Launch News (FAILURE) Progress M-12M, Soyuz-U, August 24, 2011

[garyw]

the crew of the ISS don't need rescuing. They have sufficent docked Soyuz on orbit. ISS can operate uncrewed for as long as it has reboost prop.

ESA don't have the funds for a vehicle. If JAXA's funds are not reduced I'd be shocked. Japan has a few more important things to deal with right now.

 

[Urwumpe]

ESA don't have the funds for a vehicle.

Correction: We have the money. We just prefer spending it for repeated feasibility studies about things that have already been proven feasible by an earlier less expensive study contracted by ESA.

 

[T.Neo]

In my opinion ESA or JAXA should bulid a manned spacecraft which allow the changing or rescue the crew of ISS. I said that because the Russian Space Agency has suspended all planned Soyuz rocket take-offs after a disaster of Progress M12M, and NASA will not build a new ship because Obama has them cut off funds for the construction.

What Gary said. The people on the ISS do not need rescuing. The ISS can also operate unmanned if need be, and this will only occur if Soyuz flights have not been restored before one of the Soyuz craft cannot stay on orbit any longer (Soyuz has a limited orbital 'shelf-life').

Also: Obama stopped no funding for American spacecraft, COTS is still underway. And the 4+ billion dollar MPCV/Orion is still underway per congressional influence. Of course, this vehicle will not be ready for several years, is overkill for a role as a LEO rescue vehicle, and can only carry 4 people (whereas there are 6 aboard the ISS). And it has no launch vehicle- that monstrosity would not be available for several more years, and several more billions of dollars.

ESA could do a manned vehicle but they don't seem to be interested.

Also, the ISS has been reboosted recently by ATV-2 and I think STS-135 as well. It is not in immediate danger of deorbit:

Apparently altitude may only become a problem in 6-12 months, or something like that.

Japan has a few more important things to deal with right now.

Agreed.

 

[kuki5050]

What Gary said. The people on the ISS do not need rescuing. The ISS can also operate unmanned if need be, and this will only occur if Soyuz flights have not been restored before one of the Soyuz craft cannot stay on orbit any longer (Soyuz has a limited orbital 'shelf-life').

Also: Obama stopped no funding for American spacecraft, COTS is still underway. And the 4+ billion dollar MPCV/Orion is still underway per congressional influence. Of course, this vehicle will not be ready for several years, is overkill for a role as a LEO rescue vehicle, and can only carry 4 people (whereas there are 6 aboard the ISS). And it has no launch vehicle- that monstrosity would not be available for several more years, and several more billions of dollars.

ESA could do a manned vehicle but they don't seem to be interested.

Also, the ISS has been reboosted recently by ATV-2 and I think STS-135 as well. It is not in immediate danger of deorbit.
Apparently altitude may only become a problem in 6-12 months, or something like that.

I don't mean that ISS will got a problem similar to Skylab. I think that Soyuz and Progress ships are outdated constructions which is flying in space for 45 years (for Soyuz). About problems: ISS has got a Russian machine for oxygen development called Elektron. Because it has been on Salyut and Mir stations it's old construction too.

And another question: What we will do, when ISS will go the same way as Skylab or Mir (I mean: will be destroyed)? Wasting money?

 

[Urwumpe]

I don't mean that ISS will got a problem similar to Skylab. I think that Soyuz and Progress ships are outdated constructions which is flying in space for 45 years (for Soyuz).

The Soyuz TMA-M is the most modern manned spacecraft around, until the Dragon finally gets done (it is still a prototype). The age of the Soyuz family says very little about the age of the spacecraft. The Volkswagen Golf had its debut in 1974, still the Golf VII will be technologically on front of the consumer car scale.

And another question: What we will do, when ISS will go the same way as Skylab or Mir (I mean: will be destroyed)? Wasting money?

It is cheaper to deorbit it and let it crash controlled somewhere (the Mir way, Skylab was a terrible accident), than to land or even just reuse parts of it.

It is spaceflight: The transport into orbit or back costs almost more than just the station module.

 

[kuki5050]

And another info about Soyuz:

When the Soyuz 1 was preparing to take-off, Gagarin has seen a 203 malfunctions in ship. Most of them caused crash of re-entry capsule and death of Komarov. Komarov knew that he will die during landing. His last words were that cursed are men who put him into this "spacejunk".

 

[T.Neo]

I don't mean that ISS will got a problem similar to Skylab. I think that Soyuz and Progress ships are outdated constructions which is flying in space for 45 years (for Soyuz). About problems: ISS has got a Russian machine for oxygen development called Elektron. Because it has been on Salyut and Mir stations it's old construction too.

Please do not bash something because it is "old". Because Soyuz is over 40 years old, means it has gone through many iterations and advancements, and is a very well understood and perfected system.

Remember: The last of the old, is better than the first of the new.

Many other very successful things are as old as Soyuz. That does not make them bad or substandard or dangerous.

And another info about Soyuz:

When the Soyuz 1 was preparing to take-off, Gagarin has seen a 203 malfunctions in ship. Most of them caused crash of re-entry capsule and death of Komarov. Komarov knew that he will die during landing. His last words were that cursed are men who put him into this "spacejunk".

Do you know why that occured?

Soyuz 1 was very rushed. Soyuz was new at the time. There was pressure on the whole program that really shouldn't have been there. That history does not make Soyuz a deathtrap. Statistically Soyuz has been a pretty safe vehicle, and all of its LOC events occured early in the program. Admittedly there have been a lot of close calls, but they have all been survivable so far.

 

[Urwumpe]

And another info about Soyuz:

When the Soyuz 1 was preparing to take-off, Gagarin has seen a 203 malfunctions in ship. Most of them caused crash of re-entry capsule and death of Komarov. Komarov knew that he will die during landing. HHis last words were that cursed are men who put him into this "spacejunk".

Sorry to get a bit hard on you, but that is utter nonsense and a terrible abuse of dead astronauts.

Komarovs last words are unknown - there was no antenna deployed properly. There had really been 203 anomalies and faults during testing of Soyuz-1, but only a single one was enough to kill the astronaut - the inside of the parachute containers got contaminated with ablative heatshield material and became sticky.

But since Komarov didn't even curse somebody during the mission, but instead worked hard to get a manual deorbit burn done despite the problems, it is pretty unlikely that he started cursing people just when the parachute failed to deploy completely.

Instead, it is known that Gagarin threatened his superiors to become primary astronaut for the mission if they decide to launch despite the numerous problems during testing.

Since Soyuz-1 there was not a single parachute failure in the Soyuz program.

So far only 4 astronauts died in Soyuz in almost 45 years.

The launcher is still one of the most reliable launchers in the world, despite its apparent age: http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Delta_Mission/SEM8XK57ESD_0.html

 

[N_Molson]

:hesaid:

Don't say anything lightly against the Soyuz, or heroes like Komarov. Without them and the risks taken, there would be probably nothing like the ISS today. :dry:

Soyuz-1 was completely rushed in an attempt to beat Apollo. A political decision, everyone knew the spaceship wasn't ready at all. It should have been an unmanned test, at best.

The worse is that USA did exactly the same mistake with Apollo I. Rushing programs = tragedies. In both countries, the programs got delayed by two good years of additionnal R&D. Apollo was nearly rebuilt from scratch.

The current Soyuz certainly isn't outdated. The shell stays roughly the same, but the systems inside have little in common with those of 1960's.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

Soyuz has a 45 year history in which many (most?) of the design flaws have been caught and corrected, and many things have been improved as the technologies become available.

In contrast, the US keeps developing new manned launchers and spacecraft and retires them just as they work out all of the fatal flaws. We are always on the "bleeding edge" of the technology.

We really need to stick with a launcher and spacecraft family and fly the hell out of it for 50 years. I'm hoping this is what will be done with SpaceX Falcon/Dragon.

 

[SiberianTiger]

There are some news (http://altapress.ru/story/71791/gallery/item/1/#gallery) from an Altapress reporter that works in Altai:

On August 24th about 20:25 or 20:30 local time a loud popping sound was audible above village Karakoksha of Choysky district. It sounded much like explosion seemingly in vicinity of the village. The sound case from South-Western side of the horizon. Thick cloud cover didn't allow to see any contrail of the falling debris.
The villager ran away from their homes out of fear that an earthquake might happen. It was then realized that another rocket stage fell at some 30-40 km away. Later, it turned out that a Progress spaceship accidentally fell down. Other, and mostly contradictory information began coming later in the evening and night from lumberjacks and pine nuts collectors.


On August 25th, a helicopter with a commission landed in Karakoksha, and 20 minutes later it took off and headed to the assumed Progress fragments crash site, probably Southwards, near Ooymen' where Eeolgo ridge is.

It is believed that the debris can be found in headstream of the Ooymen' river. The searchers then returned and headed again towards Teletskoye lake, but Abakan as the direction cannot be ruled out, too.

By the way, most of pine nuts collectors and other people in the mountains did know nothing about the spaceship accident. Thick clouds, rain, taiga, mountains were the scenery, and who knows what may bang in those mountains!

From the "insider side", there is a full telemetry record gathered from the failed stage, including pressure, temperature readings and such. The actual look at the debris is badly desirable to confirm the preliminary conclusions drawn. A finger is already pointed at Voronezh plant, who is blamed for supplying a defective engine, but there's no official acknowledgement of the accident's cause, yet.

Most of news are expected to come on Monday.

 

[SiberianTiger]

Soyuz-1 was completely rushed in an attempt to beat Apollo. A political decision, everyone knew the spaceship wasn't ready at all. It should have been an unmanned test, at best.

Actually, three unmanned Soyuz were launched before Soyuz-1. All of them had various problems, but Soviet technical leadership thought that on that stage it made sense to risk with a manned launch. I can't blame them much.

 

[Urwumpe]

Actually, three unmanned Soyuz were launched before Soyuz-1. All of them had various problems, but Soviet technical leadership thought that on that stage it made sense to risk with a manned launch. I can't blame them much.

Well, rushing to a first manned mission of a spacecraft worked good twice already by then... and failed on the third.

 

[SiberianTiger]

I don't mean that ISS will got a problem similar to Skylab. I think that Soyuz and Progress ships are outdated constructions which is flying in space for 45 years (for Soyuz).

I have to correct you a bit: if you look for the root of heritage, you should start from 1980, because it's when Soyuz-T (7K-T) was laucnhed. It was a drastically new design with new capabilities compared to previous versions of Soyuz (7K-OK). Designers even wanted to give it a different name, but it was decided on a higher level of subordination that maintaining a meritorious franchise is paramount.

So, in a way, the present day Soyuz design is an age mate of the Space Shuttle.

 

[Urwumpe]

So, in a way, the present day Soyuz design is an age mate of the Space Shuttle.

Until Soyuz TMA this was true, the TMA update still followed the extend of the Shuttle avionics update. But Soyuz TMA-M is then a pretty radical update again, because of its new guidance system. A much bigger change as between Soyuz T and Soyuz TM, when it received the much more capable Kurs docking system.

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

From ISS On-Orbit Status Report for 27/08/2011.

Progress 44P Replanning:
Ground teams at MCC-H and TsUP-Moscow are busy replanning on-orbit operations after the loss of the Progress M-12M/44P resupply ship on 08/24. Prime method for tracking consumables on board will be the new BCR/RFID (Bar Code Reader / Radio Frequency ID) scanner system (which is to be checked out first). With a slip of Soyuz TMA-21/26S departure next week very likely, work schedules are being redefined to make use of the additional US crewmember (Garan), the two Russian crew members (Borisenko, Samokutyayev) and activities planned originally for Increment 29. SM (Service Module) propellant tanks are topped off right now from Progress M-10M/42P. Prime reboost & DAM (Debris Avoidance Maneuver) would be done with SM main engines, but DC-1 (Docking Compartment-1) could also be used. Having the SM Aft end open (no Progress docked) appears of no concern, except perhaps for a slight increase in MMOD (Micrometeorite Orbital Debris) risk.

 

[hachiman]

Kazakhstan not to ban Russian rocket launches from Baikonur

Kazakhstan does not plan to ban launches of Russian rockets from its space center in Baikonur after accident with Progress M-12M space freighter, Talgat Musabayev, the head of the Kazakh space agency, Kazcosmos, said.

Musabayev said it was not right to immediately ban the launches as the rockets were being successfully launched for already more than 40 years.

"This is the first failure out of 136 launches. It is an eco-friendly rocket. The accident has not done any harm to Kazakhstan," Musabayev said.

Musabayev also added he categorically ruled out any possibility that parts of the rocket might have fallen on the territory of Kazakhstan.

The space freighter failed to separate from the third stage of the Soyuz-U carrier rocket on the 325th second of the flight, and according to Musabayev, it was already far away from Kazakhstan.

The Soyuz-U carrier rocket blasted off from the Baikonur Space Center in Kazakhstan and was scheduled to separate at 5:09 p.m. Moscow time [13:09 GMT].

The wreckage of the Russian Progress M-12M space freighter fell in South Siberia's Altai Republic. Although no casualties or any damage have yet been reported.

This is the second spacecraft loss for the Russian space industry. On August 18, the Express AM-4 telecommunications satellite failed to separate from the Proton-M carrier rocket and could not reach the designated orbit.

 

[FADEC]

Maybe it wasn't the best idea to put all eggs in one basket...

Time to ready Dragon for full operational status.

 

[Cosmic Penguin]

I have to correct you a bit: if you look for the root of heritage, you should start from 1980, because it's when Soyuz-T (7K-T) was laucnhed. It was a drastically new design with new capabilities compared to previous versions of Soyuz (7K-OK). Designers even wanted to give it a different name, but it was decided on a higher level of subordination that maintaining a meritorious franchise is paramount.

So, in a way, the present day Soyuz design is an age mate of the Space Shuttle.

Ah Tiger, I think there's a mistake here: Soyuz-T ≠ Soyuz 7K-T . (Soyuz 7K-T is the version of Soyuz used for transportation to a space station between 1971 and 1979, while Soyuz-T (= Soyuz 7K-ST) is a later version of Soyuz (derived from the Soyuz used on the ASTP mission, confusingly named Soyuz 7K-TM). Am I right?

 

[N_Molson]

It is an eco-friendly rocket. The accident has not done any harm to Kazakhstan," Musabayev said.

:rofl:

This guy has a real sense of humor.