A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

No straight answers from NASA on depressurization event on Soyuz descent



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 24th 05, 09:39 PM
Jim Oberg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default No straight answers from NASA on depressurization event on Soyuz descent

Two weeks ago -- a potentially alarming safety issue.
So far, not a single useful word of reply from anyone at NASA.

Questions remain -- more questions arise:

First question -- how did Phillips describe it during his
debriefing with NASA folks at GCTC-Zvyozdniy? Then,
WHEN is Russia supposed to inform NASA of the
results? Lastly, WHAT (if any) implications are there
for the Soyuz currently docked?

What written documentation of the comments during descent
were made at MCC-H and the NASA Moscow office? Did
anyone note at that time the verbal descriptions of pressure
drop, and discuss them in debriefings for which there are
minutes? Can we see those minutes and log pages?

These are not unreasonably questions. Any appeal
to 'go use FOIA' is not, in my view, reasonable or fair.

Here's my original MSNBC.com story from October 14
(http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9697668/) and the
followup on Alan Boyle's 'space blog' at
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9732230/#051019a


  #2  
Old October 24th 05, 09:52 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default No straight answers from NASA on depressurization event on Soyuz descent

Out of curiosity, what is the consquence today if the historic
valve-stuck-open problem repeats?

They wear pressure suits now, so is it a matter of having time to put
on the helmet and gloves? are those already on?

Presumably it is harder to flip switches, etc in a suit inflated by
pressure difference (ie, in a depressuarized capsule).

Not saying the issue should be taken lightly, but wondering if it's
medium danger / severe annoyance level, or if it's seriously life
threatening on the ground it until it's fixed level?

  #3  
Old October 24th 05, 10:37 PM
John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default No straight answers from NASA on depressurization event on Soyuz descent

It will be interesting to see how reactions run to this question. My
reaction is that if (and these are not foregone conclusions) the crew
is prompted in time, sufficiently trained to rapidly don helmets and
gloves, and the leak rate is not unreasonably high . . . then no . . .
it not seriously life threatening (i.e. prompt dire consequences for
the crew). But it is unsettling that the crew would be down to their
last layer of redundancy (the suit itself).

Yes, the suits have been reliable (when donned in a relaxed fashion
with someone backstopping you) and no, I not saying we should stay on
the ground unless the risk is zero. It is that it elevates the pulse
slightly that you are down to your last (albeit very good) layer of
defense.

  #4  
Old October 24th 05, 11:23 PM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default No straight answers from NASA on depressurization event on Soyuzdescent

wrote:
Not saying the issue should be taken lightly, but wondering if it's
medium danger / severe annoyance level, or if it's seriously life
threatening on the ground it until it's fixed level?


I think it more as a quality control issue.

One message I saw here had the pressure begin to drop prior to
undocking. I would ASSUME that it began to happen when the closed the
hatches and vaccumed the vestibule, at which point they may have noticed
an imperfect seal.

This is a soyuz that stayed on station for 6 months. So any leaks would
have been noticed during this time.

IF the leak happened in the hatch between the orbital module and vacuum,
The crew could have closed the hatch between the re-entry module and the
orbital module and be safe. (but without toilet and space to move around)

One has to consider that if the leak was detected prior to undocking, it
probably was probably slow enough that they decided to proceed with
undocking. It was probably felt that delaying undocking to debug the
leak wasn't worth it based on the leak rate.

So the big question is whether they lived with the leak and made use of
orbital module until it was separated, or if they closed the hatch and
stayed in re-entry module all the time. (perhaps repressurising the
orbital module once to make use of the toilet).

It was probably a very minor glitch that appears to be more serious than
it was because of the "secrecy" about it. Russians should be man enough
to release the detailed information about this glitch to end any speculation.
  #5  
Old October 25th 05, 04:49 AM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default No straight answers from NASA on depressurization event on Soyuz descent

John Doe wrote:

It was probably a very minor glitch that appears to be more serious than
it was because of the "secrecy" about it.


Yah. And all the o-ring partial burnthroughs were minor glitches
too.. And all the foam shedding events prior to -107.

It's nauseating how idiots like yourself handwave away every problem
as a 'minor glitch'.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
  #6  
Old October 25th 05, 04:59 AM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default No straight answers from NASA on depressurization event on Soyuzdescent

Derek Lyons wrote:
It's nauseating how idiots like yourself handwave away every problem
as a 'minor glitch'.


Just because in-flight, a problem is not seen as critical doesn't mean
that back on ground, it can be forgotten. Russia needs to find out
exactly why this happened and make sure it doesn't happen anymore.

Unfortunatly, the evidence would have been destroyed when the orbital
module disintegrated into atmosphere. (Unless crews would have been able
to manoeuver the re-entry module to take hi-res pictures of the orbital
modul forward hatch once the orbital module was detached, but I doubt
this was done).


If a problem is under control and the leakage rate was steady and well
within limits, there there was no reason to panic and for journalists on
earth to make a mountain out of a mole hill. But yes, people deserve to
know exactly what happened.

This was a russian craft and I don't expect NASA to have to release any
information about this issue. It is up to the russians to discuss this.
I wouldn't blame NASA for lack of information about this incident.
  #7  
Old October 25th 05, 09:36 AM
Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default No straight answers from NASA on depressurization event on Soyuz descent


"John Doe" wrote in message ...
Derek Lyons wrote:

This was a russian craft and I don't expect NASA to have to release any
information about this issue. It is up to the russians to discuss this.
I wouldn't blame NASA for lack of information about this incident.


As long as NASA astronauts are expected to ride Soyuz, I expect NASA to be
forthcoming on the risks.



  #8  
Old October 25th 05, 11:59 AM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default No straight answers from NASA on depressurization event on Soyuzdescent

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote:
As long as NASA astronauts are expected to ride Soyuz, I expect NASA to be
forthcoming on the risks.


Reverse the table for a minute. Do you really expect the russians be the
first to release NASA information on glitches on shuttle flights that
carried russians cosmonauts ? Do you really think NASA would be happy
with this ?

NASA is expected to be held accountable and release the informationa
about glitches on its shuttle.
the Russians are expected to be held accountable and release the
information about glitches on Soyuz.

As a quasi customer/guest of Soyuz, NASA itself can ask the russians for
an explanation, but it isn't its role to make that information public.
  #9  
Old October 25th 05, 01:38 PM
Terrell Miller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default No straight answers from NASA on depressurization event on Soyuzdescent

John Doe wrote:

NASA is expected to be held accountable and release the informationa
about glitches on its shuttle.
the Russians are expected to be held accountable and release the
information about glitches on Soyuz.


but the Russians simply do not play by the same set of rules that we do
in America. Never have, never will. Their culture is what it is.

So NASA has had to repeatedly hold their nuts to the fire to get what we
expect from our "partners".


As a quasi customer/guest of Soyuz, NASA itself can ask the russians for
an explanation, but it isn't its role to make that information public.


it is if NASA is a US government agency funded by tax dollars...



--
Terrell Miller


"Suddenly, after nearly 30 years of scorn, Prog is cool again".
-Entertainment Weekly
  #10  
Old October 25th 05, 01:43 PM
Terrell Miller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default No straight answers from NASA on depressurization event on Soyuzdescent

Jim Oberg wrote:
Two weeks ago -- a potentially alarming safety issue.
So far, not a single useful word of reply from anyone at NASA.


snip


These are not unreasonably questions. Any appeal
to 'go use FOIA' is not, in my view, reasonable or fair.


why? If it's reasonable to ask the questions of a federal agency, why is
it unreasonable to amke sure you get an answer?


--
Terrell Miller


"Suddenly, after nearly 30 years of scorn, Prog is cool again".
-Entertainment Weekly
 




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
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 September 2nd 05 04:13 AM
Sandia National Lab assists NASA with several shuttle projects (Forwarded) Andrew Yee Space Shuttle 0 August 21st 05 06:06 PM
JimO writings on shuttle disaster, recovery Jim Oberg Policy 0 July 11th 05 06:32 PM
Review board says shuttle safe despite NASA failure to fully implement three CAIB recommendations Jacques van Oene Space Shuttle 3 July 1st 05 09:25 PM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 September 12th 03 01:37 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:16 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.