Implications of Soyuz MS-10 launch failure on ISS, crew rotation,Commercial Crew

[Svetoslav]

I'd rather prefer to discuss this in a separate thread (if mods think it's inappropriate, they'll delete it).

So I'm starting this thread to discuss:

1. How the launch failure will impact the ISS schedule

2. What will the impact be on the current ISS expedition

3. What will the impact be on Commercial Crew vehicles.

And everything related.


Edit/Lar:
We have several threads for this, please do your best to use the right thread, thanks

Mission thread
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=45365

Space Policy implications thread
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=46543

General implications thread (this one)
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=46541

Please stay out of policy on this thread, we don't necessarily have time to move posts and your post might be deleted.

[Phillip Clark]

Right now the next use of a Soyuz launch vehicle is scheduled to be a 2-1B flying the fourth Lotos mission on October 19th.   The next FG - like the MS 10 launcher - is scheduled to be Progress-MS on October 31st.   Of course, expect these dates to be revised.

[MATTBLAK]

Holy cow! I'm away from my PC an hour or two and I miss the drama. At least they are alive and safe. This is underlining, ever more strongly the need for the U.S. Commercial crew operations to get underway

[kevinof]

So how long can the current crew stay on the ISS. What's the lifetime of the Soyuz that is docked.  Is it a gating factor and if so can it be extended?

[Crispy]

Unlikely that Soyuz will be returned to flight before December, when Expedition 57 are supposed to be coming home. How much longer  can their mission be extended?

[tyrred]

I'd rather prefer to discuss this in a separate thread (if mods think it's inappropriate, they'll delete it).

So I'm starting this thread to discuss:

1. How the launch failure will impact the ISS schedule

2. What will the impact be on the current ISS expedition

3. What will the impact be on Commercial Crew vehicles.

And everything related.

1. Negatively

2. Negatively

3. Possibly accelerated schedule

Illustrates what putting all your eggs in one basket means WRT crew transport to ISS, for any and all participants. 
We now have a failed Soyuz crew launch, which should put Soyuz on stand-down until the cause and fix can be determined, a Soyuz docked to ISS with an indeterminate cause of a pressure leak, and a mountain of paperwork that NASA has admitted as a major obstacle to keeping a schedule for transport of crew to ISS on a domestic vehicle.  Chickens are coming home to roost.

[Phillip Clark]

In 1983 the mission of Soyuz-T 9 was extended by about a month (after the Soyuz-T 10-1 launch abort) which took the spacecraft past is proven "sell-by date".   So maybe Soyuz-MS can be pushed to ~230 days?

The launch abort was in September 1983 and the next crew was launched in February, so just a five months stand down.

[leetdan]

"REQUIREMENTS, RESOURCE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT FOR DECREWING/RECREWING SCENARIOS OF THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION"

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20130013650.pdf

It goes without saying, any decrewing scenario would heavily impact commercial crew schedules.  That is, I don't think DM-1 can happen if ISS is unmanned.

[Svetoslav]

Can ISS survive in unmanned mode and for how long?

[MATTBLAK]

I wonder how feasible a one-off 'caretaking' crew of two - like after STS-107 - could be until investigations are fully complete?

EDIT: By that, I mean a pair of 'volunteers' who would risk a Soyuz launch and flight when the current vehicle up there simply must return to Earth in a few months?

[woods170]

Holy cow! I'm away from my PC an hour or two and I miss the drama. At least they are alive and safe. This is underlining, ever more strongly the need for the U.S. Commercial crew operations to get underway

Same here. I was in a sprint review and retrospective session. Good to see the Soyuz abort system did what it is supposed to do (three out of three now*) and the the crew is alive and safe.

Needless to say this is going to have some repercussions. The ones I fear most are the political repercussions.

*Three out of three:
- Soyuz 18A (1975)
- Soyuz  T10-1 (1983)
- Soyuz MS-10 (2018)

[MattBaker]

Do the battery change spacewalks have to be done before the HTV leaves or could they store the old batteries somewhere along the station and deorbit them sometime in the future?

And could they do a spacewalk right now with a 3 person crew?

[Phillip Clark]

The Soyuz spacecraft launch escape system was not used on Soyuz 18-1 - the Soyuz propulsion system was used to separate the spacecraft from the Blok A/Blok I assembly.

[DaveS]

And could they do a spacewalk right now with a 3 person crew?

Yes, happened all the time during the STS-107 standdown. Only two crew-members required.

[Rebel44]

"REQUIREMENTS, RESOURCE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT FOR DECREWING/RECREWING SCENARIOS OF THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION"

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20130013650.pdf

It goes without saying, any decrewing scenario would heavily impact commercial crew schedules.  That is, I don't think DM-1 can happen if ISS is unmanned.

IIRC DM-1 was pushed back from November/December due to schedule conflicts at ISS (which obviously no longer exist after today), so DM-1 might happen sooner than currently scheduled - especially if current Soyuz capsule can stay a bit longer than planned.

[woods170]

First the sabotage (as claimed by the Russian authorities) of Soyuz MS-09 and now a launch abort on Soyuz MS-10. I suspect that Director Bridenstine will be sitting down with the commercial crew project managers and telling them that he wants to see the launch schedule for Dragon and Starliner trending left not right from this point forwards and on a dramatic scale.

Nope, not gonna happen. The mountain of review paper work to be processed for CCP is much more important than a stand down of Soyuz that will last only a few months.

[MATTBLAK]

Manned Space Programs of the World; Listen Up! You are about to endure a sh1tstorm of criticism and whining from those parts of the world press and (ugh) social media that dislikes or despises human spaceflight and spaceflight in general. You must be bold, but leave no stone unturned in resolving the problems. You've got to up your game, get those Dragons, Starliners and Soyuz's flying. Now is not the time to buckle under the strain of adversity.

Fortune and the Future favours the bold. Ad-Astra!

[woods170]

The Soyuz spacecraft launch escape system was not used on Soyuz 18-1 - the Soyuz propulsion system was used to separate the spacecraft from the Blok A/Blok I assembly.

Yes, I know. But the Soyuz propulsion system is part of the abort system during the final phase of ascent to orbit.
The Soyuz abort system is more than just the launch escape system.

Hence why I stated "three out of three"

Same applied to the Apollo CSM SPS engine. When the LAS was gone, shortly after first-stage cut-off and separation, the CSM still retained the ability to abort off the launch vehicle, courtesy of the SPS engine.

[Darkseraph]

It shows the importance of having a launch escape system. They may only ever be used on rare occasions but when they do they save a crew's life! After this, I don't think NASA will certify BFR for astronaut transport and will demand Dragon 2 be kept online for the foreseeable future.

[woods170]

It shows the importance of having a launch escape system. They may only ever be used on rare occasions but when they do they save a crew's life! After this, I don't think NASA will certify BFR for astronaut transport and will demand Dragon 2 be kept online for the foreseeable future.

Don't be silly. NASA isn't in the process of certifying BFS for use by NASA astronauts. And BFS was never going to replace Crew Dragon for ISS crew rotation missions. BFS is way too massive for that. The docking-loads, imparted on the aging ISS structure, alone were a showstopper for "BFS-to-ISS".