How safe a haven?

Space station chief wary of haven plan
Fri Feb 4, 2005 5:16 AM GMT
By Irene Klotz
[EXCERPTS]

MELBOURNE, Florida (Reuters) - The International Space Station is not
ready to serve as a safe haven for shuttle crew members stranded by
ship damage, the Russian commander of the next station crew has said.

Cosmonaut Sergei Krikalev said NASA's emergency plan for the crew of a
damaged space shuttle to take refuge on the orbiting station until a
rescue ship could be sent raised safety issues and he had pressed
managers on the issue.

"We need to prepare a backup plan for this backup scenario," said
Krikalev, 46, a veteran of three long-duration space flights and two
shuttle missions.

"It's going to be difficult. The station cannot stay in this
configuration for a long time," he said during a news conference at
Houston's Johnson Space Centre.

Managers are targeting the first post-Columbia shuttle mission for
launch in mid-May. Although the primary purpose of the Discovery flight
is to test in-flight heat shield repair techniques, the crew will
deliver critical equipment to the space station.

Some of the gear is to outfit the station to serve as a safe haven if
another shuttle is damaged.

Krikalev's chief concerns centre around adequate air, water and food
supplies, as well as how nine people would cope physically and mentally
in a small space for a prolonged time.

Access to the station's exercise equipment, which is critical during
long-duration space flight, would be limited.

"I've got assurance from station managers that everything necessary
needs to be done to make sure that this scenario would be avoided,"
Krikalev said.

Although NASA will have a second shuttle poised for launch in case of a
problem with Discovery, the agency would have to go ahead with the
mission well before an accident investigation or hardware modifications
could be made.

"If the situation which requires people to stay (aboard the station)
happened, it will be a very difficult decision to send another shuttle
to try to rescue them," Krikalev said.

A bit mo

-------------------------------

Feb. 3, 2005, 9:33PM
Cosmonaut questions space shuttle strategy
NASA says it will keep crew size at seven for its upcoming mission
By MARK CARREAU
Houston Chronicle

Months before Discovery is scheduled to lift off, Sergei
Krikalev, who becomes the station skipper in late April,
has asked NASA to consider cutting Discovery's crew from
seven to four. And if Columbia-like shuttle damage
forces an emergency rescue, he thinks two Soyuz capsules
could do it quicker than one U.S. backup shuttle.

"As soon as I knew the shuttle would fly during my
(command), it became my duty to work up all of these
options to be sure I would not be faced with two bad
scenarios, and that is why I talked about this," Krikalev
said Thursday during a news conference at Johnson Space
Center discussing the six-month space station mission
he'll share with American John Phillips.

"It's my concern, and I feel it's my duty."

The odds of a serious problem are low, admits Krikalev,
who has spent 17 months in space. But he noted the outpost
has struggled to sustain even its two-man U.S. and Russian
crews since the loss of Columbia two years ago grounded
NASA's shuttle fleet.

NASA intends to stick with its plans for a seven-member
crew on Discovery's mission, NASA spokesman James
Hartsfield said Thursday.

"I believe the NASA management knows exactly what the
risks are," Phillips said.

With a shuttle crew of four, Krikalev says Russians could
rescue all six space station crew members by launching a
three-man Soyuz rescue capsule to join another Soyuz
already parked at the outpost. With a larger Discovery
crew, NASA would have to launch a backup shuttle or ask
nine people to share the station's cramped quarters for
months, he said.

--------------------------------------------------------



Question: Why not use the one presumably available Soyuz
(besides the docked life-boat one) to reduce a crew of
nine to six, thus buying some time?

"Allen Thomson" wrote:

And if Columbia-like shuttle damage
forces an emergency rescue, he thinks two Soyuz capsules
could do it quicker than one U.S. backup shuttle.

And where precisely are these two 'extra' Soyuz going to come from?

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

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Derek Lyons wrote:

And where precisely are these two 'extra' Soyuz going to
come from?

An excellent question that goes to the heart of the matter.

I'd be willing to spot them one extra Soyuz available on
fairly short notice, which would get three people down while
leaving the emergency life-boat on ISS. Russian boosters
and hardware in general are notoriously rugged and given to
rough-and-ready response. But that assumes that they're
available to respond rough-and-readily.

However, how soon after an initial emergency Souyz launch
could Russia get another Soyuz to ISS to return an additional
three people and leave the station with three on board?

Krikalev's concerns are worth thinking about, but I'm
not sure where the answer will come out.

Derek Lyons wrote:
And where precisely are these two 'extra' Soyuz going to come from?

Krikalev was acting as a saleman: "For a true safe haven that works, buy
2 soyuz now and have them always ready to be launched if needed to
rescue shuttle crews".

While the Soyuz solution does deal with saving human lifes, it does not
deal with any cargo uplift for spare parts to save the injured shuttle.
And that is where the backup shuttle really comes in handy.

In the short term, will they be doing anything to make PMA3 usable ? Are
there any possible PMA3 locations that would allow the SSRMS to move the
injured shuttle from PMA2 to PMA3 ?

In terms of sufficient storage and general space, I still think that
NASA should have spend those 2 years strenghtening one MPLM into a
permanent fixture to the station.

John Doe wrote:

Krikalev was acting as a saleman: "For a true safe haven
that works, buy 2 soyuz now and have them always ready to
be launched if needed to rescue shuttle crews".

Who would buy them? Not the US, which is constrained (at least
in ordinary circumstances) by the Iran Non-Proliferation Act.

On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 01:57:17 GMT, (Derek Lyons) wrote:

"Allen Thomson" wrote:

And if Columbia-like shuttle damage
forces an emergency rescue, he thinks two Soyuz capsules
could do it quicker than one U.S. backup shuttle.

And where precisely are these two 'extra' Soyuz going to come from?

The way I read it, Krikalev is only talking about one extra Soyuz.
Two shuttle and one ISS crew member in each, leaving the station
unoccupied for a while. Given the probable loss of another reenterable
shuttle forcing the situation in the first place, the future of ISS would
be in doubt anyway.

Dale

Derek Lyons wrote:
And if Columbia-like shuttle damage
forces an emergency rescue, he thinks two Soyuz capsules
could do it quicker than one U.S. backup shuttle.

And where precisely are these two 'extra' Soyuz going to come from?

What "two 'extra' Soyuz"? Can you read? He's taking about 1 (one) extra
Soyuz with a three-man capsule. Another capsule is already there on ISS,
meaning that six people will be able to return from ISS (two - ISS crew,
and another four - shuttle crew) leaving the ISS unoccupied.

--
Best regards,
Andrey Tarasevich

Andrey Tarasevich wrote:

What "two 'extra' Soyuz"? Can you read? He's taking about
1 (one) extra Soyuz with a three-man capsule. Another
capsule is already there on ISS, meaning that six people
will be able to return from ISS (two - ISS crew, and
another four - shuttle crew) leaving the ISS unoccupied.


But, which is also a possibility, if there are six people on
ISS, they want to reduce the crew to the previous two to avoid
abandoning the station (at least for a while) and leave a
lifeboat Soyuz there for the two, that means two extra Soyuz.

Either that or have somebody sit in sombody else's lap, which
the seatliner discussion indicates might not be a good idea.

"Andrey Tarasevich" wrote in message
...
Derek Lyons wrote:
And if Columbia-like shuttle damage
forces an emergency rescue, he thinks two Soyuz capsules
could do it quicker than one U.S. backup shuttle.

And where precisely are these two 'extra' Soyuz going to come from?

What "two 'extra' Soyuz"? Can you read? He's taking about 1 (one) extra
Soyuz with a three-man capsule. Another capsule is already there on ISS,
meaning that six people will be able to return from ISS (two - ISS crew,
and another four - shuttle crew) leaving the ISS unoccupied.
Umm, the fact that often the shuttle is flying with more than 4 astronauts,
and needs that many to accomplish the required amount of work required in
the time while there, what do you do with the others, space them?



--
Best regards,
Andrey Tarasevich