Author Topic: MISSION FAILURE: Progress M-27M launch Soyuz-2-1A - April 28, 2015  (Read 336016 times)

Online PerW

  • Member
  • Posts: 90
  • Gothenburg, Sweden
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 194
Twet from:
Jeff Foust ‏@jeff_foust  37m37 minutes ago
Roscosmos statement says the return of 3 ISS crewmembers scheduled for Wed night now planned for early June: http://bit.ly/1E415qE

Offline swlee

  • Member
  • Posts: 5
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 1
Here's the NASA press release confirming the schedule changes posted earlier from Roscosmos:
http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/international-space-station-partners-adjust-spacecraft-schedule
« Last Edit: 05/12/2015 07:08 PM by swlee »

Offline saliva_sweet

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 443
  • Liked: 356
  • Likes Given: 1121
Quote from: Peter King ‏@PeterKingCBS
russian space agency says 3d stage launch vehicle fuel leak caused progress mishap. Need to be fixed before Expedition 44 crew launch.

Online Galactic Penguin SST

Nothing new really - they are still looking at what caused the blowing up at the spacecraft separation plane.

Doesn't this count as an official confirmation that it was in fact a launch failure? I personally count 3rd stage shutdown and s/c sep as parts of launch. I'm just looking at the "2015 in spaceflight" wikipedia page which I believe you are curating and it lists the launch as success and notes s/c failure.

Well seeing as I'm the main user who edits that page....I would say that I would wait for the final conclusion before making that statement.  ;)

(which made me think - what other launch had the rocket stage conclusively caused its main payload to be damaged beyond salvageable state in spaceflight history? I don't think the latest plausible case - Eutelsat W3B - was conclusively proven)
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2466
  • Liked: 1688
  • Likes Given: 656
It's a wiki: you can change it now to reflect what RSA is currently saying, and if the final report says something different, change it again.
Electrons are cheap.

Offline ZachS09

Twet from:
Jeff Foust ‏@jeff_foust  37m37 minutes ago
Roscosmos statement says the return of 3 ISS crewmembers scheduled for Wed night now planned for early June: http://bit.ly/1E415qE

It seems that the return of TMA-15M was delayed by about a month because of the Progress failure. Let's hope Virts and his crew members make it home safely then.
"Liftoff of Falcon 9: the world's first reflight of an orbital-class rocket."

Offline mtakala24

And also the postponement of the landing is because they do not want to go to 3-man crew for an extended period of time. They will want to launch a Progress first, and then a manned vehicle, which would only happen if Progress is a success and at the end of July at the earliest. Nothing to do with safety of a Soyuz landing, but the safety of launches.

Offline PahTo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1490
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 136
  • Likes Given: 393
Quote from: Peter King ‏@PeterKingCBS
russian space agency says 3d stage launch vehicle fuel leak caused progress mishap. Need to be fixed before Expedition 44 crew launch.

From the LIVE section:

Forgive me if this has been covered, but has a "compare and contrast" been done between Soyuz 2-1A and Soyuz U?  I suppose more importantly, with Soyuz FG?  In short, what differences are there with the 3rd stage of the 2-1A and U/FG?  Software?  Obviously the engine is the same.  So how did this "fuel leak" come to pass (in any way related to 2-1A)?

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6633
  • Liked: 899
  • Likes Given: 136
Quote from: Peter King ‏@PeterKingCBS
russian space agency says 3d stage launch vehicle fuel leak caused progress mishap. Need to be fixed before Expedition 44 crew launch.

How in the heck does a fuel leak lead to an over performance?

Offline mtakala24

How in the heck does a fuel leak lead to an over performance?

Leaner mixture -> higher thrust, but hotter than nominal operating point?

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9565
  • Liked: 345
  • Likes Given: 453
Quote from: Peter King ‏@PeterKingCBS
russian space agency says 3d stage launch vehicle fuel leak caused progress mishap. Need to be fixed before Expedition 44 crew launch.

Given how many times we have been burned by hasty Russian statements, or translation errors, I would suggest that this "fuel leak" is nothing but a rumor at the moment.

Especially as no one has suggested that the third stage burned any less than for the nominal period.

How in the heck does a fuel leak lead to an over performance?

Leaner mixture -> higher thrust, but hotter than nominal operating point?

Just because there was a leak does not mean that the avionics would sense a leak and command a different propellant ratio.  The result of a leak would be that the engine would burn until the leaking propellant ran out, and then the engine would stop burning some time prior to the nominal burnout time.

Same as your car. If your gas tank springs a leak, you don't travel the same distance because your car computer adjusts the air/gasoline mix, you just run out of gas and your engine stops working.


« Last Edit: 05/12/2015 10:38 PM by Danderman »

Online Chris Bergin

Bit of an article to keep the coverage of this going - and yes, we did note the schedule changes last week.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/05/soyuz-2-1a-third-stage-progress-m-27m-iss-changes/

And no, I don't have any information on a "fuel leak" so I'm not reporting that.

Offline ddunham

  • Member
  • Posts: 47
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 2
How in the heck does a fuel leak lead to an over performance?

Depends on where the leak is.  If the leak is into the engine or fuel path, you can burn more than you think you are.  Wasn't there a shuttle flight where some injector caps came off during launch and led to more burn than planned?

Offline GClark

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 333
  • Liked: 28
  • Likes Given: 5
(which made me think - what other launch had the rocket stage conclusively caused its main payload to be damaged beyond salvageable state in spaceflight history? I don't think the latest plausible case - Eutelsat W3B - was conclusively proven)

2MV-2 #1 and Cosmos 96 come to mind...

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12675
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3465
  • Likes Given: 578
I read the Roscosmos release as indicating that the stage shutdown later than expected, as we've known.  It isn't clear to me if the tank depressurization events were associated with the normal post-shutdown purge, but timed incorrectly (Progress still attached), or something else.  I'm also suspicious of the translation phrase "separation", which I wonder might actually mean "shutdown".

 - Ed Kyle

Offline saliva_sweet

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 443
  • Liked: 356
  • Likes Given: 1121
Given how many times we have been burned by hasty Russian statements, or translation errors, I would suggest that this "fuel leak" is nothing but a rumor at the moment.

Yes, Peter King doesn't clarify his source and nothing official about a fuel leak has come from Roscosmos and no one else has reported anything similar. This is very much a rumor.

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6633
  • Liked: 899
  • Likes Given: 136
What if the avionics didn't shut down the engine at the proper insertion time and just allowed the engine to run to depletion of one or the other of the commodities?  Running an engine dry usually results in a RUD, right?  And maybe a depress of one of the tanks too by sucking it dry followed by RUD followed by opening it to space because of the RUD?

Offline rsnellenberger

  • Amateur wood butcher
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 585
  • Houston, TX
  • Liked: 55
  • Likes Given: 18
(which made me think - what other launch had the rocket stage conclusively caused its main payload to be damaged beyond salvageable state in spaceflight history? I don't think the latest plausible case - Eutelsat W3B - was conclusively proven)

2MV-2 #1 and Cosmos 96 come to mind...


SpaceX Falcon-1 Flight 3 was a lot more recent...

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7436
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 1434
  • Likes Given: 4475
(which made me think - what other launch had the rocket stage conclusively caused its main payload to be damaged beyond salvageable state in spaceflight history? I don't think the latest plausible case - Eutelsat W3B - was conclusively proven)

2MV-2 #1 and Cosmos 96 come to mind...


SpaceX Falcon-1 Flight 3 was a lot more recent...
The recontact was between first and second stage. They were nowhere to orbital. There was the talks about the SeaLaunch and Intelsat 19, I think?

Offline notsorandom

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1679
  • Ohio
  • Liked: 373
  • Likes Given: 87
(which made me think - what other launch had the rocket stage conclusively caused its main payload to be damaged beyond salvageable state in spaceflight history? I don't think the latest plausible case - Eutelsat W3B - was conclusively proven)

2MV-2 #1 and Cosmos 96 come to mind...
Salyut 2, the upper stage exploded after three days. There was an impact between the station and a part of the upper stage ten days after that rendering the station useless. Both solar panels were lost and the station depressurized.

Tags: