ISS: It's All Decked Out. Give It Somewheto Go

> No fundamental reason one could not, but here's
> one reason it should not be done: How much mass
> would need to be launched from Earth to make the
> interior habitable? If the interior is fitted
> with any where near the equipment density of
> ground-prepared stations, it could easily exceed
> one hundred tonnes launched to an already
> orbiting ET to make it habitable. With all the
> construction work being done on orbit, where it
> costs $20 million to get each worker into space
> (which could be slightly offset by getting the
> ISS crew to work on it, but still) how would
> this actually be cheaper than just making a
> custom module on Earth? An ET does provide a
> tantalizingly large hull which could be
> pressurized on orbit, but I'm not so sure it
> would be cheap.

These are actually some pretty solid concerns.
I'll give my opinion (because that's what I have
to give) on them.

The Shuttle is being retired, but the Ares V launch
vehicle is expected to use a similar ET. It is
also expected to launch 130 tons to LEO. There's
your equipment density.

Actually, though, I'd suggest less equipment density.
In fact, the first couple of ET's should be outfitted
as living quarters. One could be (tiny) private
sleeping quarters. Could have enough for twenty people.
The next could have a galley and a clinic. The next
could be set aside for exercise, recreation, and showers.
Toilets too. This wouldn't require much more tonnage of
equipment per ET than the smaller modules used now,
would free up a lot of space in the rest of the ISS,
let it carry more people, and YES the crew should do
the assembly. And besides, you're going to be launching
those ET's anyway.

So perhaps you'd only need 50 tons per, and the other
80 tons could be the solar panels, air, water, and such
that there's no getting around having to have.

And the tourists would like it. ^_^