"Extra" Soyuz at ISS in 2013?

[Danderman]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8226309.stm

According to this article, ESA may procure an extra Soyuz in 2013 for its own requirements at ISS. There are other threads about whether this will happen, but what I want to discuss there is HOW would an extra Soyuz dock with ISS in 2013, given the limitations on docking ports at ISS.

Your thoughts are welcome. Let us assume that this extra Soyuz would be attached to ISS for not less than 3 months, and that ISS would have the current configuration of the Russian segment plus MRM1 and MRM2, but not MLM.

[nacnud]

Well that would mean four Soyuz ports if Pirs was still there. So 3 Soyuz and either one of progress or AVT.

I can't see any show stoppers.

[Danderman]

Well that would mean four Soyuz ports if Pirs was still there. So 3 Soyuz and either one of progress or AVT.

I can't see any show stoppers.

Assuming 2 Soyuzes at all times at ISS plus a Progress, three ports would be filled, as they are today. I AM assuming that Pirs will be at ISS until MLM is instaleld, so there would be 4 probe and cone ports.

The question arises because ATV or a taxi Soyuz may also be at ISS for extended periods, filling the 4th port.

[Olaf]

What´s about the fifth Soyuz for Space Adventures?

[robertross]

Wow, I was really shocked/surprised to see Canada included in here!!!!!!

"Esa could then buy its own vehicle, perhaps with the Canadians who are also looking for more seat opportunities."

Now THERE is a great way to make a case to our Canadian government that we need increased funding: to get our astronauts to the ISS during the gap.

[Ben E]

Is Payette in line for a future expedition, or is it just Hadfield?

[robertross]

Is Payette in line for a future expedition, or is it just Hadfield?

Julie Payette has made it known she would like to be on ISS for a long duration mission. I don't know if she would get that chance in the 'near' future, but I am willing to bet good money she WILL be back on ISS before 2020, and fairly confident she will be there by 2016.

I'm sure her priorities now are her family. She has missed a lot of growing up time with her kids.

[Ben E]

I remember reading somewhere that it previously took 4 years to train an expedition crew member and that Steve Lindsey pushed to reduce it to 2 years. Is this the same for Canadian/Japanese/European crew members or do they have to train for longer/shorter times?

When was Thirsk, for instance, assigned to his expedition? How long was his training cycle?

Thanks.

[quickshot89]

atv rear port for an extra progress to dock to? leaves 3 ports left for soyuz

(and yes i know the atv doesnt have one yet, but it is able to accomadate one)

[Stan Black]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8226309.stm

According to this article, ESA may procure an extra Soyuz in 2013 for its own requirements at ISS. There are other threads about whether this will happen, but what I want to discuss there is HOW would an extra Soyuz dock with ISS in 2013, given the limitations on docking ports at ISS.

Your thoughts are welcome. Let us assume that this extra Soyuz would be attached to ISS for not less than 3 months, and that ISS would have the current configuration of the Russian segment plus MRM1 and MRM2, but not MLM.

MLM provides roll control, so no need for second Progress. Progress on Pirs at the moment provides roll control.

As well as Space Adventures aren't the Indians wanting a Soyuz too?

[JayP]

HOW would an extra Soyuz dock with ISS in 2013, given the limitations on docking ports at ISS.

Install an APAS and TRIDAR and dock with PMA3. Soyuz has flown with an APAS before so that isn't a problem. TRIDAR hasn't frown on Soyuz but it shouldn't be a problem given enough engineering budget. Then all you need is to get the cooperation of NASA (to use the PMA).

[Jorge]

HOW would an extra Soyuz dock with ISS in 2013, given the limitations on docking ports at ISS.

Install an APAS and TRIDAR and dock with PMA3. Soyuz has flown with an APAS before so that isn't a problem. TRIDAR hasn't frown on Soyuz but it shouldn't be a problem given enough engineering budget. Then all you need is to get the cooperation of NASA (to use the PMA).

Current plan is for PMA-3 to end up on Node 3 port, rendering it inaccessible to visiting vehicles.

Russians won't use TriDAR; they'll stick with Kurs.

"Given enough engineering budget" = "push the Soyuz seat price even higher".

[Stan Black]

HOW would an extra Soyuz dock with ISS in 2013, given the limitations on docking ports at ISS.

Install an APAS and TRIDAR and dock with PMA3. Soyuz has flown with an APAS before so that isn't a problem. TRIDAR hasn't frown on Soyuz but it shouldn't be a problem given enough engineering budget. Then all you need is to get the cooperation of NASA (to use the PMA).

Current plan is for PMA-3 to end up on Node 3 port, rendering it inaccessible to visiting vehicles.

Russians won't use TriDAR; they'll stick with Kurs.

"Given enough engineering budget" = "push the Soyuz seat price even higher".

Kurs to proximity; then SSRMS!

[Danderman]

MLM provides roll control, so no need for second Progress.

Really? Is that documented, or is that a guess? The reason that I am asking is that the system requirements for FGB were that its thrusters would be made inoperative as soon as docking with Zvezda was complete, so I assumed that MLM would have the same requirement.

[Danderman]

Kurs to proximity; then SSRMS!

Does Soyuz have the automated capability for station-keeping sufficient for SSRMS requirements?

[Stan Black]

MLM provides roll control, so no need for second Progress.

Really? Is that documented, or is that a guess? The reason that I am asking is that the system requirements for FGB were that its thrusters would be made inoperative as soon as docking with Zvezda was complete, so I assumed that MLM would have the same requirement.

Управление МКС по каналу крена с помощью двигателей установленных на гермоадаптере.
http://www.khrunichev.ru/main.php?id=55

[Danderman]

MLM provides roll control, so no need for second Progress.

Really? Is that documented, or is that a guess? The reason that I am asking is that the system requirements for FGB were that its thrusters would be made inoperative as soon as docking with Zvezda was complete, so I assumed that MLM would have the same requirement.

Управление МКС по каналу крена с помощью двигателей установленных на гермоадаптере.
http://www.khrunichev.ru/main.php?id=55

I wonder if this statement refers to the potential of MLM's length allowing a docked Progress to provide roll control for ISS. AFAIK, no Russian module docked to a space station has provided active control since Cosmos 1686 (I am not counting FGB control for Unity at the beginning of ISS). My recollection is that all of the modules docked to the Mir core module became inactive after docking.

[hop]

I wonder if this statement refers to the potential of MLM's length allowing a docked Progress to provide roll control for ISS. AFAIK, no Russian module docked to a space station has provided active control since Cosmos 1686 (I am not counting FGB control for Unity at the beginning of ISS). My recollection is that all of the modules docked to the Mir core module became inactive after docking.

ISS routinely integrates Progress into the attitude control system. Surely a permanent module wouldn't be any much different technically ? If anything it seems like it should be easier, since you'd basically set it up once and forget about it.

There were also the VDUs on Mir http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=15078.0

[Stan Black]

MLM provides roll control, so no need for second Progress.

Really? Is that documented, or is that a guess? The reason that I am asking is that the system requirements for FGB were that its thrusters would be made inoperative as soon as docking with Zvezda was complete, so I assumed that MLM would have the same requirement.

Управление МКС по каналу крена с помощью двигателей установленных на гермоадаптере.
http://www.khrunichev.ru/main.php?id=55

I wonder if this statement refers to the potential of MLM's length allowing a docked Progress to provide roll control for ISS. AFAIK, no Russian module docked to a space station has provided active control since Cosmos 1686 (I am not counting FGB control for Unity at the beginning of ISS). My recollection is that all of the modules docked to the Mir core module became inactive after docking.

I'm sure I read that Priroda's thrusters were used after docking?

http://old.spaceonline.tv/mirnews/dat_mirnws416.txt
http://old.spaceonline.tv/mirnews/dat_mirnws417.txt

[Danderman]

ISS routinely integrates Progress into the attitude control system. Surely a permanent module wouldn't be any much different technically ? If anything it seems like it should be easier, since you'd basically set it up once and forget about it.

There were also the VDUs on Mir http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=15078.0

The ISS computer system is different from Mir; ironically, this makes ISS use of Progess more complicated than on Mir because the ISS European computer cannot interface directly with Progress, matching units must be installed in the control loop every time a Progress docks.

As far as Mir was concerned, the central computer had enough difficulty in controlling the base block thrusters and Progress that controlling the FGB modules was a big problem. The Mir base block computer tended to fail under many circumstances.