A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

ISS may be abandoned in november



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #32  
Old August 30th 11, 01:56 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,012
Default ISS may be abandoned in november

In article , nospam@ab-
katrinedal.dk says...

Jeff Findley wrote:
The real problem is that at this point I doubt the Russians know

what
caused the Soyuz launch vehicle failure. If true, they don't have any
reasonable idea the probability of failure of another Soyuz launch.

Right now the Russians just don't know what they don't know.


The 3. stage gas generator is being fingered.
http://www.universetoday.com/88508/c...h-may-have-bee
n-determined/


Makes sense, given the symptoms reported. But exactly what caused the
gas generator to fail isn't reported in the above article. Still, it
seems like the Russians have at least narrowed the problem down.

Jeff
--
" Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get it
up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. "
- tinker
  #34  
Old August 30th 11, 02:07 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Sylvia Else[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 458
Default ISS may be abandoned in november

On 28/08/2011 11:52 PM, bob haller wrote:
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/statio...27unmannedops/

I think they should immediately return as much crew as possible to
minimize consumption, and have that commercial delivery take essential
supplies to give the russians more time to fix the soyuz booster
issue.......


The last thing we need is a unmanned ISS that has tech troubles and
gets out of control. dropping station modules all over its ground
track worldwide.......


What do they need by way of ground support? If they don't want to land
in Kazakhstan in winter, they could land in Australia. Plenty of room
here - much of the place is completely uninhabited because it's totally
useless.

Sylvia.
  #35  
Old August 30th 11, 02:10 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,012
Default ISS may be abandoned in november

In article 7728347f-be4b-44ab-a2ef-488b2975d5d7
@l7g2000vbz.googlegroups.com, says...

On Aug 30, 6:44*am, Alan Erskine wrote:

Why do I get the feeling someone at NASA said this was going to happen
but they were ignored - similar to the guy warning of the SRB problem
before Challenger....


well i talked about this exact problem here.......


True, but you talk about a lot of crazy $#!^ in the sci.space
newsgroups.

was ;ughed at soyuz is dependable or so others posted.


Statistically, it's been very dependable. "All things being equal",
this failure was unlikely. We'll have to wait for the Russians to
determine the root cause(s) of the failure. A recent article points to
the gas generator for the third stage's liquid fueled rocket engine.

The article did not say that the Russians know why the gas generator
failed. They have to figure this out to determine what, if anything,
should be done about the failure. For example, it could be a design
defect (unlikely), a manufacturing defect (more likely), or some other
problem (control system failure or similar).

nasa wanted to keep the infrastructure and one orbiter space worthy
just in case.....


You've been told time and again that NASA simply cannot afford to do
this and develop a "next generation" anything. SLS, if it flies, will
need the shuttle infrastructure modified to fit its needs. The shuttle
program is over and isn't coming back. Get over it.

Jeff
--
" Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get it
up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. "
- tinker
  #37  
Old August 30th 11, 02:19 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jochem Huhmann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 606
Default ISS may be abandoned in november

Jeff Findley writes:

This used to be possible, but that was decades ago. I'm not sure if the
current "digital" Soyuz is equipped to fly unmanned. You'd have to ask
the Russians.

But even if you can fly it unmanned, it won't do you any good if the
Soyuz launch vehicle fails again and it doesn't make it to ISS.


Of course. But you'd have a test flight without endangering any crew and
if it works you have a fresh Soyuz at the station, so the current crew
can stay there longer.

Anyway, being able to get an empty Soyuz to the station would be a
capability that could be very helpful in many emergency situations (like
having a docked Soyuz damaged or unusable in some other way). The
Russians would be very wise to implement and test this if they haven't
already.


Jochem

--
"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no
longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
  #39  
Old August 30th 11, 03:06 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,018
Default ISS may be abandoned in november

On Aug 30, 4:44*am, Alan Erskine wrote:

Why do I get the feeling someone at NASA said this was going to happen
but they were ignored - similar to the guy warning of the SRB problem
before Challenger....


Incidentally, some people would blame Obama for cancelling the Shuttle
program.

The Shuttle fleet was kept running longer than it was really
appropriate to operate it from a safety viewpoint. So it wasn't
Obama's fault.

And it is now too late to build more Shuttles.

This doesn't mean that I'm necessarily putting the blame on Bush.
Those who wish to blame the Democrats for everything may take solace
in the possibility that this threshold was crossed back under Clinton.

John Savard
  #40  
Old August 30th 11, 03:10 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,018
Default ISS may be abandoned in november

On Aug 30, 7:02*am, Jeff Findley wrote:

For example, if 1000 engineers "predict" a total of 10,000 different
failures modes, that doesn't mean that NASA has the resources to
adequately address them all.


Well, then the United States has two choices. Give NASA those
resources, or don't fly that thing.

Of course, it isn't really that simple. It is reasonable that unlikely
and unforeseeable failures can happen - ones that can perhaps be
envisaged in theory, but which are so unlikely that they were never
expected in practice. I think people can understand that. So the
voters aren't totally unreasonable. They might just want to hold NASA
to the same standards as, say, they hold a mass manufacturer of
consumer products like automobiles. Which is only a little
unreasonable.

John Savard
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Abandoned Spaceships [email protected] History 96 July 23rd 05 09:43 PM
Abandoned Spaceships [email protected] News 0 July 12th 05 12:45 AM
Hubble to be abandoned Michael Gallagher History 577 February 29th 04 04:09 PM
Station to be abandoned? Jorge R. Frank Policy 56 September 3rd 03 02:55 AM
Station to be abandoned? [email protected] Policy 2 August 25th 03 04:49 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.