“Moscow, we have a problem!”
Damages on the Spektr module and the solar arrays after a collision. Crédits : NASA
1997 was marred by a series of near-catastrophes aboard Mir, including fires, a breakdown in the oxygen generator, repeated computer problems, collisions, plus leaks in the ventilation and temperature systems.
Damages on the solar arrays after a collision. Crédits : NASA
Astronauts were having to spend between 30 and 75% of their in-orbit time Mir’s ageing equipment, at the expense of science research. Eventually considered too dangerous for its inhabitants and too costly to maintain, Mir’s fate became a topic for debate.
|
In the bid to give Mir a new lease of life, funding was pledged for a range of possible solutions—from business ventures and tourism to in-orbit satellite assembly.
Demonstrations held within the Russian space agency, by employees fearing redundancy and the prospect of securing “mere token seats in the International Space Station”, were echoed by public demonstrations in Moscow against “the genocide of the Russian people” that Mir’s destruction was felt to represent. |
Meanwhile, the US had fears for the safety of its astronauts and was concerned that Russia’s financial entanglement in a Mir rescue operation would impact on its commitment to the International Space Station.
After some wavering, Mir’s destruction warrant was signed by the Russian prime minister in January 2001, and it was finally deorbited on 23 March of the following year.
After some wavering, Mir’s destruction warrant was signed by the Russian prime minister in January 2001, and it was finally deorbited on 23 March of the following year.
