Author Topic: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A  (Read 586893 times)

Offline Stan Black

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3212
  • Liked: 383
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #500 on: 09/08/2010 09:02 pm »
Block DM seem to leave two "aux motor" in orbit according orbital elements (see last Glonass launch).
Nicolas and I were discussing if it was the "SOZ" motors (used on block DM for ullage), but we can't find any info about jettisoning them.

Question is : what are these "aux motor" ?

(pictures from http://www.kosmonavtika.com/lanceurs/proton/partie2/4.html )

The SOZ are the auxiliary motors?

Do their orbits match these?

11982-100F396x19077x5191982-100G377x19074x521 
21983-084G395x19165x5191983-084H375x19165x520 
31983-127G398x19051x5201983-127H425x19046x520 
41984-047G401x19132x5201984-047H420x19136x519 
51984-095G376x19153x5201984-095H397x19154x519 
61985-037G406x19150x5191985-037H386x19150x520 
71985-118K414x19132x6481985-118L414x19132x647 
81986-071G408x19130x6471986-071H412x19126x648 
91987-036F175x15854x6501987-036H195x11992x647DM failure
101987-079G407x19118x6491987-079H407x19118x648 
11            DM failure
121988-043G415x19111x6491988-043H412x19120x648 
131988-085F413x19112x6491988-085G411x19115x648 
141989-001G406x19114x6481989-001H407x19113x649 
151989-039G609x18872x6501989-039H632x18850x651 
161990-045F635x18859x6531990-045G647x18836x652 
171990-110G416x19126x6491990-110H417x19126x647 
181991-025F403x19084x6491991-025G397x19121x647 
191992-005G412x19127x6471992-005H412x19126x648 
201992-047G406x19130x6491992-047H401x19131x648 
211993-010G402x19130x6481993-010H401x19131x648 
221994-021G405x19128x6481994-021H399x19133x648 
231994-050G414x19119x6491994-050H416x19118x648 
241994-076G418x19095x6491994-076H410x19104x647 
251995-009G394x19136x6481995-009H391x19137x648 
261995-037J413x19113x6481995-037K413x19114x648 
271995-068G402x19120x6481995-068H408x19115x648 
281998-077H395x19125x6481998-077J394x19129x648 
292000-063G405x19124x6472000-063H400x19118x648 
302001-053G385x19132x6482001-053H385x19131x648 
312002-060E393x19133x6482002-060F391x19135x647 
32            Briz-M
332004-053G397x19141x6472004-053H397x19142x648 
342005-050E387x19141x6482005-050F387x19140x649 
352006-062G416x19119x6492006-062H412x19119x647 
362007-052F399x19130x6482007-052G400x19130x649 
372007-065F401x19129x6462007-065G401x19129x648 
382008-046G397x19143x6482008-046H397x19144x647 
392008-067G464x19591x6492008-067H398x19138x647 
412009-070E396x19139x6482009-070F399x19133x647 
402010-007G398x19137x6462010-007H400x19136x648 
422010-041G     2010-041H      

Thanks to Mr. McDowell
http://planet4589.org/space/log/satcat.txt

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 225
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #501 on: 09/08/2010 10:44 pm »
I'd take a multichamber, single shaft engine with little chance of combustion instability over the massive development problem that was F-1.  There seems to be a size limit on Russian HC chambers.
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8662
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1169
  • Likes Given: 287
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #502 on: 09/09/2010 01:41 pm »
However the Russians do not throw out a good working rocket quite as much as the US and so you see the same rockets in use 40-50 years latter.

Don't know, The RL-10 is the workhorse of US upper stages and it dates back to the 60's. The AJ-10 (Delta II upper, Shuttle OMS, Apollo CSM) dates back to Vanguard. The main engine of the pre RD-180 Atlas and Delta II's came from the Navaho Intercontinental Cruise Missile program.

It's only with the EELV, and new COT's launchers (Falcon 9, Taurus II) that new rocket engines have been adopted. Before that the last major change was the SSME back in the early 1980's.


So isn't that to Pathfinder's point?  US has developed noteworthy engines every decade.  (Taurus II doesn't fall into that category though, since the NK-33 is Russian).

Since when ? The US developed and deployed a bunch of engines in the 1950's/early 1960's, Developed one new engine (SSME) in the 70's while still relying on for most things the engines from 50's and 60's, then had to fast forward to the 90's before RS-68, an SSME evolution. We still rely on the RL-10 for upper stages, and only over the last 10 years are replacing a Navaho derived engine in the first stages of the Atlas, Delta while retiring Titan. And then new Merlin from SpaceX.

We have used over and over the same engines (updated yes) for decades, and are just now (last 10 years) replacing them. 
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline JimO

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2000
  • Texas, USA
  • Liked: 481
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #503 on: 09/13/2010 03:42 pm »
Did these questions ever get answered?  I have suddenly become much more interested in this topic!  Thanks!


I ran across some discussion about the software for the TMA's Neptune IDS on a Russian site (http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7050&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=121) that seemed to indicate that Neptune had 100 KSLOC in Pascal and 30 KSLOC in assembly language.  (I won't comment on what I think about those decisions :o)

Have you ever seen any similar discussions regarding the software that's being written to go in the TsVM-101 for the 700-Series+ Soyuz vehicles?  I'd like to get some understanding of the complexity and the magnitude of the effort - particularly if the 101 is going to eventually replace both the ARGON-16 in the instrumentation/prop module and the KS020M in the descent module.

According to posts at the same site (http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7050&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=121) the TsVM-101 is a homegrown computer with a 1B812 processor (24 MIPS, 2MB, 50W) - which seemed to be a 486 derivative.   Is that the same processor type that was used in the Neptune's Integrated Control Consoles (ICCs)?  Are both of these newer flight computers evolved from the KSO20M currently in the DM?  Do all 3 boxes share software developers from the same shop using the same s/w dev tools, etc.?

(BTW - the website for the TsVM-101 vendor seems to be down.  I hope that doesn't imply anything in regards to their flight products  ;))

Thanks in advance for any answers to this deluge of questions!

Offline JimO

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2000
  • Texas, USA
  • Liked: 481
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #504 on: 09/13/2010 04:13 pm »
Fundamental questions about the new TsVM-101 computer in the 'digital Soyuz'.

Where is it? Which module?

Will the October 'digital Soyuz' also have the "lighter digital equivalent called МБИЦ, MBITS", in the Instrumentation Module to replace the five separate analog systems, or will the TsVM-101 perform that role there, as well as replacing the Argon unit?

Or will the TsVM-101 be in the Descent Module, replacing the KSO20M computer as well?

I need more specific on which flight computers where are being replaced by what. Thanks!


Offline Nickolai

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 314
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #505 on: 09/13/2010 05:37 pm »
Also, does anyone know how much weight is being saved by these changes?

Offline anik

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7780
  • Liked: 969
  • Likes Given: 369
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #506 on: 09/13/2010 06:40 pm »
Where is it? Which module?

TsVM-101 computer is in the instrumentation/propulsion module of Soyuz TMA spacecraft on place of Argon-16 computer.

Will the October 'digital Soyuz' also have the "lighter digital equivalent called МБИЦ, MBITS", in the Instrumentation Module to replace the five separate analog systems, or will the TsVM-101 perform that role there, as well as replacing the Argon unit?

MBITS system will be on Soyuz TMA-01M spacecraft.

Or will the TsVM-101 be in the Descent Module, replacing the KSO20M computer as well?

Installation of TsVM-101 computer in the descent module of Soyuz TMA spacecraft with replacing of KS-020M computer by TsVM-101 computer is planned in future.

Also, does anyone know how much weight is being saved by these changes?

Argon-16 computer's weight was in eight times more than weight of TsVM-101 computer.

Offline JimO

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2000
  • Texas, USA
  • Liked: 481
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #507 on: 09/13/2010 07:19 pm »
Spasibo bolshoye, this is very timely and useful.

Are there any specific questions that others here want me to ask
at the Expedition press conference on Sept 15 here in Houston?

Aside from photos of the computers themselves, I cannot find any illustrations of the changes. Are there any suggestions or advice for further searching?

How about the "малогабаритная бортовая информационная телеметрическая системая" (МБИТС), that will replace the five deparate analog telemetry systems?

One more question -- the 'guidance computer' that was scavenged off Progress vehicles and brought back on shuttles -- that was the КС020М, right?
« Last Edit: 09/13/2010 07:28 pm by JimO »

Offline Captain Scarlet

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 272
  • Cambridgeshire, England
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #508 on: 09/16/2010 04:36 pm »
Is it true one cosmonaut screamed at the engineers down the loop for failing in their job while his Soyuz tumbled to Earth, resulting in his death?

Offline ycs86

  • Member
  • Posts: 15
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #509 on: 10/03/2010 06:01 pm »
What is it exactly? And what is it purpose and how does it work? Does it stay in the way when opening the front hatch after a successful docking?

Online DaveS

  • Shuttle program observer
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8444
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 1076
  • Likes Given: 61
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #510 on: 10/03/2010 06:09 pm »
What is it exactly? And what is it purpose and how does it work? Does it stay in the way when opening the front hatch after a successful docking?
That's the docking probe and I believe it is removed post-docking from the station side.
"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 Mark Dave

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1096
  • Ruined
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #511 on: 10/03/2010 06:11 pm »
It's the docking probe. The ball point extends out prior to to docking and when it contacts the interface port it retracts. You can see it on the Rassvet module here

Offline jabe

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1217
  • Liked: 168
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #512 on: 10/03/2010 06:12 pm »
watch the video from


it shows how it works really well.. watch from 1:31..shows a cutaway on what happens to the probe after docking...
jb
« Last Edit: 10/03/2010 06:13 pm by jabe »

Offline ycs86

  • Member
  • Posts: 15
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #513 on: 10/03/2010 06:19 pm »
Ok, thanks guys for the explanation! :) 

Offline Space Pete

Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #514 on: 10/03/2010 06:49 pm »
Yup, it's a docking probe. The probe latches onto the docking drogue on the ISS (see Fig. 1), which is what provides the initial capture for the Soyuz. One the relative motion has dampened out, the probe retracts and brings the two docking collars together for hard dock.

One the ISS drogue hatch is opened (see Fig. 2), the entire probe assembly then swings out of the way like a door to allow access between the Soyuz and ISS.
NASASpaceflight ISS Editor

Offline Space Pete

Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #515 on: 10/03/2010 06:54 pm »
On the Progress, the probe assy. can actually be separated from the hatch (see Fig. 3 & 4) to allow larger payloads to be transferred through the hatchway (the probe precludes this). The probe cannot be separated from the hatch on the Soyuz for safety reasons (if the Soyuz had to suddenly undock in an emergency, the crew would not have time to retrieve & re-install the probe). If they undocked without the probe installed, then they would not be able to re-dock with the ISS if the all-clear was given.
« Last Edit: 10/03/2010 06:56 pm by Space Pete »
NASASpaceflight ISS Editor

Offline ycs86

  • Member
  • Posts: 15
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #516 on: 10/03/2010 07:05 pm »
Yup, it's a docking probe. The probe latches onto the docking drogue on the ISS (see Fig. 1), which is what provides the initial capture for the Soyuz. One the relative motion has dampened out, the probe retracts and brings the two docking collars together for hard dock.

One the ISS drogue hatch is opened (see Fig. 2), the entire probe assembly then swings out of the way like a door to allow access between the Soyuz and ISS.


Very very interesting! Thank you! :)

Offline ycs86

  • Member
  • Posts: 15
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #517 on: 10/03/2010 07:05 pm »
On the Progress, the probe assy. can actually be separated from the hatch (see Fig. 3 & 4) to allow larger payloads to be transferred through the hatchway (the probe precludes this). The probe cannot be separated from the hatch on the Soyuz for safety reasons (if the Soyuz had to suddenly undock in an emergency, the crew would not have time to retrieve & re-install the probe). If they undocked without the probe installed, then they would not be able to re-dock with the ISS if the all-clear was given.


Very nice illustration! Thank you too!

Offline Mark Dave

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1096
  • Ruined
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #518 on: 10/08/2010 09:31 pm »
I wonder how do the cosmonauts strap into the Soyuz? Well from photos the only entry is the orbital module. So does this mean the crew gets  in and straps themselves in or does someone help?

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10127
  • Liked: 615
  • Likes Given: 702
Re: Soviet/Russian space programs Q&A
« Reply #519 on: 10/08/2010 10:02 pm »
The probe cannot be separated from the hatch on the Soyuz for safety reasons (if the Soyuz had to suddenly undock in an emergency, the crew would not have time to retrieve & re-install the probe). If they undocked without the probe installed, then they would not be able to re-dock with the ISS if the all-clear was given.

This sounds rather odd, there is really a protocol for re-docking at ISS after a crew abandons ship? Is the Soyuz supposed to loiter somewhere near ISS waiting for an all-clear? How long is the Soyuz supposed to wait, and how does this impact emergency landing zone calculations?

My assumption was that after a Soyuz departs ISS during an emergency, it would land as soon as possible.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1