Anyone knows if the last known launch date of February 1st is still holding or not? I think chances are that air-space and maritime closure notices should have been issued for this by now if this is true....
How long does it take to change out the pad equipment between the set-up for a Soyuz-2-1V launch vs. a Soyuz-2-1A or Soyuz-2-1B launch? This operation would add to the pad turn-around time, would it not?Zubenelgenubi
Quote from: zubenelgenubi on 01/28/2015 03:19 pmHow long does it take to change out the pad equipment between the set-up for a Soyuz-2-1V launch vs. a Soyuz-2-1A or Soyuz-2-1B launch? This operation would add to the pad turn-around time, would it not?Zubenelgenubithe only items removed and added to configure between the versions is the launch pedestal arm extensions and that is only 16 bolts per pedestal or 64 bolts total. there is little piping to the core stage that will need a tad bit of adjustment and caps installed at the ends of unused piping when the outboard boosters arent flown.
Previous information was that this launch was schedule for September 4, 2015. Do we have any other info about this?
Quote from: Satori on 08/23/2015 03:59 pmPrevious information was that this launch was schedule for September 4, 2015. Do we have any other info about this?Well, NK's "official schedule" is now showing it as 3Q/4Q 2015.I do wonder what will happen at Plesetsk for the remaining part of 2015 - early in the year I remember that they planned as many as 10 Soyuz rockets launching from there this year. Only 3 has flown so far.
According to this picture, launch will take place on September 4th, 2015.Payload will be Kanopus-ST and satellite КЮА-1, whatever it is.
Quote from: Nicolas PILLET on 07/18/2015 08:02 amAccording to this picture, launch will take place on September 4th, 2015.Payload will be Kanopus-ST and satellite КЮА-1, whatever it is.Ooh wish I could read the numbers on that chart properly. KYuA-1 mass 15.8 kg, is that right?
Quote from: jcm on 10/07/2015 02:18 pmQuote from: Nicolas PILLET on 07/18/2015 08:02 amAccording to this picture, launch will take place on September 4th, 2015.Payload will be Kanopus-ST and satellite КЮА-1, whatever it is.Ooh wish I could read the numbers on that chart properly. KYuA-1 mass 15.8 kg, is that right?I think, this is right. Did some attempts to improve the readability of the photo and "15.8 kg" seems to be correct.BTW: the KYuA-1 looks somewhat similar to the SKRL-756 calibration spheres on the maiden flight of the Soyuz-2-1v
Test firehttp://www.russianspaceweb.com/nk33.html#2015"On October 5, 2015, the United Engine Corporation, ODK, announced that it had conducted a successful 40-second test firing of the NK-33 engine to certify it for the use on the Soyuz-2-1v rocket
On October 5, 2015, the United Engine Corporation, ODK, announced that it had conducted a successful 40-second test firing of the NK-33 engine to certify it for the use on the Soyuz-2-1v rocket, which at the time was being prepared for its second launch. The firing tested an upgraded combustion chamber and a newly manufactured ignition chamber. (Both components were modified in the wake of an Antares rocket failure in 2014.) The ODK said that the final processing of the fifth NK-33 engine would be completed within next two weeks before its shipment to RKTs Progress, the developer of the Soyuz rocket family.
Quote from: Prober on 10/07/2015 01:37 pmTest firehttp://www.russianspaceweb.com/nk33.html#2015"On October 5, 2015, the United Engine Corporation, ODK, announced that it had conducted a successful 40-second test firing of the NK-33 engine to certify it for the use on the Soyuz-2-1v rocketYou left out the most important part of the entire post:QuoteOn October 5, 2015, the United Engine Corporation, ODK, announced that it had conducted a successful 40-second test firing of the NK-33 engine to certify it for the use on the Soyuz-2-1v rocket, which at the time was being prepared for its second launch. The firing tested an upgraded combustion chamber and a newly manufactured ignition chamber. (Both components were modified in the wake of an Antares rocket failure in 2014.) The ODK said that the final processing of the fifth NK-33 engine would be completed within next two weeks before its shipment to RKTs Progress, the developer of the Soyuz rocket family.
anik's list on NK is now showing this launch scheduled on December 9 - not sure what his source is.
Expected lanch time as come and gone... Checking for updates.
http://www.vesti.ru/videos/show/vid/664606/#This video on YouTube:According to the reporter, the names of these satellites - Kosmos-2511 and Kosmos-2512.
Закупка и поставка услуги по организации перевозки МКА 14Ф147 авиатранспортом, иных сопутствующих услуг, связанных с перевозкой.
I also read Anatoly's article on his website. Interesting!That information also explains why these satellites received Kosmos designations.It also explains why we had no live launch coverage.The Seasat conspiracists claimed that the satellite power failure was a cover for stopping the satellite's unforeseen abilities from disclosing the position of submerged submarines.(I think the above conspiracy theory is baloney.)Is there anything in the open literature to suggest that such a capability CAN exist, much less does?
Some more video (low quality) from different angles from Russian TV channel Zvezda.http://tvzvezda.ru/news/vstrane_i_mire/content/201512051945-t5ta.htm
A first object has been cataloged by USSTRATCOM2015-071C/41100 in 208 x 681 km x 98.19°
Quote from: input~2 on 12/05/2015 04:52 pmA first object has been cataloged by USSTRATCOM2015-071C/41100 in 208 x 681 km x 98.19°This could be the second stage remaining in orbit
One of the satellites did not separate from the Volga upper stage.
Hm, strange - there have been three objects registered in orbit (2015-071A [41098], 2015-071B [41099] and 2015-071C [41100]), which hints, that both satellites have separated.
Quote from: Skyrocket on 12/06/2015 10:26 amHm, strange - there have been three objects registered in orbit (2015-071A [41098], 2015-071B [41099] and 2015-071C [41100]), which hints, that both satellites have separated.Comparing the first and the second Soyuz-2-1V launches, I think that 41100 is the second stage.
I doubt that it was Kanopus-ST that failed to separate - the Russians would be alarmed immediately if it doesn't. The passive sphere on the other hand.....Also this new Russian report seems to hint on that too - of the 2 satellites named as "K" and "S" in the report, "S" separated while "K" didn't. The rest is left to the reader as an exercise.....
Quote from: Galactic Penguin SST on 12/06/2015 03:32 pmI doubt that it was Kanopus-ST that failed to separate - the Russians would be alarmed immediately if it doesn't. The passive sphere on the other hand.....Also this new Russian report seems to hint on that too - of the 2 satellites named as "K" and "S" in the report, "S" separated while "K" didn't. The rest is left to the reader as an exercise..... Yeah, I was puzzled by that. I was worried that 'K' was Kanopus and 'S' was sfera (sphere)... what's your interpretation?
Quote from: Artyom. on 12/05/2015 05:18 pmSome more video (low quality) from different angles from Russian TV channel Zvezda.http://tvzvezda.ru/news/vstrane_i_mire/content/201512051945-t5ta.htm That last angle looked like the media were allowed to place a camera near the pad, something I can't remember seeing for Plesetsk launches (or Russian launches in general). Must admit I kind of forgot about this one thinking it was after Atlas/Cygnus, then the Atlas got delayed. So, NK-33's still work apparently, but nobody will ever roll the dice on the remaining Americanized ones.
As the "Y", an emergency situation, which arose during the second launch in the history of the carrier rocket "Soyuz-2.1V" actually led to the loss of the latest remote sensing satellite "Canopus-ST". According to preliminary information, the spacecraft could not be separated from the upper stage, so that the whole bunch began to move on the wrong path. A few days later the satellite with which it would be possible to detect foreign submarines at depth, enter the dense layers of the atmosphere, where destroyed and burned.
Kommersant reporting that it was Kanopus-ST that failed to deploy.http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2871516Bad Google translation:QuoteAs the "Y", an emergency situation, which arose during the second launch in the history of the carrier rocket "Soyuz-2.1V" actually led to the loss of the latest remote sensing satellite "Canopus-ST". According to preliminary information, the spacecraft could not be separated from the upper stage, so that the whole bunch began to move on the wrong path. A few days later the satellite with which it would be possible to detect foreign submarines at depth, enter the dense layers of the atmosphere, where destroyed and burned.
So in summary, as I understand it: - Original object A was Volga + Kanopus-ST, first in circular orbit then sent for a de-orbit which resulted in a low perigee orbit sometime on December 6 between 01:23 and 09:38 UTC - Original Object B is the radar reflector sphere KYuA in circular orbit since separation - Original Object C is the Soyuz 2nd stage in a low perigee orbit
Quote from: input~2 on 12/07/2015 05:58 amSo in summary, as I understand it: - Original object A was Volga + Kanopus-ST, first in circular orbit then sent for a de-orbit which resulted in a low perigee orbit sometime on December 6 between 01:23 and 09:38 UTC - Original Object B is the radar reflector sphere KYuA in circular orbit since separation - Original Object C is the Soyuz 2nd stage in a low perigee orbitThe only problem I can see is that the identity of the satellites come from one single newspaper, which isn't much. You might want to dig into the latest posts on it at NK for further thoughts, which only muddles the water even further...
So, is this a Volga failure or a Kanopus ST failure? One of the accounts appeared to assign the problem to the payload, but isn't the upper stage in charge of performing the separation events, etc.? - Ed Kyle
OK in view of this news report I think I need to retract my statement...
A source in the space industry explained to Tass that the reason for abnormality has been preliminary established - one of four [pyro] hold-downs, holding Kanopus did not work
When is the last time a payload was lost due to failure to separate from the upper stage?Are there any other instances of a primary payload failing to separate from the upper stage, but any secondary payloads do separate as planned?Thank you in advance.
Quote from: zubenelgenubi on 12/07/2015 03:50 pmWhen is the last time a payload was lost due to failure to separate from the upper stage?Are there any other instances of a primary payload failing to separate from the upper stage, but any secondary payloads do separate as planned?Thank you in advance.Hmm... there was the SAC-B/HETE Pegasus failure in 1996 in which both primary payloads failed to separate.Can't think of one with a successful secondary and failed primary, offhand.
According to JSpOC, Object A (Volga+Kanopus ST?) will re-enter in 15 hours
Quote from: input~2 on 12/07/2015 08:56 amAccording to JSpOC, Object A (Volga+Kanopus ST?) will re-enter in 15 hoursAccording to their most recent prediction, reentry should now occur between 03:54 and 09:54 UTC on December 8
According to JSpOC, Volga+Kanopus-ST reentered over the South Atlantic (35S 001W) at 05:43 UTC
A new object D was cataloged early this morning with a decreasing altitude in an orbit close to that of Object A (87 x 280 km x 98.14° at 0155UTC)Maybe that was Kanopus after the faulty hold-down let off!
JSpoC now calls object D the Volga. This implies they concluded Kanopus and Volga did split on Dec 7.It's not fully clear they know for sure which of A and D are Kanopus and Volga.
Is one of them a 14Ф147?QuoteЗакупка и поставка услуги по организации перевозки МКА 14Ф147 авиатранспортом, иных сопутствующих услуг, связанных с перевозкой.http://www.zakupki.gov.ru/223/purchase/public/purchase/info/common-info.html?noticeId=3089261
Quote from: Stan Black on 12/05/2015 03:34 pmIs one of them a 14Ф147?QuoteЗакупка и поставка услуги по организации перевозки МКА 14Ф147 авиатранспортом, иных сопутствующих услуг, связанных с перевозкой.http://www.zakupki.gov.ru/223/purchase/public/purchase/info/common-info.html?noticeId=3089261Think Kanopus-ST was article 14Ф147, because it was manufactured by Polyot?
I should mention that Kanopus did not fail to separate from Volga, but rather from a special adapter carried by Volga as a payload. Nothing touching the launch vehicle and upper stage actually failed. In other words, it's as if a subsatellite carried by Apollo 17 had failed to deploy around the Moon, would that be a launch vehicle failure?
Quote from: Danderman on 03/07/2016 05:50 pmI should mention that Kanopus did not fail to separate from Volga, but rather from a special adapter carried by Volga as a payload. Nothing touching the launch vehicle and upper stage actually failed. In other words, it's as if a subsatellite carried by Apollo 17 had failed to deploy around the Moon, would that be a launch vehicle failure?The key words there are "as a payload". This is the same adapter design that was carried on the previous Volga mission,so it seems like it's standard Volga equipment. But perhaps it was integrated/managed as part of the payloadrather than the launch vehicle. I still suspect the separation command is controlled from the Volga - just becauseit's my impression that's usually how launch vehicles operate. So I am not convinced by your Apollo 17 analogy.
Quote from: zubenelgenubi on 12/05/2015 03:38 pmI also read Anatoly's article on his website. Interesting!That information also explains why these satellites received Kosmos designations.It also explains why we had no live launch coverage.The Seasat conspiracists claimed that the satellite power failure was a cover for stopping the satellite's unforeseen abilities from disclosing the position of submerged submarines.(I think the above conspiracy theory is baloney.)Is there anything in the open literature to suggest that such a capability CAN exist, much less does?Search for "internal waves" and submarines. The focus of research seems to be on using microwaves to detect subtle ocean surface effects. My supposition. - Ed Kyle
ТЗ «Создание ракетно-космического комплекса «Канопус-СТ» космической системы-демонстратора освещения подводной и гидрометеорологической обстановки на базе МКА» (шифр РКК «Канопус-СТ»)
