Author Topic: Speculation on the consequences for the ISS from the recent Soyuz failure  (Read 73875 times)

Offline hop

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3352
  • Liked: 553
  • Likes Given: 891
1) I wish to read the study that tells us this is "within expectations".  Sorry don't buy it.
http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/logsum.html

This was the 116th launch in the ISS program. No LV in the world has demonstrated much better than a 0.99 success rate.

Soyuz U historical success rate is ~0.97. This failure comes after 54 consecutive successful Soyuz U launches.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428

1.  Don't you think there is an offer on the table for a jet from Houston to Star City?

2.   Or at the very least an ask for all the available raw data to be shared?


1.  No, there is no rush

2.  No, not all the raw data, that is for the russians to work with.  However, the US will be kept informed.

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729

1.  Don't you think there is an offer on the table for a jet from Houston to Star City?

2.   Or at the very least an ask for all the available raw data to be shared?


1.  No, there is no rush

2.  No, not all the raw data, that is for the russians to work with.  However, the US will be kept informed.

Ever been to Russia Jim?    Maybe we can send you for a NASA review of the material.
 
 
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Offline Skylab

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 477
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 55

1.  Don't you think there is an offer on the table for a jet from Houston to Star City?

2.   Or at the very least an ask for all the available raw data to be shared?


1.  No, there is no rush

2.  No, not all the raw data, that is for the russians to work with.  However, the US will be kept informed.

Ever been to Russia Jim?    Maybe we can send you for a NASA review of the material.
 
 
Me being the devil's advocate, how would you feel about the opposite approach?

Offline malenfant

  • Member
  • Posts: 93
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 0
Continued from other thread.

The risk to the program of leaving the station unmanned would transform that debate out of all recognition.  I don't think nasa could be seen to be jeopardising a $100m asset because of those medical concerns.  Of the crew members effected only one would be US anyway.

Okay, am I correct in concluding you wouldn't mind 'just' 1 dead US crew member? If you're truly French and your English is that limited, don't even try posting!

Heh..

Nobody is talking about dead crew.  A dead crew can't do maintenance.  My point is that the 6 month limit is some arbitrary invention of Nasa.

Much longer spaceflight durations are possible because he Russians have flown them.  My point is that when the station is at risk then rules like this (which are arbitrary and overly risk-averse in the first place) would likely be gone in a second.
« Last Edit: 08/26/2011 07:51 am by malenfant »

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6160
  • California
  • Liked: 677
  • Likes Given: 195
The 6 month duration is not arbitrary. It matches with the Soyuz orbital lifetime.

Offline Phillip Clark

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
  • Hastings, England
  • Liked: 557
  • Likes Given: 1078
While Mir was still o[perating there were reports that the Russians had decided that for space station missions ~6 months was the optimum stay time for a crew.   That is a reason that the ever-increasing flight times of Mir residencies ended, with the Poliakov visit being a one-off, originally planned as an 18 months flights but cut back to 14 months by the time the launch took place.

Of course, at that time time the Soviets had vastly more experience with such things than had NASA.
I've always been crazy but it's kept me from going insane - WJ.

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Space Watcher
  • Liked: 1332
  • Likes Given: 173
Still very serious, but thanks to 135 not as serious as it could have been.


Hopefully the Russians can get this resolved prior to the next Soyuz launch, otherwise we will have more serious implications.
3-30-2017: The start of a great future
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline MP99


1.  Don't you think there is an offer on the table for a jet from Houston to Star City?

2.   Or at the very least an ask for all the available raw data to be shared?


1.  No, there is no rush

2.  No, not all the raw data, that is for the russians to work with.  However, the US will be kept informed.

Ever been to Russia Jim?    Maybe we can send you for a NASA review of the material.

Me being the devil's advocate, how would you feel about the opposite approach?

Given commonality with crewed launches...

How many Russian crew flew on Shuttle after Columbia? What level of insight did the Russians have into the investigation & RTF?

Have to say, this report makes for scary reading:-

Quote
The failures cannot be put down to chance, but directly result from the poor state of the industry, experts said.

"The series of accidents with Russian satellites is not by chance. It is a crisis in the sector," Lisov said.

"This is an alarm call. It shows that monitoring has failed. Before, they would not have let through a defect at the checking stage."

Even the deputy chief designer of Energia space corporation, Valery Ryumin, acknowledged to Echo of Moscow radio station that standards had fallen.

"Of course quality is worsening, we have to admit this," he said.

Quote
The Progress crash, which comes after five satellites have failed to reach their orbits since December, hinders Russia's hopes of using its space prowess to commercial advantage.

Newly appointed Roskosmos boss Popovkin has said that he is keen to cut down on manned launches and do more lucrative satellite launches.

Even if procedures improve for future production, isn't there some concern that hardware already in the pipeline has gone through the same lax procedures?

cheers, Martin

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7201
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2050
  • Likes Given: 1962
Have to say, this report makes for scary reading:-

Quote
Igor Lisov, an expert at the Novosti Kosmonavtiki journal [said], "It is almost 100 percent certain that it was a production error or down to bungling operators."

Lisov may be jumping to conclusions there.  We don't know that any of the prior (successful) Soyuz vehicles would have succeeded on this mission.  For example this vehicle may have been hit by freak atmospheric conditions that caused a mechanical failure.  In other words, this vehicle may have been just as perfect as all the preceding ones, yet experienced a radically different outcome.  But of course maybe what Lisov means by "almost 100 percent" is something like 98%, and not 99.999%.  (Those two values are "almost" the same, aren't they? ;))
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline Galactic Penguin SST

Have to say, this report makes for scary reading:-

Quote
Igor Lisov, an expert at the Novosti Kosmonavtiki journal [said], "It is almost 100 percent certain that it was a production error or down to bungling operators."

Lisov may be jumping to conclusions there.  We don't know that any of the prior (successful) Soyuz vehicles would have succeeded on this mission.  For example this vehicle may have been hit by freak atmospheric conditions that caused a mechanical failure.  In other words, this vehicle may have been just as perfect as all the preceding ones, yet experienced a radically different outcome.  But of course maybe what Lisov means by "almost 100 percent" is something like 98%, and not 99.999%.  (Those two values are "almost" the same, aren't they? ;))

Well the NK is probably the best Russian spaceflight magazine around, so he would probably know a lot more about the management and production problems in the Russian aerospace industry than most of us.

Plus you can contact him by a simple PM if you have any questions.  ;)
Astronomy & spaceflight geek penguin. In a relationship w/ Space Shuttle Discovery. Current Priority: Chasing the Chinese Spaceflight Wonder Egg & A Certain Chinese Mars Rover

Offline aquanaut99

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1049
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 0
Just my two cents,in view of complaints coming from the RSA that manned Spaceflight consumes more than 50% of the available budget i have to wonder if there is any stomach left for LEO anywhere in the World,i think as the US has shown there may not even be much of a stomach for anything other than commercial flights that return a profit.
China also needs justification for every launch and a Military reason seems to be the only thing that gives their way of Govt give the green light to a project.
it seems to me that the days of manned spaceflight might be coming to an end until the World economy recovers.

My sense at this time is that Russia would not view the end of the ISS as a terrible loss.
i believe many see no point in LEO, and as has been said by many what is the point of flying just to re-learn the data about human endurance already known from 50 years of manned spaceflight?.

If Soyuz could not return to flight other than research what has Russia got to lose?
yes the price of a Soyuz seat but that is peanuts compared to the profit from launching satellites.
it might happen sooner than we thought that manned spaceflight will be as dead as a dodo. >:(

Very possible, and it in fact matches some of my own observations.

And yes, read between the lines: The Russians appear more and more fed up with manned spaceflight. The USA, ofc, has just recently terminanated its govt manned spaceflight, all claims to the contrary notwithstanding. We all know SLS and MPCV will never fly (at least not with crew).

To all those still advocating a moon return or a manned Mars mission: Better learn to be satisfied with little. You should already cheer if we even have humans beyond our atmosphere, for that is far from being a given in future.

Personally, I believe HSFs high-watermark was 1969-1972 and that it will probably never be matched again, much less surpassed.
« Last Edit: 08/26/2011 10:51 am by aquanaut99 »

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6160
  • California
  • Liked: 677
  • Likes Given: 195
Personally, I believe HSFs high-watermark was 1969-1972 and that it will probably never be matched again, much less surpassed.

Never? Wow, you are quite the pessimist.

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4869
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1096
Personally, I believe HSFs high-watermark was 1969-1972 and that it will probably never be matched again, much less surpassed.

On average per year...
1. How many people went into space 1969-1972?
2. How many people went into space 2000-2010?
3. How many HSF missions* were there 1969-1972?
4. How many HSF missions* were there 2000-2010?


* HSF mission = launch with people on board.

Offline AlexCam

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 124
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
According to news sources, Soyuz needs to be cleared for launch until late November of this year, or the station will be completely abandoned. This is because of rules regarding the landing of Soyuz during the winter months of December and January, which is deemed high risk.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
We're looking pretty dumb for not finishing development of at least a CRV, now, aren't we?
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline aquanaut99

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1049
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 0
According to news sources, Soyuz needs to be cleared for launch until late November of this year, or the station will be completely abandoned. This is because of rules regarding the landing of Soyuz during the winter months of December and January, which is deemed high risk.

So... the beginning of the end for HSF?

Offline Bubbinski



So... the beginning of the end for HSF?

I would hope not!  But I would hope minds get focused on minimizing the gap.  First things first....is there a "drop dead" date for recertification of the Soyuz launch vehicle?  Secondly, has a launch date been picked for the first Soyuz unmanned flight (Glonass)?  Thirdly, is the next Progress being moved up?

Longer term: how long can ISS go unmanned? 
I'll even excitedly look forward to "flags and footprints" and suborbital missions. Just fly...somewhere.

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10390
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 1415
  • Likes Given: 171
According to news sources, Soyuz needs to be cleared for launch until late November of this year, or the station will be completely abandoned. This is because of rules regarding the landing of Soyuz during the winter months of December and January, which is deemed high risk.

So... the beginning of the end for HSF?

If you prefer to create hype - yes. If you listen to NASA - no. If the worst-case scenario occurs, it's abandoned (which it can do just fine) until otherwise ready to be used again.

Offline SpacexULA

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1756
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 73
According to news sources, Soyuz needs to be cleared for launch until late November of this year, or the station will be completely abandoned. This is because of rules regarding the landing of Soyuz during the winter months of December and January, which is deemed high risk.

So... the beginning of the end for HSF?

If you prefer to create hype - yes. If you listen to NASA - no. If the worst-case scenario occurs, it's abandoned (which it can do just fine) until otherwise ready to be used again.

This is really just an absolutely amazing situation  we have had human beings in LEO at all times from 1986 till today, now 35 years later we are going to have to abandon LEO....

It's enought to make you sick.
No Bucks no Buck Rogers, but at least Flexible path gets you Twiki.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1