No flights with this upgraded version since Progress M1-11 (13P) in '04
As I understand this version can carry more fuel that the M series. Is that on the expence of dry cargo?
With the ATV flying, I suppose refueling/reboost from Progress will no longer be required?
Progressing will still be needed. They are cheaper ( AFAIK ) than ATV or HTV. They get sent up 3 to 4 times a year. ATV is no more than once a year.
nrh - 30/3/2008 3:31 PM
No flights with this upgraded version since Progress M1-11 (13P) in '04
As I understand this version can carry more fuel that the M series. Is that on the expence of dry cargo?
M1 isn't really an "upgrade" AFAIK, it's just optimized for flying a different mix of cargo.
With the ATV flying, I suppose refueling/reboost from Progress will no longer be required?
Perhaps in theory, but in practice progress will continue to serve in these roles as well.
Not only Progress is still needed the Russians are even still going ahead with it's successor Parom and it's cargo container.
Also Progess and later Parom will launch more often as well as being cheaper plus you have the pride issues Russia must be able to do everything it's self if needed.
Maybe it's not just pride but common sense on the Russian's part.
Patchouli - 30/3/2008 4:01 PM
Also Progess and later Parom will launch more often as well as being cheaper plus you have the pride issues Russia must be able to do everything it's self if needed.
Don't confuse powerpoint with actual plans. Until they fund and start bending metal, it's the former.
Maybe it's not just pride but common sense on the Russian's part.
Not to mention that it is part of their commitment to the project.
Patchouli - 30/3/2008 7:01 PM
Also Progess and later Parom will launch more often as well as being cheaper plus you have the pride issues Russia must be able to do everything it's self if needed.
Parom is not real program, just studies
nrh - 30/3/2008 5:31 PM
No flights with this upgraded version since Progress M1-11 (13P) in '04
As I understand this version can carry more fuel that the M series. Is that on the expence of dry cargo?
No, it is primarily at the expense of water. Since the shuttle fuel cells generate water as a byproduct of electricity generation, the space shuttle was to deliver all water to ISS, hence the development of the Progress M1 which replaced the water tanks with additional fuel.
After the Columbia accident, Russia reverted to the Progress M to deliver water to ISS while the shuttle fleet was grounded. Perhaps they could have reverted to the M1 after return-to-flight, but the announcement of shuttle retirement in 2010 has understandably made them reluctant to do so.
What are the specific features of the Progress M-xxM series? We seem to have the first one, Progress M-01M launch, next August ?