NASA is the assignee.

Appl. No.: 07/520,883
Filed: May 9, 1990

Other References:
Lunar Science Institute, Criswell, copyright 1976. .
Vinopal, "Aeroassisted Orbital Transfer Vehicle Sys Tech Study", D180-29222-1 Boeing 1985.

Full text of:

United States Patent 5,092,545 text file

U.S. Patent 5,092,545 PDF

This next patent actually belongs on the Moon Mining page but the same group in the above patent, Bionetics Corporation, conceived this patent from the same Shuttle external tank into a lunar habitat module. Also, the tanks are too be converted in LEO, at a space station other than the ISS, giving one to believe there is more than one station in our orbit.

For these reasons I'm placing it below the transporter.

First, NASA funded the study (4212) for the:

"Single Launch Lunar Habitat Derived From NSTS External Tank" in 1990.

NASA Technical Memorandum 4212 pdf (2.12Mb) 1990

US Patent 5,094,409 pdf (556Kb) 1992

Method of providing a lunar habitat from an external tank.

Abstract:

Conveniently, a space station is used to outfit the base structure. Various elements of the oxygen tank and intertank are used in outfitting.

NOTE: With respect to the orbit altitude mentioned above, the ISS ranges from 278 to 460 km (150 to 250 n. mi.) at an inclination of 51.6°

Figure A

Hammerhead II side view

This next patent is also derived from a Shuttle external tank and converted at a platform in orbit for station structures.

US Patent 4,807,833 pdf (1.16Mb) 1989

A combined space vehicle fuel cell and modular space station structural building component which provides containment of propellants during launch and thereafter provides one of a plurality of modules which can be interconnected once orbit is achieved for constructing a space station or space platform.

The benefits realized through this manufacturing in space vision are significant. The immediate benefit is the in situ repair and fabrication “machine shop” in space for making components and systems. Such a facility can be a key component in saving lives and/or providing a greater opportunity for survivability for astronauts, and space travelers during a mission. Through this concept of manufacturing in space, very large scale space structures call be built thus reducing the cost for launch of such structures.