Author Topic: MISSION FAILURE: Progress M-27M launch Soyuz-2-1A - April 28, 2015  (Read 336126 times)

Offline Mark McCombs

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 259
  • SW Washington
  • Liked: 109
  • Likes Given: 1171
Well congrats to team Soyuz anyway.   8)  A beautiful launch. 


I certainly hope the Progress team can get their Kurs antenna issue sussed.

Edit:  I see now that there is much more going on.  I hope the vehicle does not die before the chance to correct the problem(s).
« Last Edit: 04/28/2015 04:51 PM by Mark McCombs »
"Are you sure you want to go to Red Alert, Sir? It does mean changing the bulb." - Kryten
"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory". LLAP - Leonard Nimoy

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12574
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 2752
  • Likes Given: 410
Letting the ISS crew know that they are going to replan for the delay in docking.

Congratulations to Roscosmos for the successful launch! Fingers crossed the telemetry and Kurs issues can be successfully resolved.
« Last Edit: 04/28/2015 07:49 AM by Steven Pietrobon »
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.


Offline Chris Bergin

Can they dock it without KURS? Switch to TORU and dock it manually?

(Apparently, is the answer).

Offline Chris Bergin

Waiting to pass over ground stations in 30 mins or so to have a better assessment. Someone keep an eye on that....I've got to go to work ;)

Now they are saying they "may" have deployed.

Offline chewi

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 122
  • Liked: 37
  • Likes Given: 5
Launch video


Online Galactic Penguin SST

Hmm....this Russian report claims that the intermittent telemetry isn't due to anything wrong with the Progress, but with the Soyuz rocket - which put it 30 km too high! (presumably referring to the apogee)
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Online Galactic Penguin SST

Progress should be re-entering Russian ground stations' range around this time...
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Offline Svetoslav

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 904
  • Bulgaria
  • Liked: 297
  • Likes Given: 39
Latest information from Interfax:

http://www.interfax.ru/russia/438968

Only two of five antennas Kurs have been deployed.

Online Galactic Penguin SST

Hmm....this Russian report claims that the intermittent telemetry isn't due to anything wrong with the Progress, but with the Soyuz rocket - which put it 30 km too high! (presumably referring to the apogee)

Looks like this theory may be gaining some traction after NORAD just released orbit elements....

40619/2015-024A: 127 x 251 km x 51.57 deg.
40620/2015-024B: 123 x 306 km x 51.67 deg.

(nominal plan is 193+-2 x 238+-5 km x 51.67+-0.03 deg.)

If so........controllers must get control of the ship quick before it is too late.  :-X
« Last Edit: 04/28/2015 08:36 AM by Galactic Penguin SST »
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Online Galactic Penguin SST

OK they are getting telemetry from the Progress. Quick, steer into manual control before it fell into the atmosphere!  :o
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Online Galactic Penguin SST

Now showing the screen from Kurs so it seems its normal...  ::)
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Online Galactic Penguin SST

Hmm....someone reminded me that NORAD's orbit of object B (which is much higher than that of A) seems to corresponds to what Progress should end up after making its first burn automatically at 07:52 UTC (the epoch is at 08:28 UTC). If so, maybe it has already done the 2nd one (at 08:29 UTC) as well which would probably put it to safety for now.  :-\
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Offline DaveS

  • Shuttle program observer
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7758
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 286
  • Likes Given: 12
Hmm....someone reminded me that NORAD's orbit of object B (which is much higher than that of A) seems to corresponds to what Progress should end up after making its first burn automatically at 07:52 UTC (the epoch is at 08:28 UTC). If so, maybe it has already done the 2nd one (at 08:29 UTC) as well which would probably put it to safety for now.  :-\
Not quite. The perigee is still low, just barely above the NASA definition of Entry Interface (400k ft, 121.920 km).
"For Sardines, space is no problem!"
-1996 Astronaut class slogan

"We're rolling in the wrong direction but for the right reasons"
-USA engineer about the rollback of Discovery prior to the STS-114 Return To Flight mission

Offline asmi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 657
  • Ontario, Canada
  • Liked: 96
  • Likes Given: 90
Hmm....someone reminded me that NORAD's orbit of object B (which is much higher than that of A) seems to corresponds to what Progress should end up after making its first burn automatically at 07:52 UTC (the epoch is at 08:28 UTC). If so, maybe it has already done the 2nd one (at 08:29 UTC) as well which would probably put it to safety for now.  :-\
That's my thinking too. The question is if NORAD's orbit is before that second burn or after it (in latter case launch obviously went rather wrong).

Online Galactic Penguin SST

Hmm....someone reminded me that NORAD's orbit of object B (which is much higher than that of A) seems to corresponds to what Progress should end up after making its first burn automatically at 07:52 UTC (the epoch is at 08:28 UTC). If so, maybe it has already done the 2nd one (at 08:29 UTC) as well which would probably put it to safety for now.  :-\
Not quite. The perigee is still low, just barely above the NASA definition of Entry Interface (400k ft, 121.920 km).

What I said assumes that the planned 2nd burn was performed which would change its orbit from the reported value above - it should be at the original apogee so if nothing else the perigee should raise by a bit even if the orbit's off.
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Online speedevil

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 324
  • Fife
  • Liked: 144
  • Likes Given: 128
NASA TV is still talking about issues with KURS - and mentioning the orbit only as if it was nominal.

Offline asmi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 657
  • Ontario, Canada
  • Liked: 96
  • Likes Given: 90
As for KURS issue - as far as I understand, this Progress is to use new KURS antennae (which are to be used on Progress-MS), so issues with them are not totally unexpected.

Offline DaveS

  • Shuttle program observer
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7758
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 286
  • Likes Given: 12
As for KURS issue - as far as I understand, this Progress is to use new KURS antennae (which are to be used on Progress-MS), so issues with them are not totally unexpected.
The antennas themselves might be new but what about their deployment mechanisms? Are those new or are they the same as old Kurs antennas?
"For Sardines, space is no problem!"
-1996 Astronaut class slogan

"We're rolling in the wrong direction but for the right reasons"
-USA engineer about the rollback of Discovery prior to the STS-114 Return To Flight mission

Offline Liss

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 905
  • Moscow, Russia
  • Liked: 108
  • Likes Given: 8
I don't like AoP values for A and B orbit at all. To have perigee near ascending node, you'd have a significant pitch angle at insertion. Well, and the B orbit 123x305 km is distorted against the planned 193x238 km.
Don't know if the very first perigee in this orbit is survivable (not in the sense of immediate reentry -- but going to safe mode in this situatuion means essentially the same).
This message reflects my personal opinion based on open sources of information.

Tags: