A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

First NASA Soyuz TMA-11 documents



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 7th 08, 09:19 PM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default First NASA Soyuz TMA-11 documents

More info from James Oberg
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/may08/6229
This is interesting:
"However, a suggestive detail in the postlanding photography, a thruster
mounting with jagged gaps alongside it, indicates that an attitude
thruster burned through. Such damage would have reduced or even entirely
eliminated the crew's ability to point the crew module during descent.
The thruster could have been lost as a consequence of a vain attempt to
steer the much-heavier-than-expected combined vehicle through the
initial buffeting."

Soyuz TMA RV thrusters use simple hydrogen peroxide decomposition to
generate thrust, so you'd think the comparatively low temperatures
involved wouldn't burn through a thruster... was the thruster damaged
during reentry?

Another interesting section:

"In addition, Yi So-yeon, the South Korean flight participant, reported
in interviews in Seoul that the final ground impact was not vertical but
sideways, causing many heavy baggage items to break free from restraints
and hit her."

After parachute deployment the capsule is supposed to fire a system that
releases a bridle from the side-mounted parachute housing that then
swings up over the top hatch, so that the capsule is descending
vertically under the chute. If it did hit sideways, that suggests
something went wrong with the bridle release and in that case the
landing rockets wouldn't cushion the landing much on impact.

Pat
  #2  
Old May 8th 08, 05:48 PM posted to sci.space.history
John[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 373
Default First NASA Soyuz TMA-11 documents

On May 7, 4:19*pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
More info from James Oberghttp://www.spectrum.ieee.org/may08/6229
This is interesting:
"However, a suggestive detail in the postlanding photography, a thruster
mounting with jagged gaps alongside it, indicates that an attitude
thruster burned through. Such damage would have reduced or even entirely
eliminated the crew's ability to point the crew module during descent.
The thruster could have been lost as a consequence of a vain attempt to
steer the much-heavier-than-expected combined vehicle through the
initial buffeting."

Soyuz TMA RV thrusters use simple hydrogen peroxide decomposition to
generate thrust, so you'd think the comparatively low temperatures
involved wouldn't burn through a thruster... was the thruster damaged
during reentry?

Another interesting section:

"In addition, Yi So-yeon, the South Korean flight participant, reported
in interviews in Seoul that the final ground impact was not vertical but
sideways, causing many heavy baggage items to break free from restraints
and hit her."

After parachute deployment the capsule is supposed to fire a system that
releases a bridle from the side-mounted parachute housing that then
swings up over the top hatch, so that the capsule is descending
vertically under the chute. If it did hit sideways, that suggests
something went wrong with the bridle release and in that case the
landing rockets wouldn't cushion the landing much on impact.

Pat


Pat,

You seem to have an understanding of Soyuz systems. Although not
related (as best we know) to the current TMA-11 issue, I wonder if you
may have some historical information.

On the Soyuz spacecraft used today, a radar altimeter is used to cue
the firing of the braking rockets immediately before landing.
However, earlier versions of Soyuz used a radiometric system similar
to a gamma backscatter gauge that measured radiation scattered back
from the ground as the vehicle approached touchdown. If I remember
correctly the system used a Cobalt 60 source. The location of the
source on the bottom of the vehicle was marked by the international
yellow and magenta radiation symbol. But that is all I know (and I am
iffy on some of that information).

Do you have any specific information on this system, especially:

1. The isotope and the activity of the source, in either Becquerels
(SI units) or curies (traditional units).

2. The resultant radiation exposure or dose rates in the interior of
the reentry vehicle (again in either SI or traditional units)?

I have goggled for this information several times and even posted the
question here on the newsgroup a couple of years ago, without
success. Thank you in advance for any information or internet
references you might be able to share.

Blue skies to all,

John
  #3  
Old May 9th 08, 08:56 AM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default First NASA Soyuz TMA-11 documents



John wrote:

Do you have any specific information on this system, especially:

1. The isotope and the activity of the source, in either Becquerels
(SI units) or curies (traditional units).

2. The resultant radiation exposure or dose rates in the interior of
the reentry vehicle (again in either SI or traditional units)?

I have goggled for this information several times and even posted the
question here on the newsgroup a couple of years ago, without
success. Thank you in advance for any information or internet
references you might be able to share.


Nothing on the TMA version, but both the radioactive and radar firing
systems for the landing rockets aren't going to work right if it doesn't
land vertically. In that case you are going to hit very hard, then (if
you are lucky) the landing rockets aren't going to go off...or if you're
not.... they are going to fire and blow the capsule around after its
initial surface impact.
From what little I've read about the specifics of the TMA-11 landing,
it sounds a lot like the latter occurred. That would account for the
fire and description of it rolling around after bouncing off of the
ground on the initial impact.
The burn time of the landing rockets is very short (around a
second?)...but they generate one hell of a lot of thrust while firing.
Whatever happened, this was a _way_ off-nominal reentry and landing.
It would be interesting to get specific details of the TMA-10 reentry
and landing aberrations, though I doubt we will.
Hitting the atmosphere with the service module still attached and having
it burn off as heating an aerodynamic loads built up would scare me a
lot less than having it separate and still having it attached by the
umbilicals between it and the reentry module; in that case it could be
batting into the heatshield as reentry began and damaging it before it
fell away.
Several of the Vostoks came in like that, with their reentry spheres
still attached by their umbilicals, but in that case the service module
would have ended up basically above the reentry sphere as it descended
until falling free.
In the case of Soyuz, the service module would end up hanging at around
a ninety degree angle from the the Soyuz RV's heatshield, so that the
crew would be entering head-first till it separated.
Unfortunately, that's the side of the RV the parachute ejection hatches
are mounted on, and they could be damaged by the heat, like what
happened during the Soyuz 5 reentry.
Our astronaut's statement that deceleration was _feet-first_ indicates
that that wasn't the case, and the whole service module stayed attached
till its attachments to the RV burned away, like in the case of Soyuz 5.
The solar arrays on the equipment module and forward center of mass of
the combined vehicle means that during the initial interaction with the
atmosphere the combined RV/SM is going to come in like a finned bomb -
nose end first.
In the case of Soyuz 5, the two modules apparently separated when the
hypergolic propellants in the SM cooked off and blew it to pieces.

Pat
  #4  
Old May 9th 08, 05:07 PM posted to sci.space.history
John[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 373
Default First NASA Soyuz TMA-11 documents


In the case of Soyuz 5, the two modules apparently separated when the
hypergolic propellants in the SM cooked off and blew it to pieces.

Pat



Goood Grief!!!!!!!!!!!
  #5  
Old May 10th 08, 09:33 AM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default First NASA Soyuz TMA-11 documents



John wrote:
In the case of Soyuz 5, the two modules apparently separated when the
hypergolic propellants in the SM cooked off and blew it to pieces.

Pat



Goood Grief!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, Volynov heard quite a bang when the tanks blew; here's the
description of the reentry from the book "Challenge to Apollo":

"Six seconds after
the termination of retrofire, Volynov heard the pyrocartridges
triggering to separate the three
major modules of the spacecraft: the living compartment, the descent
apparatus, and the
instrument-aggregate compartment. As he looked through the viewport, he
noticed something
deadly wrong: he could clearly see the antennas attached to the solar
arrays on the cylindrical
instrument-aggregate compartment, meaning that the section, also known
as the service module,
had not separated from the descent apparatus. While similar failures had
occurred on early
Vostok and Voskhod flights, it posed a much greater threat on Soyuz
because of the relatively
huge size of the module. Volynov immediately reported in code to ground
controllers about his
predicament. Most simply believed that Volynov had little chance to live?
The descent apparatus tumbled in somersaults as it remained attached to
the three-ton
service module and began its long journey through the atmosphere.
Turning over and over, with
the thermal shield unexposed to the heat because it was still covered by
the service module,
the heat began to affect unprotected portions of the descent apparatus.
Smoke began to appear
within the capsule as the light heat insulation began to burn. Normally,
during a reentry, hydrogen
peroxide jets would fire during this period to guide the capsule to
provide lift and reduce
thermal and gravitational stresses. In this case, Volynov noticed that
his instrument panel indicated
that the valves for the thrusters were open, but there had been no
firings. All the propellant
had been used up at the initiation of retrofire, when the computer had
tried in vain to
correct the spaceship's incorrect attitude.
Volynov recalls that he was sure that only a few minutes separated him
from death. The normally
unflappable cosmonaut considered saying goodbye to his relatives, but
instead decided to
hurriedly save all the recorded materials on the docking procedure by
ripping the important pages
from the log book, rolling them up tightly, and sticking them into the
middle of the book. Then,
amid the cauldron around him, he calmly began to speak into a tape
recorder, describing all the
details of his experience to assist in identifying the reasons for the
failure. Through it all, there
were terrifying moments. Once, there was a sharp clap, indicating that
the propellant tanks of
the service module had blown apart with such force that the crew hatch
was forced inwards and
then upwards like the bottom of a tin can. Plummeting through a
ballistic trajectory, he realized
that the service module had finally disintegrated and he had survived.
His relief soon turned to
anxiety when the parachute system triggered at an altitude of ten
kilometers. The straps on the
main parachute began to twist, preventing them from unfurling properly.
For the second time in
minutes, he was convinced of his end, Remarkably, the braids of the
parachute began to untwist
slowly: by the time that the descent apparatus landed with its
soft-landing engines, it was sufficient
to ensure Volynov's safety, although the landing was so hard that the
roots of his teeth
in his upper jaw were broken off. It was only the specially built
shock-absorbing seat that saved
him from broken bones and more serious injuries."

Pat
  #6  
Old May 17th 08, 01:01 AM posted to sci.space.history
John[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 373
Default First NASA Soyuz TMA-11 documents

On May 10, 4:33*am, Pat Flannery wrote:
John wrote:
In the case of Soyuz 5, the two modules apparently separated when the
hypergolic propellants in the SM cooked off and blew it to pieces.


Pat


Goood Grief!!!!!!!!!!!


Yeah, Volynov heard quite a bang when the tanks blew; here's the
description of the reentry from the book "Challenge to Apollo":

"Six seconds after
the termination of retrofire, Volynov heard the pyrocartridges
triggering to separate the three
major modules of the spacecraft: the living compartment, the descent
apparatus, and the
instrument-aggregate compartment. As he looked through the viewport, he
noticed something
deadly wrong: he could clearly see the antennas attached to the solar
arrays on the cylindrical
instrument-aggregate compartment, meaning that the section, also known
as the service module,
had not separated from the descent apparatus. While similar failures had
occurred on early
Vostok and Voskhod flights, it posed a much greater threat on Soyuz
because of the relatively
huge size of the module. Volynov immediately reported in code to ground
controllers about his
predicament. Most simply believed that Volynov had little chance to live?
The descent apparatus tumbled in somersaults as it remained attached to
the three-ton
service module and began its long journey through the atmosphere.
Turning over and over, with
the thermal shield unexposed to the heat because it was still covered by
the service module,
the heat began to affect unprotected portions of the descent apparatus.
Smoke began to appear
within the capsule as the light heat insulation began to burn. Normally,
during a reentry, hydrogen
peroxide jets would fire during this period to guide the capsule to
provide lift and reduce
thermal and gravitational stresses. In this case, Volynov noticed that
his instrument panel indicated
that the valves for the thrusters were open, but there had been no
firings. All the propellant
had been used up at the initiation of retrofire, when the computer had
tried in vain to
correct the spaceship's incorrect attitude.
Volynov recalls that he was sure that only a few minutes separated him
from death. The normally
unflappable cosmonaut considered saying goodbye to his relatives, but
instead decided to
hurriedly save all the recorded materials on the docking procedure by
ripping the important pages
from the log book, rolling them up tightly, and sticking them into the
middle of the book. Then,
amid the cauldron around him, he calmly began to speak into a tape
recorder, describing all the
details of his experience to assist in identifying the reasons for the
failure. Through it all, there
were terrifying moments. Once, there was a sharp clap, indicating that
the propellant tanks of
the service module had blown apart with such force that the crew hatch
was forced inwards and
then upwards like the bottom of a tin can. Plummeting through a
ballistic trajectory, he realized
that the service module had finally disintegrated and he had survived.
His relief soon turned to
anxiety when the parachute system triggered at an altitude of ten
kilometers. The straps on the
main parachute began to twist, preventing them from unfurling properly.
For the second time in
minutes, he was convinced of his end, Remarkably, the braids of the
parachute began to untwist
slowly: by the time that the descent apparatus landed with its
soft-landing engines, it was sufficient
to ensure Volynov's safety, although the landing was so hard that the
roots of his teeth
in his upper jaw were broken off. It was only the specially built
shock-absorbing seat that saved
him from broken bones and more serious injuries."

Pat


Pat,

Do you have any information on the gamma backscatter altimetry
system?

Thanks

John
  #7  
Old May 17th 08, 10:33 AM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default First NASA Soyuz TMA-11 documents



John wrote:

Pat,

Do you have any information on the gamma backscatter altimetry
system?


Not specific details on it, but the isotope used on it to generate the
backscatter off of the ground that fires the landing rockets was
powerful enough that the rear bulkhead on the Soyuz unincorporated both
a radiation warning insignia on it and visual warnings not to stand
behind the reentry module if it was laying on its side.
It's a very strange way of firing the landing rockets, but you can see
how it works... there's something like a downward pointing Geiger
counter on the capsule's bottom once the heatshield is jettisoned that
picks up the backscatter from the isotope as it bounces off of the
ground, and is attenuated by the atmosphere between the isotope itself
and the backscatter detector in secondary radioactive forms till it
reaches the detector.
That's probably Alpha backscatter radiation, if the isotopic emitter
was powerful enough.
Their air-dropped tanks (and I suspect the Voskhods from the same
period) used a deployed lanyard that fired the landing rockets when it
physically touched the ground from around 5-10 feet altitude (Voskhod's
landing rockets were mounted at the base of the shroud lines of its
parachute, as were the VA lander's from the TKS module).

Pat
 




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
NASA PDF documents available online for free download Rusty History 18 October 23rd 05 02:52 PM
NASA PDF - X-15 Rocket Plane documents Rusty History 1 August 7th 05 06:47 PM
NASA PDF documents - Apollo Soyuz Test Project Rusty History 0 July 25th 05 08:48 PM
NASA NTRS EVA / Spacesuit PDF documents Rusty History 6 February 25th 05 10:44 AM
Paper copies of NASA documents, where do I find? C T Space Shuttle 0 April 19th 04 03:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:38 AM.


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.