Author Topic: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak  (Read 96530 times)

Offline SWGlassPit

  • I break space hardware
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 567
  • Liked: 418
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #300 on: 08/31/2018 10:28 pm »
I'm sure I must have missed something. Makes no sense to me that this has been identified as most likely MMOD damage and is an exit hole with no apparent entry hole. How is this possible? Also the repair was on the inside liner and not main pressure hull, so this implies that the liner is sealed all around and that the external leak still exists. Therefor the air should slowly escape from the space between the liner and outside hull, correct? And this is not a concern?

There is no inside liner -- what you see in the pictures in the article IS the pressure shell.  Claims that it is "most likely MMOD damage" are simply false.  It's not MMOD, period.

What do you think it is?
It sure looks like a drilled hole to me.

Offline ellindsey

  • Member
  • Posts: 61
  • New Jersey
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #301 on: 09/01/2018 12:07 am »
I'm sure I must have missed something. Makes no sense to me that this has been identified as most likely MMOD damage and is an exit hole with no apparent entry hole. How is this possible? Also the repair was on the inside liner and not main pressure hull, so this implies that the liner is sealed all around and that the external leak still exists. Therefor the air should slowly escape from the space between the liner and outside hull, correct? And this is not a concern?

There is no inside liner -- what you see in the pictures in the article IS the pressure shell.  Claims that it is "most likely MMOD damage" are simply false.  It's not MMOD, period.

What do you think it is?
It sure looks like a drilled hole to me.
I agree.  Circular scoring inside the hole, tooling marks on the surface nearby that look like a drill bit skipping, and a scuff mark on the bulkhead nearby that looks like the drill chuck rubbing against it.  That looks exactly like a hole made by a handheld power drill.

Online MattBaker

  • Member
  • Posts: 73
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #302 on: 09/01/2018 01:06 am »
This modern, realistic and real-time version is surely the most ambitious adaption of Agatha Christie's "Hull Breach on the Space Station" yet.

And neither "everyone did it together" nor "a stranger snuck aboard and did it" makes sense so I'm really excited to see what new ending they have come up with.

Too much?

Offline Jeff Lerner

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
  • Toronto, Canada
  • Liked: 80
  • Likes Given: 47
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #303 on: 09/01/2018 01:47 am »
I'm sure I must have missed something. Makes no sense to me that this has been identified as most likely MMOD damage and is an exit hole with no apparent entry hole. How is this possible? Also the repair was on the inside liner and not main pressure hull, so this implies that the liner is sealed all around and that the external leak still exists. Therefor the air should slowly escape from the space between the liner and outside hull, correct? And this is not a concern?

There is no inside liner -- what you see in the pictures in the article IS the pressure shell.  Claims that it is "most likely MMOD damage" are simply false.  It's not MMOD, period.

What do you think it is?
It sure looks like a drilled hole to me.

Ok..you've posted several comments eliminating MMOD as the cause...you've also said it looks like a drilled hole..

Based on your profile, you're obviously in the space business..do you or someone you know have actual details as to what
The cause of the problem is ??..can you share your facts and source instead of being coy about the cause ??

Offline SWGlassPit

  • I break space hardware
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 567
  • Liked: 418
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #304 on: 09/01/2018 03:00 am »
I'm sure I must have missed something. Makes no sense to me that this has been identified as most likely MMOD damage and is an exit hole with no apparent entry hole. How is this possible? Also the repair was on the inside liner and not main pressure hull, so this implies that the liner is sealed all around and that the external leak still exists. Therefor the air should slowly escape from the space between the liner and outside hull, correct? And this is not a concern?

There is no inside liner -- what you see in the pictures in the article IS the pressure shell.  Claims that it is "most likely MMOD damage" are simply false.  It's not MMOD, period.

What do you think it is?
It sure looks like a drilled hole to me.

Ok..you've posted several comments eliminating MMOD as the cause...you've also said it looks like a drilled hole..

Based on your profile, you're obviously in the space business..do you or someone you know have actual details as to what
The cause of the problem is ??..can you share your facts and source instead of being coy about the cause ??

Folks who work in the space industry tread a fine line on what they can say in a public seeing, between export control laws, proprietary information, and international political considerations, it's a fine needle to thread. Demanding sources is not going to get you anywhere.

I say it's not MMOD because MMOD is what I do for a living, and I know very well what MMOD damage looks like. I say it looks like a badly drilled hole because I've badly drilled a hole or three in my lifetime. If I had to guess the cause, I'd say someone drilled a hole where they weren't supposed to. Anything beyond that is not for me to say.

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 761
  • Istanbul turkey
  • Liked: 322
  • Likes Given: 1381
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #305 on: 09/01/2018 03:47 am »
If that is a drilled hole...there are so so many places to start being concerned it is hard to figure out which one should be viewed with alarm the most...

Offline biosehnsucht

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 322
  • Liked: 113
  • Likes Given: 258
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #306 on: 09/01/2018 04:26 am »
If it was drilled in space : why were they drilling holes at all?

If it was drilled before launch : why didn't it leak earlier?

Surely the theory that they drilled out the MMOD created hole to what we see in the photos in order to make the hole easier to access / assess / repair by making it larger so they could more easily stuff whatever in it makes more sense?

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 761
  • Istanbul turkey
  • Liked: 322
  • Likes Given: 1381
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #307 on: 09/01/2018 04:39 am »
If it was drilled in space : why were they drilling holes at all?

If it was drilled before launch : why didn't it leak earlier?

Surely the theory that they drilled out the MMOD created hole to what we see in the photos in order to make the hole easier to access / assess / repair by making it larger so they could more easily stuff whatever in it makes more sense?

Making the hole larger to fix it, makes no sense to me...

Offline RotoSequence

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1166
  • Liked: 850
  • Likes Given: 908
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #308 on: 09/01/2018 04:50 am »
Making the hole larger to fix it, makes no sense to me...

A round hole in the metal is probably easier to plug a stopper into than a hairline crack, but that obviously isn't the fix they employed, and post-impact drilling likely wasn't the procedure used.  :-\

Offline AntiAnti

  • Member
  • Posts: 25
  • Moscow
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #309 on: 09/01/2018 05:13 am »
I'm sure I must have missed something. Makes no sense to me that this has been identified as most likely MMOD damage and is an exit hole with no apparent entry hole. How is this possible? Also the repair was on the inside liner and not main pressure hull, so this implies that the liner is sealed all around and that the external leak still exists. Therefor the air should slowly escape from the space between the liner and outside hull, correct? And this is not a concern?

There is no inside liner -- what you see in the pictures in the article IS the pressure shell.  Claims that it is "most likely MMOD damage" are simply false.  It's not MMOD, period.
It's drilled entry MMOD damage. Drilled, to a. make sure it won't grow. b. to seal the seam between interior panel (white) and the wall. That's why MCC-M asked them to be very cautious at that moment.
« Last Edit: 09/01/2018 05:15 am by AntiAnti »

Offline CJ

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 889
  • Liked: 652
  • Likes Given: 180
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #310 on: 09/01/2018 05:23 am »
Those marks to the right of the small hole look very much like drill marks, of the kind you'd get if you were drilling at a shallow angle and the bit skipped off (walked as it rotated).

Some wild, unfounded speculation as a result; could the hole have been drilled during assembly (perhaps as part of mounting points for that white cloth) by accident? Not enough to puncture it, but almost; then the last sliver gave way in time. It would not take much to accidentally drill aluminum, and the worker might not have even realized it if the aluminum was covered at the time.

 

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4031
  • Space Watcher
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 163
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #311 on: 09/01/2018 08:05 am »
Looked over the pictures and some other information that has come down in the past 30 hours or so.
Not impossible to rule out MMOD but extremely unlikely. Metal scoring marks near the hole and also very symmetric appearance. Metal is pushed "out" toward space the exterior of the pressure vessel not "in" as with MMOD or external breaching in.

Two likely possibilities exist.
1. A mistake was made in pre launch processing, someone attempted to drill a hole in the wrong place. The error was either realized and not considered serious and therefore ignored, or was not caught or properly understood.
2. Something within the station, in this case located inside the Soyuz Orbital Module, struck the sidewall creating the puncture. It is also possible a foreign object became trapped between the insulation blanket mounted to the sidewall and potentially caused a breach that way.

Idea that someone drilled the hole while in space is ludicrous, it would have been caught immediately even if something so insane were mandated or allowed.
If I were a betting man my money would be on this being either a closeout/preflight error on the ground, or a manufacturing defect, in both cases that was simply missed. Most likely in this case, a thin piece of metal or shavings remained in the hole keeping it sealed through launch and docking, until a short time ago when it was finally forced open by static pressure forces. Very thin metal at the bottom of the hole would have fatigued under static pressure over time since launch and now, thermal cycles add to the stress, matter of time.

Seems very hard to say this was MMOD but not impossible to rule out at this time. Investigation will ultimately tell us the answer, but it seems like this happened on the ground.
3-30-2017: The start of a great future
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline jeng_eo

  • Member
  • Posts: 9
  • Earth
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 220
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #312 on: 09/01/2018 09:07 am »
Sorry for the probably dumb question...

Can we rule out the hypothesis that they drilled the hole in there (widened it) to get access for an endoscope?
I remember some talks that the astros not being able to see whats behind the hole...
« Last Edit: 09/01/2018 09:08 am by jeng_eo »

Offline gonucelar

  • Member
  • Posts: 15
  • Germany
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #313 on: 09/01/2018 11:17 am »
Looked over the pictures and some other information that has come down in the past 30 hours or so.
Not impossible to rule out MMOD but extremely unlikely.

And it seems equally unlikely that they launched a spacecraft with such an obvious hole. Even if there was a manufactoring defect/sabotage coverup, they would have at least tried to fix it.

It appears much more likely that the hole was drilled by cosmonauts over the MMOD damage to prevent the original "crack" from expanding (AFAIK, standard practice when dealing with cracks in metals) and to make it easier to seal. And the picture we are seeing is not that of the original damage, but from the work in progress (just like other two photos show the continued work in progress).

Online Olaf

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1895
  • Germany
  • Liked: 616
  • Likes Given: 243
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #314 on: 09/01/2018 01:13 pm »
https://twitter.com/Space_Station/status/1035568133476634624
Quote
Thanks @Cmdr_Hadfield! But to avoid confusion: The crew used Kapton tape, not duct tape, to temporarily stop the minor leak on a Soyuz while developing a permanent solution. And this photo shows a small hole in the Solar Max Satellite, not the hole observed Thursday on station.

Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #315 on: 09/01/2018 02:00 pm »
Looking at the pictures that hole has been addressed from the inside with a drill

Anyone that has held a drill nevermind in in zero g will have struggled to stop the chuck making the marks shown on the pictures further up the panel when  pushing through the panel

This will have been done to prevent cracking  as already stated a common teqnique in the aerospace world

there would be very few metal chips inside  as they would want to be drawn outwards but im sure they have small vaccum units anyway they could use

Dont forget the russians cracked on and did the repair before the station commander had chance to review the procedure they just wanted it done

Looking at the hole it may have been a outer fastener that pulled through the panel no really good pics of the original hole to form a solid opinion

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4031
  • Space Watcher
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 163
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #316 on: 09/01/2018 02:30 pm »
Looked over the pictures and some other information that has come down in the past 30 hours or so.
Not impossible to rule out MMOD but extremely unlikely.

And it seems equally unlikely that they launched a spacecraft with such an obvious hole. Even if there was a manufactoring defect/sabotage coverup, they would have at least tried to fix it.

It appears much more likely that the hole was drilled by cosmonauts over the MMOD damage to prevent the original "crack" from expanding (AFAIK, standard practice when dealing with cracks in metals) and to make it easier to seal. And the picture we are seeing is not that of the original damage, but from the work in progress (just like other two photos show the continued work in progress).

Wrong. The hole was anything but obvious it was behind a thermal insulation blanket and some other objects. Also please recall that Roscosmos has had serious quality control issues across most of their vehicles and programs and recent years. We had the issue with the out of control progress not that long ago and before that upper stage issues and the upside down sensors on proton. 

On top of this, the US has had similar issues in the past, for example the shuttle mission that launched with an improperly plugged LOX injector post that was then ejected and cracked the tube wall in one of the SSMEs.

These things are usually not so obvious, more to the point: it's usually not immediately obvious that it will cause a problem even if you do notice it. That is where "flight rationale" comes in.

Shape and outward press of the hole points to this being something that happened on the ground.
3-30-2017: The start of a great future
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4031
  • Space Watcher
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 163
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #317 on: 09/01/2018 02:33 pm »
Those marks to the right of the small hole look very much like drill marks, of the kind you'd get if you were drilling at a shallow angle and the bit skipped off (walked as it rotated).

Some wild, unfounded speculation as a result; could the hole have been drilled during assembly (perhaps as part of mounting points for that white cloth) by accident? Not enough to puncture it, but almost; then the last sliver gave way in time. It would not take much to accidentally drill aluminum, and the worker might not have even realized it if the aluminum was covered at the time.

More likely it was an attempted mounting point for some other piece of hardware that was going to be located behind that blanket. An attachment point for a mounting bracket perhaps.
3-30-2017: The start of a great future
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline SWGlassPit

  • I break space hardware
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 567
  • Liked: 418
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #318 on: 09/01/2018 03:12 pm »
Sorry for the probably dumb question...

Can we rule out the hypothesis that they drilled the hole in there (widened it) to get access for an endoscope?
I remember some talks that the astros not being able to see whats behind the hole...

Yes. Video of them using the endoscope clearly shows that it doesn't fit in the hole.

Making the hole larger to fix it, makes no sense to me...

A round hole in the metal is probably easier to plug a stopper into than a hairline crack, but that obviously isn't the fix they employed, and post-impact drilling likely wasn't the procedure used.  :-\

Drilling is not part of any leak repair procedure that exists for ISS.

I'm sure I must have missed something. Makes no sense to me that this has been identified as most likely MMOD damage and is an exit hole with no apparent entry hole. How is this possible? Also the repair was on the inside liner and not main pressure hull, so this implies that the liner is sealed all around and that the external leak still exists. Therefor the air should slowly escape from the space between the liner and outside hull, correct? And this is not a concern?

There is no inside liner -- what you see in the pictures in the article IS the pressure shell.  Claims that it is "most likely MMOD damage" are simply false.  It's not MMOD, period.
It's drilled entry MMOD damage. Drilled, to a. make sure it won't grow. b. to seal the seam between interior panel (white) and the wall. That's why MCC-M asked them to be very cautious at that moment.

Will you stop with this? You are spreading falsehoods. What you see there IS the pressure wall. A short distance behind the hole is the MMOD shield, which is perfectly intact. I say this as one of the MMOD guys for ISS (at the risk of shedding my anonymity): this is not an MMOD strike.

Offline geza

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 271
  • Budapest
    • Géza Meszéna's web page
  • Liked: 98
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Expedition 56 Thread - also covering the ISS leak
« Reply #319 on: 09/01/2018 05:53 pm »
Thanks for informing us. The situation is strange...

Tags: