upvote
There aren’t even doors between sections. Airlocks are serious things, there is one or two for station for EVA. There are multiple hatches for docking spacecraft.

One of the innovations of ISS is larger docking adapter with bulkhead that is removed after docking. Russian section still uses hatches. All of the cables go through the docking adapter or hatch which makes impossible to close door or quickly disconnect.

reply
If things go wrong, they're already in the vehicle supposed to bring them back. It might be upsetting to be 3 locked doors away from your best way to come back home
reply
This is the right answer - if it goes wrong they are already placed in the escape vehicle, sitting in their space suits.
reply
deleted
reply
> vehicle supposed to bring them back.

Love the use of the word supposed there.

Dragon is built by Space X that has a track record of blowing things up.

reply
Is there any rocket-builder without a history of blowing things up?
reply
Why did you feel the need to post this comment?
reply
>Why did you feel the need to post this comment?

Maybe parent feels like rocket science is a field that should have few launch failures?

I can't give you a quantitative answer since I'm usually focused on new research rather than what company/nation did said research... but their stuff does seem to blow up on the launchpad more often than NASA's :-)

reply
NASA does not produce any launch vehicles. It produces payloads and buys launch services from others.

Unless you count test artifacts, an actual catastrophic failure of a rocket on a launchpad (or even in flight) has been rare in the last 10 years.

reply
Not for crew carrying craft.
reply
Look on the bright side, at least you're not riding in Boeing's capsule.
reply
Well, I won't claim to know the answer, but "please do not move between different airlocked sections while this work is underway" sounds a lot like the definition of "shelter" to me
reply
In this case, per the article, "shelter" meant "shelter in a capsule capable of returning to earth and put on the spacesuits that you wear during return to earth".

I.e. leaving the actual ISS structure entirely.

reply
I would guess they're worried about breaking something, but thanks for the clarification (and apologies for not having RTFA)
reply
There are normally-open air-tight hatches between modules. Various utility connections and air ducts are normally run through the open hatches so it would take a bit of work to disconnect these connections before they could be closed.

Not exactly something you want to be doing under time pressure.

reply
What’s the reason against separate conduit for utilities?
reply
If such a conduit would connect two sections that the hatch is meant to isolate, you would have to make the conduit and everything running through it airtight, even under a catastrophic loss of air. If the conduit didn't seal as well as the hatch, which is meant to withstand hard vacuum on the other side of it, it would defeat the purpose of the hatch.
reply
They just didn't have enough of reserved general purpose connections for future use. I guess this woild be especially the case with the Russian modules, which were literally surplus Soviet manned space army outposts(such a thing do not make a lot of sense, they did it anyway).
reply
Those would need to be connected during docking and sealed separately anyway if you wanted to seal the hatch. More failure points.
reply
deleted
reply
Just a guess: Harder to build and operate with more failure modes and less opportunity for intervention.
reply
You'd still need to pull out the utilities and close a now second hatch in the conduit to seal the thing. What would be the point?
reply
I think the service module is both structurally and functionally critical. If it is failing and you do not know why, catastrophic failure is presumably possible, not just some air loss. A hole or crack in the module is now apparently double the size it was until recently, that is a trend that presumably could continue to rapid unscheduled disassembly.
reply
> Naively, I would assume that there are airlocks between the different sections of the ISS.

There are not. The airlocks on the ISS are either docking modules for spacecraft, for spacewalks, or for deploying satellites.

The crew shelters in the vehicles so that in case of an emergency they can evacuate immediately.

reply
Compression loss can lead to a decompression of sorts if I had to guess... it is a vaccum out there. The force from a decompression can yield a chain reaction or strongly disrupt the entire station.
reply
[dead]
reply