Author Topic: FAILURE: Soyuz 2-1B - Meridian launch - December 23, 2011 (Read 105493 times)

Prober · « **Reply #40 on:** 12/23/2011 02:46 pm »

Russian satellite falls back to Earth after launch
http://news.yahoo.com/russian-satellite-falls-back-earth-launch-150234260.html;_ylt=AnhmLgZtEU90EFIoYZaB6FCs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNqbjJxdGdzBG1pdAMEcGtnA2ViZTJiYzNmLWE2ZGMtMzYyNy05ZWMzLTYwMjZmYWZkZmI1ZQRwb3MDMjAEc2VjA2xuX0xhdGVzdE5ld3NfZ2FsBHZlcgM0NDk2YjBiMC0yZDc3LTExZTEtYmQ1Yi1hNjU1MWVjOTNmOWY-;_ylv=3

Danderman · « **Reply #41 on:** 12/23/2011 02:56 pm »

Some basic data:

Progress is launched by Soyuz-U.
Soyuz TMA-M is launched by Soyuz-FG
Meridien is launched by Soyuz 2-1b

The difference between Soyuz-U and Soyuz FG are the combustion chamber injectors, and allegedly, some quality control procedures.

The difference between Soyuz-FG and Soyuz 2-1b are the avionics (Soyuz 2-1b has a digital flight control system, whereas Soyuz FG is analog) and the 3rd stage of Soyuz 2-1b is significantly different - it uses a different engine and the prop tanks are different, although the stage is externally identical.

If the 3rd stage engine stopped burning some seconds into flight, it would be seem to be the same type of failure as the Soyuz failure earlier this year, although the engines are different.

woods170 · « **Reply #42 on:** 12/23/2011 02:59 pm »

Quote from: Rahkashi on 12/23/2011 01:14 pm

Okay. So, does this failure have anything to do with the previous Soyuz failure? I understand that the 2.1-b has a different third stage then on the previous Soyuz.

The Progress failure was in the RD-0110 type third stage engine. It had a blocked gas-generator fuel line.
The Soyuz 2-1B has an RD-0124 type third stage engine. It's basic design descends from the RD-0110. However. the RD-0124 is of the closed cycle type. The RD-0110 is not.

B. Hendrickx · « **Reply #43 on:** 12/23/2011 02:59 pm »

Video of the launch as seen from the Ural mountains region already available on YouTube :

as seen from Chelyabinsk :

as seen from Miass :

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #44 on:** 12/23/2011 03:00 pm »

Quote from: Danderman on 12/23/2011 02:56 pm

Some basic data:

Progress is launched by Soyuz-U.
Soyuz TMA-M is launched by Soyuz-FG
Meridien is launched by Soyuz 2-1b

The difference between Soyuz-U and Soyuz FG are the combustion chamber injectors, and allegedly, some quality control procedures.

The difference between Soyuz-FG and Soyuz 2-1b are the avionics (Soyuz 2-1b has a digital flight control system, whereas Soyuz FG is analog) and the 3rd stage of Soyuz 2-1b is significantly different - it uses a different engine and the prop tanks are different, although the stage is externally identical.

If the 3rd stage engine stopped burning some seconds into flight, it would be seem to be the same type of failure as the Soyuz failure earlier this year, although the engines are different.

Thanks! That's a hugely helpful post on the commonality question.

Also, there's a post-docking Russian press conference in 15 minutes.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=25257.375

We'll see if anything is noted at that.

Danderman · « **Reply #45 on:** 12/23/2011 03:03 pm »

Quote from: jcm on 12/23/2011 02:14 pm

The claim of a Tobolsk impact zone seems surprising given how late in the burn things failed... I would have expected it to be semi-near-orbital by +421s and make it to the Pacific, but I haven't run the numbers yet... does anyone have a feel for this?

The actual quote about Tobolsk was along the lines of "if the 3rd stage never started, the debris would fall somewhere around Tobolsk", in other words, no one ever said that the debris actually landed near Tobolsk. Everyone seems to be going with the engine shutdown at +421 seconds, ie in the middle of the 3rd stage burn.

Danderman · « **Reply #46 on:** 12/23/2011 03:04 pm »

Everyone should note that very few Russian launches use the Soyuz 2-1b variant. This should have little impact on upcoming launches, except that everything will be double checked.

Galactic Penguin SST · « **Reply #47 on:** 12/23/2011 03:13 pm »

Interesting note: all four previous launches of the Meridian satellite used the Soyuz-2-1a rocket. Did the payload got modifications that led to the switch to a higher performance rocket?

patchfree · « **Reply #48 on:** 12/23/2011 03:15 pm »

But all 2.1b launches performed flawlessly...

JimO · « **Reply #49 on:** 12/23/2011 03:19 pm »

Popovkin:
This is a significant failure, this proves this area of the space industry is in sort of a crisis…

Satori · « **Reply #50 on:** 12/23/2011 03:21 pm »

On the TMA-03M, Popovkhin says that the problem was obviously on the third stage engine, but wants to wait for the telemetry analysis.

JimO · « **Reply #51 on:** 12/23/2011 03:25 pm »

Q: One of a kind, what?
This engine was created in 2009. We created special ad hoc commissions, it looks like not everything can be checked from special charts. We do need to find out what happened, the site is in the south where we found the pieces that fell on the ground from the spacecraft…
Q:
Yes, there are problems. We need to modernize, this is aging of main resources…
We need to optimize, is now at level of 33%,
We need to optimize and modernize the tracking systems.
Aging of human resources given troubles in the ‘90’s, people left and nobody came to replace them..
Average age is 43 years, but in fact main bulk is those over 60 and under 30. We don’t have the middle aged group. And we need to replace lots of leaders and heads…

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #52 on:** 12/23/2011 03:29 pm »

Thanks Jim! I caught a bit too:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=25257.msg843240#msg843240

Didn't really hide from the problems, which they seem to have big time. Scary.

JimO · « **Reply #53 on:** 12/23/2011 03:30 pm »

Wow! NK magazine just asked a final question, in English -- Popovkin scowled, stood up, and walked out without any further comments.

Martin FL · « **Reply #54 on:** 12/23/2011 03:33 pm »

Do we yet know what failed? Upper Stage or Staging etc?

Danderman · « **Reply #55 on:** 12/23/2011 03:46 pm »

Quote from: Martin FL on 12/23/2011 03:33 pm

Do we yet know what failed? Upper Stage or Staging etc?

If the report of failure at +421 seconds is accurate, the failure occurred during the middle of the 3rd stage burn.

Lee Jay · « **Reply #56 on:** 12/23/2011 03:55 pm »

This is not what I wanted to wake up to.

rdale · « **Reply #57 on:** 12/23/2011 03:56 pm »

Quote from: JimO on 12/23/2011 03:30 pm

Wow! NK magazine just asked a final question, in English

What did he ask?

Galactic Penguin SST · « **Reply #58 on:** 12/23/2011 03:58 pm »

Quote from: rdale on 12/23/2011 03:56 pm

Quote from: JimO on 12/23/2011 03:30 pm
Wow! NK magazine just asked a final question, in English

What did he ask?

I believe he was asking about whether the launch failure would affect the ISS Progress/Soyuz flights...

racshot65 · « **Reply #59 on:** 12/23/2011 04:03 pm »

Quote from: JimO on 12/23/2011 03:30 pm

Wow! NK magazine just asked a final question, in English -- Popovkin scowled, stood up, and walked out without any further comments.

Was he offended that they asked in English, or by the question they asked ?