Soyuz TMA-12 faulty

They think the faulty explosive bolts that caused the service module
separation problems on Soyuz TMA-10 and 11 are also on TMA-12:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/scienc...82559920080523
If that's the case, then the crew probably has at least a 10% chance of
being killed during reentry.

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...
They think the faulty explosive bolts that caused the service module
separation problems on Soyuz TMA-10 and 11 are also on TMA-12:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/scienc...82559920080523
If that's the case, then the crew probably has at least a 10% chance
of being killed during reentry.

Pat

"...at least a 10% chance of being killed...." Where does
that 10% come from? It's not in the original Science News
reference link.

I'll be watching for what the Russians come up with. It's
likely to be interesting -- and effective.

Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.space.policy 2008 May 24]

Martha Adams wrote:

They think the faulty explosive bolts that caused the service module
separation problems on Soyuz TMA-10 and 11 are also on TMA-12:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/scienc...82559920080523
If that's the case, then the crew probably has at least a 10% chance
of being killed during reentry.

Pat

"...at least a 10% chance of being killed...." Where does
that 10% come from? It's not in the original Science News
reference link.

That's based on the fact that Soyuz 5 was very nearly fatal when it had
this problem (to the point of the cosmonaut getting his teeth knocked
out on impact), and TMA-11 getting very near a burn-through situation
during its recent reentry.
As to how severely damaged TMA-10 was after its reentry - we don't
really know, as there was no American astronaut aboard it, and the
Russians apparently didn't mention the separation problem to anyone till
after the TMA-11 flight.

Pat

Pat Flannery writes:

They think the faulty explosive bolts that caused the service module
separation problems on Soyuz TMA-10 and 11 are also on TMA-12:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/scienc...82559920080523

What I find really strange is that obviously there's not even enough
information available to say *which* module didn't separate cleany. I've
read "equipment module" several times now and still don't know if that
means the orbital module or the service module.

If that's the case, then the crew probably has at least a 10% chance of
being killed during reentry.

I don't think anyone can quantify the probability of the crew being
killed. There's just not enough information available.

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

Jochem Huhmann wrote:
Pat Flannery writes:

They think the faulty explosive bolts that caused the service module
separation problems on Soyuz TMA-10 and 11 are also on TMA-12:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/scienc...82559920080523

What I find really strange is that obviously there's not even enough
information available to say *which* module didn't separate cleany. I've
read "equipment module" several times now and still don't know if that
means the orbital module or the service module.

It means service module.

If that's the case, then the crew probably has at least a 10% chance of
being killed during reentry.

I don't think anyone can quantify the probability of the crew being
killed. There's just not enough information available.

Agreed.

Jochem Huhmann wrote:

I don't think anyone can quantify the probability of the crew being
killed. There's just not enough information available.
Do you really want to find out via real-world experience?
Volynov on Soyuz 5 went so far as to stick his orbital log between his
spacesuit's inner lining and his body, so that it would have a chance of
surviving as he died during reentry.
You can't quantify the actual lethality risk of a Soyuz reentry with the
service module still attached with three reference points on the graph,
but this is damn near as off-nominal and dangerous as it gets.
That's why I said 10% _minimum_.

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote:
If that's the case, then the crew probably has at least a 10% chance of
being killed during reentry.

What's their % chance of being killed during a "normal" reentry?

Glen Overby
52% of all statistics are made up.

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...
Volynov on Soyuz 5 went so far as to stick his orbital log between his
spacesuit's inner lining and his body, so that it would have a chance of
surviving as he died during reentry.

And for that I salute him- that's Wally Schirra kind of thinking.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Glen Overby wrote:
What's their % chance of being killed during a "normal" reentry?

Glen Overby
52% of all statistics are made up.


The Soyuz 11 did a perfect reentry and landing, but unfortunatly all the
air had leaked out, so the crew was dead when it landed.
Then there was the one that rolled down the mountainside, and the other
one that descended into the lake.
Yet another Soyuz was supposed to have landed right next to a small
rural school.

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
lephone...

Glen Overby wrote:
What's their % chance of being killed during a "normal" reentry?

Glen Overby
52% of all statistics are made up.


The Soyuz 11 did a perfect reentry and landing, but unfortunatly all the
air had leaked out, so the crew was dead when it landed.
Then there was the one that rolled down the mountainside, and the other
one that descended into the lake.
Yet another Soyuz was supposed to have landed right next to a small rural
school.

Hand waving doesn't make for good statistics. Try again.

Jeff
--
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein