Author Topic: LIVE: Progress M-06M/38P SECOND docking attempt - July 4, 10 (Read 51246 times)

John44 · « **Reply #120 on:** 07/04/2010 05:29 pm »

Expedition 24 - Progress 38 Docking to the ISS
http://www.space-multimedia.nl.eu.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6072

aquarius · « **Reply #121 on:** 07/04/2010 06:23 pm »

Now they have to resolve this issue, because eventually they'll need TORU, right?

Apollo-phill · « **Reply #122 on:** 07/04/2010 06:27 pm »

Space-Pete,UK

My observation of ISS last night was of the Progress-M-05M vehicle and NOT the Progress-M-06M vehicle (which docked today).

In UK , most observers viewing ISS will be looking southwards tracking ISS from west to east.

The 'order' of flight of vehicles last night was (using US TLE data) Progress-M-05M followed by ISS then followed by Progress-M-06M.

I was able to clearly see the Progress-M-05M (my earlier report) ,then ISS but could detect the Progress-M-06M vehicle.

If it stays clear tonight - as it is now - then I should definitely be able to say I 'observed' Progress-M-06M - because its docked at ISS :-) Progress-M-05M should still be 'out front'

Apollo-phill · « **Reply #123 on:** 07/04/2010 06:31 pm »

"........I was able to clearly see the Progress-M-05M (my earlier report) ,then ISS but could detect the Progress-M-06M vehicle......."

should read

"....I was able to clearly see the Progress-M-05M (my earlier report) ,then ISS but could NOT detect the Progress-M-06M vehicle.........."

Sorry but I suffer currently with a benign eruptive eye tumour which causes grey areas. Too much computer screen watching (I was 45 years a computer engineer/software ) before retiring and maybe too many cold nights at tracking scopes in earlier years :-))

Space Pete · « **Reply #124 on:** 07/04/2010 06:54 pm »

Quote from: Apollo-phill on 07/04/2010 06:27 pm

Space-Pete,UK

My observation of ISS last night was of the Progress-M-05M vehicle and NOT the Progress-M-06M vehicle (which docked today).

In UK , most observers viewing ISS will be looking southwards tracking ISS from west to east.

The 'order' of flight of vehicles last night was (using US TLE data) Progress-M-05M followed by ISS then followed by Progress-M-06M.

I was able to clearly see the Progress-M-05M (my earlier report) ,then ISS but could detect the Progress-M-06M vehicle.

If it stays clear tonight - as it is now - then I should definitely be able to say I 'observed' Progress-M-06M - because its docked at ISS :-) Progress-M-05M should still be 'out front'

I don't think it could have been Progress M-05M that you saw last night, as Progress M-05M is currently docked to the ISS.

Progress M-06M was definitely ahead of the ISS (as it flew straight past it on its first docking attempt), but I don't know what you saw behind the ISS. It may have been Progress M-04M (but I think that was de-orbited on 01/07).

Space Pete · « **Reply #125 on:** 07/04/2010 07:31 pm »

From ISS On-Orbit Status Report for 04/07/2010:

Yest kasaniye! At 4:17 PM GMT, Progress M-06M/38P docked successfully to the SM Aft port under KURS autopilot control, followed by a final DPO post-contact thrusting burn, docking probe retraction and hook closure ("sborka") after motion damp-out while the ISS was in free drift for ~20 minutes (4:17 PM to 4:37 PM GMT). At "hooks closed" signal, the SM returned to active attitude control, maneuvering the ISS to LVLH TEA (Torque Equilibrium Attitude) at ~4:37 PM GMT. Control authority returned to US Momentum Management at ~6:10 PM GMT. Russian thrusters were disabled temporarily during clamps install and leak check (6:10 PM to 8:10 PM GMT). [This was the second docking attempt after Friday's aborted docking, now traced to an interruption of the TORU radio signal by the SM's Klest/Simvol television system. The dropout of the TORU teleoperated rendezvous & docking system then generated the command "cancel dynamic operations" which aborted KURS automatic rendezvous mode and switched Progress to a safe, passive flightpath, as designed. For today's docking, TORU, which is usually in "hot standby" mode during KURS-controlled dockings, was not activated.]

Before docking, FE-4 Wheelock shut down the amateur/ham radio equipment (~1:05 PM GMT) to prevent RF interference with the Progress KURS radio control system. [The protective shutters of the Lab, Kibo & Cupola science windows were already closed last night.]

For monitoring 38P rendezvous & docking, CDR Skvortsov & FE-2 Caldwell-Dyson had set up the Ku-band video "scheme" for covering the Progress docking, activating the FGB based A31p SSC (Station Support Computer) laptop for the TV conversion to NTSC & Ku-band of the RS video signal from the SONY HDV camera via the MPEG-2 encoder from FGB & SM, in order to downlink "streaming video" packets via US OpsLAN and Ku-band.

Approach & docking as seen from the +X (backward facing) SM TV camera was monitored by Skvortsov on the SSC1 laptop using the NVIEWER (NASA Viewer) software application.

Tracy Caldwell-Dyson worked with Skvortsov to tear down and remove the MPEG-2 "schemes" streaming video downlink setup, then deactivated the conversion A31p laptop in the FGB.

From ~6:10 PM to 7:25 PM GMT, the crew conducted the standard one-hour leak checking of the docking vestibule and fuel/oxidizer transfer line interface between Progress and SM Aft.

The Russian crewmembers then:
• Opened the hatches (~7:25 PM GMT) and installed the QD screw
clamps (BZV) of the docking & internal transfer mechanism (SSVP) to
rigidize the coupling (Sasha).
• Performed the standard air sampling inside Progress with the Russian
AK-1M air sampler (Fyodor).
• Powered down Progress (~8:05 PM) and installed the
ventilation/heating air duct (Sasha).
• Dismantled the docking mechanism (StM, Stykovochnovo mekhanizma)
between Progress and the SM Aft port (~8:25 PM to 9:25 PM GMT)
[the StM being the "classic" probe-and-cone type, consisting of an
active docking assembly (ASA) with a probe (SSh), which fits into the
cone (SK) on the passive docking assembly (PSA) for initial soft dock
and subsequent retraction to hard dock. The ASA is mounted on the
Progress' cargo module (GrO), while the PSA sits on the docking ports
of the SM, FGB and DC-1].
• Worked in the 38P vehicle to install the electronic LKT local
temperature sensor commutator (TA251MB) of the BITS2-12 onboard
telemetry measurement system and its PZU-1M ROM
(Read Only Memory), using recycled boxes from stowage (Fyodor).

Space Pete · « **Reply #126 on:** 07/04/2010 07:50 pm »

Here's the NASA TV docking video.

JimO · « **Reply #127 on:** 07/04/2010 08:38 pm »

Friday's true miss distance....

Press reports Friday said the Progress "missed the ISS by 2 km", even though we all here could see [on the screen-grabbed Kurs display] a pretty hot negative R-dot at the time that dynamic operations were terminated (at 2.4 km).

This morning a press report clarified that indeed the post-abort trajectory took the Progress much closer to ISS but on a still-safe verified trajectory: 640 meters miss distance.

Source: ITAR-TASS July 4 // 1811 gmt report, quoting Vitaliy Lopota.

Ronsmytheiii · « **Reply #128 on:** 07/04/2010 08:59 pm »

Hungry4info3 · « **Reply #129 on:** 07/05/2010 12:13 am »

When they're ready to discard Progress M-06M, could they possibly have it perform some additional docking manouevers to help troubleshoot what went wrong? Or are they confident they've got it nailed down?

Danderman · « **Reply #130 on:** 07/05/2010 01:21 am »

Quote from: Hungry4info3 on 07/05/2010 12:13 am

When they're ready to discard Progress M-06M, could they possibly have it perform some additional docking manouevers to help troubleshoot what went wrong? Or are they confident they've got it nailed down?

Maybe yes, maybe no. One of the Kurs antennas has been retracted, so it would be impossible to duplicate the state of the spacecraft when the error occurred.

Danderman · « **Reply #131 on:** 07/05/2010 01:31 am »

Quote from: PahTo on 07/04/2010 04:02 pm

Question for those in the know: regardless of how far away the parking orbit, will the added manuevers impact the reboost portion of this vehicle's mission?

Refuelling prop for the Service Module thrusters can be traded for prop required for Progress reboost, so, effectively, no.

Danderman · « **Reply #132 on:** 07/05/2010 01:40 am »

Quote from: JimO on 07/04/2010 08:38 pm

Friday's true miss distance....

Press reports Friday said the Progress "missed the ISS by 2 km", even though we all here could see [on the screen-grabbed Kurs display] a pretty hot negative R-dot at the time that dynamic operations were terminated (at 2.4 km).

This morning a press report clarified that indeed the post-abort trajectory took the Progress much closer to ISS but on a still-safe verified trajectory: 640 meters miss distance.

Source: ITAR-TASS July 4 // 1811 gmt report, quoting Vitaliy Lopota.

Welllllll ..............................

As is well known, one of the early requirements for Russian participation in ISS was to change the Progress approach so that, prior to reaching the flyaround point, the trajectory of Progress would take it some distance from ISS if there were a control system failure, such as if Kurs did not appropriately interface with the motion control system. In other words, the Progress trajectory is always designed to "miss" ISS if something goes wrong, right up to reaching the flyaround point. The only time that Progress is aimed at ISS is during the last 100 meters or so from the docking port.

The flyaround point is about 500 meters distance. I believe that to change the trajectory to aim at ISS would cost about 2 m/sec, at that point.

Its possible that at the moment of the abort, the Progress motion control system didn't know where ISS was, and so responded to the abort with a random breakoff of its approach, which, in this case, brought the Progress into a vector that vaguely approached ISS, but quickly took Progress away.

JimO · « **Reply #133 on:** 07/05/2010 01:15 pm »

Quote from: Hungry4info3 on 07/05/2010 12:13 am

When they're ready to discard Progress M-06M, could they possibly have it perform some additional docking manouevers to help troubleshoot what went wrong? Or are they confident they've got it nailed down?

I was worried they were OVER-confident they had it nailed down, but I am greatly reassured by Lopota's statements post-docking:

Quote

"A commission is working on the cause of the unstable contact. We will definitely get to the source of the unstable contact within the next two weeks," said the president of the Energia rocket and space corporation, Vitaly Lopota.

Another sign they were just guessing is that they ALSO powered down the amateur radio rig in case IT might have been the source of the interference.

Lopota DID also say that they think they have eliminated any issues with the new digital control system as contributing to the abort.

AnalogMan · « **Reply #134 on:** 07/05/2010 02:37 pm »

Quote from: JimO on 07/05/2010 01:15 pm

Another sign they were just guessing is that they ALSO powered down the amateur radio rig in case IT might have been the source of the interference.

I believe that powering down the amateur/ham rig is standard practice prior to any docking/un-docking/relocation of either Soyuz or Progress spacecraft (specifically to avoid possible interference with KURS).

It is also powered down whenever there is an EVA taking place to avoid possible interference with the spacewalkers' radio links.

ralf vandebergh · « **Reply #135 on:** 07/05/2010 02:41 pm »

Image I took of docked Progress M-06M, when the ISS passed here a few hours after docking. Taken in poor seeing, but I expected worse for the results. 10 inch aperture, manually tracked).

Ralf Vandebergh
http://ralfvandebergh.startje.be/vieuw.php?qid=303316

aquarius · « **Reply #136 on:** 07/05/2010 03:41 pm »

Great image!

Space Pete · « **Reply #137 on:** 07/05/2010 03:45 pm »

From Doug Wheelock via Twitter - Progress M-06M approaching SM Aft (in Hi-res)!

Danderman · « **Reply #138 on:** 07/05/2010 07:08 pm »

Was that last photo taken from Poisk?

Space Pete · « **Reply #139 on:** 07/05/2010 08:15 pm »

Quote from: Danderman on 07/05/2010 07:08 pm

Was that last photo taken from Poisk?

Yes, from MRM-2's Aft-Port facing hatch porthole.