Soyuz in Shuttle?

The reason that the mission to service
Hubble has been cancelled is that they
can't guarantee the safety of the crew
for trips that are not close to the Space
Station (which can serve as a refuge).

However, why not carry a Soyuz capsule
in the Shuttle cargo bay? Then if there
is a problem with Shuttle reentry, the
Soyuz can be used as a lifeboat.

The shuttle crew size is typically five to seven people. The Soyuz seats
two or three. You do the math.




wrote in message
...
The reason that the mission to service
Hubble has been cancelled is that they
can't guarantee the safety of the crew
for trips that are not close to the Space
Station (which can serve as a refuge).

However, why not carry a Soyuz capsule
in the Shuttle cargo bay? Then if there
is a problem with Shuttle reentry, the
Soyuz can be used as a lifeboat.

Do you really need five to seven people on a Hubble service mission?

Someone in a position of power has got to sort this or a great investment
could be just left to fall out of the sky.

I imagine it might be reconsidered if the repair ideas pan out, but that
does not help the folk making the improved hardware, as they will probably
be stopped and redeployed now.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________
__________________________________


"Dosco Jones" wrote in message
link.net...
|
| The shuttle crew size is typically five to seven people. The Soyuz seats
| two or three. You do the math.
|
|
|
|
| wrote in message
| ...
| The reason that the mission to service
| Hubble has been cancelled is that they
| can't guarantee the safety of the crew
| for trips that are not close to the Space
| Station (which can serve as a refuge).
|
| However, why not carry a Soyuz capsule
| in the Shuttle cargo bay? Then if there
| is a problem with Shuttle reentry, the
| Soyuz can be used as a lifeboat.
|
|
|


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free, so there!
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.561 / Virus Database: 353 - Release Date: 13/01/04

"Dosco Jones" wrote in message
link.net...

The shuttle crew size is typically five to seven people. The Soyuz seats
two or three. You do the math.



Someone should suggest this idea -

Produce a modified version of the Soyuz without an Orbital Module and
possibly with a smaller Service Module. If two could be carried in the
payload bay, they only take up about half the space, you can now return a
crew of six.

In article , Brian Gaff wrote:
Do you really need five to seven people on a Hubble service mission?

Quite probably.

STS-103 flew with seven; it made three two-man EVAs over three days.
STS-61 made five over five; ditto 109 and 82. (61 was planned for up to
seven...)

To do multiple EVAs, it's standard practice (AIUI, someone please
correct me) to have two pairs; group A does it one day, group B the
next, then A... remember, these are strenuous physical activities, in
some cases lasting over eight hours. Rotation is advisable.

So, you have four there. You then need people to do everything else - to
operate the Shuttle, the arm, whatever else they do (I never paid
greatly much attention g) - it's an intensive mission, they're not
just deadweight. You can make a case for that on some missions, but
historically manpower has been needed on things like HST servicing and
ISS assembly flights (witness that assembly flights occasionally get
announced as five, and then they look at th timeline and add two more).
For the ISS, it's doubly the case; you're adding a significant amount of
capacity just by having two more bodies to lug things.

I imagine it might be reconsidered if the repair ideas pan out, but that
does not help the folk making the improved hardware, as they will probably
be stopped and redeployed now.

I believe a significant amount of the hardware for Hubble is either
in the late stages of construction or, more commonly, sitting in a
cleanroom.

--
-Andrew Gray

Andrew Gray wrote in
:

In article , Brian Gaff
wrote:
Do you really need five to seven people on a Hubble service mission?

Quite probably.

STS-103 flew with seven; it made three two-man EVAs over three days.
STS-61 made five over five; ditto 109 and 82. (61 was planned for up
to seven...)

To do multiple EVAs, it's standard practice (AIUI, someone please
correct me) to have two pairs; group A does it one day, group B the
next, then A... remember, these are strenuous physical activities, in
some cases lasting over eight hours. Rotation is advisable.

A two-man team can do three EVAs, provided they get a day off in between
each one. Two pairs are standard for four or more EVAs.

So, you have four there. You then need people to do everything else -
to operate the Shuttle, the arm, whatever else they do (I never paid
greatly much attention g) - it's an intensive mission, they're not
just deadweight.

Right. The arm operator and the IVA crewmember need to be separate people,
because they have to pay attention to different things. So the minimum crew
size for a dual-pair EVA flight is six.


--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

Someone please tell me how the Shuttle crew would perform a transfer
into Soyuzes in the cargo bay that have had their orbital modules
removed.



"John Hearsey" wrote in message ...
"Dosco Jones" wrote in message
link.net...

The shuttle crew size is typically five to seven people. The Soyuz seats
two or three. You do the math.



Someone should suggest this idea -

Produce a modified version of the Soyuz without an Orbital Module and
possibly with a smaller Service Module. If two could be carried in the
payload bay, they only take up about half the space, you can now return a
crew of six.

"Clark" stillnospam@me wrote in message
...

Right. The arm operator and the IVA crewmember need to be separate
people, because they have to pay attention to different things. So the
minimum crew size for a dual-pair EVA flight is six.

Errr, ummm, that would be four assuming the non-EVA pair would be IVA and
arm
operator. They would have to be cross trained but what's wrong with EVA
today, arm operator tomorrow?

do you really want the person working the robot arm to be the same person
that worked themselves to the brink of exchaustion theprevious day doing an
8-hour EVA?

Didn't think so. Oh, and with a crew of four, one of each pair would have to
be fully-trained shuttle pilots, so now they have *three* jobs to prepare
for. *Bad* Clark, no cookie...

--
Terrell Miller


"It's one thing to burn down the **** house and another thing entirely to
install plumbing"
-PJ O'Rourke

"Terrell Miller" wrote in
:

"Clark" stillnospam@me wrote in message
...

Right. The arm operator and the IVA crewmember need to be separate
people, because they have to pay attention to different things. So
the minimum crew size for a dual-pair EVA flight is six.

Errr, ummm, that would be four assuming the non-EVA pair would be IVA
and
arm
operator. They would have to be cross trained but what's wrong with
EVA today, arm operator tomorrow?

do you really want the person working the robot arm to be the same
person that worked themselves to the brink of exchaustion theprevious
day doing an 8-hour EVA?

Right. Astronauts are generally in better-than-average physical shape, but
they're not supermen.

Didn't think so. Oh, and with a crew of four, one of each pair would
have to be fully-trained shuttle pilots, so now they have *three* jobs
to prepare for. *Bad* Clark, no cookie...

Expanding on this, training would be a problem in general. EVA training is
typically the long pole in the tent in terms of total hours. A crewmember
supporting both EVA teams would wind up with a *lot* of EVA training hours.
It's not impossible (I think it's been done before), but it's not the
preferable way to operate.

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

"Clark" stillnospam@me wrote in message
...

do you really want the person working the robot arm to be the same
person that worked themselves to the brink of exchaustion theprevious
day doing an 8-hour EVA?

Hmmm, "brink of exhaustion"? maybe, maybe not.

Try "definitely". And try reading about how easy it is to do work in a
pressurized spacesuit. Example: the glove tips pinch your fingers so tight
that your fingernails can turn black from all the blood pooling behind them.

Didn't think so. Oh, and with a crew of four, one of each pair would
have to be fully-trained shuttle pilots, so now they have *three* jobs
to prepare for. *Bad* Clark, no cookie...


I'm sorry you have such a low opinion of a persons capabilities...

and I'm sorry you have no clue about mission training or EVA. Or grammar,
for that matter...

--
Terrell Miller


"It's one thing to burn down the **** house and another thing entirely to
install plumbing"
-PJ O'Rourke