Leak on ISS

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018...airs-continue/

Apparently there's a 2mm leak on-board ISS that's been tracked down to
Soyuz.
I'm sure some folks be all gloom and doom and all, but NASA is very much
treating this as a very minor incident.

It'll be easily patched. (and I fact looks like it has been).

It's in the orbital module so any outside damage (assuming it's due to
orbital debris) should pose no threat to re-entry.

But this got me thinking... NASA and the Russians have always treated the
Soyuz as lifeboats. But I've never seen any talk of plans for if the Soyuz
Descent module was highly damaged (let's say a lot larger than a 2mm leak).
Sure, you could probably plug most, but at some size and position, it could
make re-entry pretty hairy.

Years ago, the Soviets had a production rate they probably could just speed
up the next Soyuz launch (and do it uncrewed) but these days, it would
probably be 3+ months.
On the other hand, once Starliner and Dragon 2 come online, there's a lot
more options.


--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net
IT Disaster Response -
https://www.amazon.com/Disaster-Resp...dp/1484221834/

In article ,
says...

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018...airs-continue/

Apparently there's a 2mm leak on-board ISS that's been tracked down to
Soyuz.
I'm sure some folks be all gloom and doom and all, but NASA is very much
treating this as a very minor incident.

It was. The Russians were getting ready to permanently patch it and the
US astronauts were talking to their mission control trying to get them
to convince the Russians that the proposed permanent patch should be
studied for at least 24 hours. In response, the Russians just patched
the hole in their module using some epoxy sealant and medical gauze. It
seems to have worked.

This highlights the cultural difference that the cosmonauts generally
have more autonomy where US astronauts generally have mission control
plan everything out for them and test things on the ground before they
implement even the simplest fixes.

Apparently this is so common in US astronauts that they get worried when
cosmonauts don't do things their way, like patching a (reportedly) 2mm
diameter hole in a Russian module. That's freaking tiny. And 1 atm of
pressure differential isn't that much at all.

It'll be easily patched. (and I fact looks like it has been).

It's in the orbital module so any outside damage (assuming it's due to
orbital debris) should pose no threat to re-entry.

Agreed. Sine the orbital module is discarded after the reentry burn,
it's not that big of an issue. The Soyuz would be fine to use for
reentry even if the leak reoccurs.

But this got me thinking... NASA and the Russians have always treated the
Soyuz as lifeboats. But I've never seen any talk of plans for if the Soyuz
Descent module was highly damaged (let's say a lot larger than a 2mm leak).
Sure, you could probably plug most, but at some size and position, it could
make re-entry pretty hairy.

You'd likely shelter in place at ISS and wait for a replacement crew
vehicles to bring you back. This was discussed years ago. No one is
100% sure if the current Soyuz could launch and dock with ISS without a
crew, but it stands to reason it could since Progress does just that.

Years ago, the Soviets had a production rate they probably could just speed
up the next Soyuz launch (and do it uncrewed) but these days, it would
probably be 3+ months.
On the other hand, once Starliner and Dragon 2 come online, there's a lot
more options.

Agreed. And Starliner and Dragon 2 will have more seats, so more
options to launch a "rescue" mission.

NASA has certainly been thinking about this, especially after the
Columbia disaster. On the NASA side, I'm sure they've thought more
about it than the Russians (again, cultural differences).

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018...airs-continue/

Apparently there's a 2mm leak on-board ISS that's been tracked down to
Soyuz.
I'm sure some folks be all gloom and doom and all, but NASA is very much
treating this as a very minor incident.

It was. The Russians were getting ready to permanently patch it and the
US astronauts were talking to their mission control trying to get them
to convince the Russians that the proposed permanent patch should be
studied for at least 24 hours. In response, the Russians just patched
the hole in their module using some epoxy sealant and medical gauze. It
seems to have worked.

This highlights the cultural difference that the cosmonauts generally
have more autonomy where US astronauts generally have mission control
plan everything out for them and test things on the ground before they
implement even the simplest fixes.

Apparently this is so common in US astronauts that they get worried when
cosmonauts don't do things their way, like patching a (reportedly) 2mm
diameter hole in a Russian module. That's freaking tiny. And 1 atm of
pressure differential isn't that much at all.

It'll be easily patched. (and I fact looks like it has been).

It's in the orbital module so any outside damage (assuming it's due to
orbital debris) should pose no threat to re-entry.

Agreed. Sine the orbital module is discarded after the reentry burn,
it's not that big of an issue. The Soyuz would be fine to use for
reentry even if the leak reoccurs.

But this got me thinking... NASA and the Russians have always treated the
Soyuz as lifeboats. But I've never seen any talk of plans for if the
Soyuz
Descent module was highly damaged (let's say a lot larger than a 2mm
leak).
Sure, you could probably plug most, but at some size and position, it
could
make re-entry pretty hairy.

You'd likely shelter in place at ISS and wait for a replacement crew
vehicles to bring you back. This was discussed years ago. No one is
100% sure if the current Soyuz could launch and dock with ISS without a
crew, but it stands to reason it could since Progress does just that.

Years ago, the Soviets had a production rate they probably could just
speed
up the next Soyuz launch (and do it uncrewed) but these days, it would
probably be 3+ months.
On the other hand, once Starliner and Dragon 2 come online, there's a lot
more options.

Agreed. And Starliner and Dragon 2 will have more seats, so more
options to launch a "rescue" mission.

NASA has certainly been thinking about this, especially after the
Columbia disaster. On the NASA side, I'm sure they've thought more
about it than the Russians (again, cultural differences).

Jeff

I have to admit I hadn't fully read the article I linked to until after
posting (I had read a briefer Time.com article though).
But, as I've said in the past, heck, worst case, I'd be willing to fly in a
Cargo Dragon NOW if need be, up or down.. wouldn't be the most pleasant ride
for sure.

And given how quickly SpaceX can turn things around and how close they are
to launching Crew Dragon... I could see them (and the article touches upon
this) rushing to launch.

On an unrelated note, this is one reason why as much as I LOVED the book The
Martian, I laugh that it has so quickly become outdated in a sense. If
something like that happened in today's "history", SpaceX could probably
launch even very limited supplies within about 3 months! And try again 3
months later!


--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net
IT Disaster Response -
https://www.amazon.com/Disaster-Resp...dp/1484221834/

Jeff Findley wrote on Fri, 31 Aug 2018
06:20:18 -0400:

In article ,
says...

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018...airs-continue/

Apparently there's a 2mm leak on-board ISS that's been tracked down to
Soyuz.
I'm sure some folks be all gloom and doom and all, but NASA is very much
treating this as a very minor incident.

It was. The Russians were getting ready to permanently patch it and the
US astronauts were talking to their mission control trying to get them
to convince the Russians that the proposed permanent patch should be
studied for at least 24 hours. In response, the Russians just patched
the hole in their module using some epoxy sealant and medical gauze. It
seems to have worked.

This highlights the cultural difference that the cosmonauts generally
have more autonomy where US astronauts generally have mission control
plan everything out for them and test things on the ground before they
implement even the simplest fixes.

Apparently this is so common in US astronauts that they get worried when
cosmonauts don't do things their way, like patching a (reportedly) 2mm
diameter hole in a Russian module. That's freaking tiny. And 1 atm of
pressure differential isn't that much at all.


NASA likes to have everything tested on the ground to make sure it
works and won't kill anyone. Russians are a little more 'relaxed'
about that.



Years ago, the Soviets had a production rate they probably could just speed
up the next Soyuz launch (and do it uncrewed) but these days, it would
probably be 3+ months.
On the other hand, once Starliner and Dragon 2 come online, there's a lot
more options.


Agreed. And Starliner and Dragon 2 will have more seats, so more
options to launch a "rescue" mission.


NASA will never (according to their current plans) send up more than
three or four people at once, so with seven seats there are always
spare seats (although Boeing is approved to sell 'extra' seats to
'tourists').


--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to
live in the real world."
-- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden