Jump to content

Russian Launch and Mission Thread


tater
 Share

Recommended Posts

Wheeeeewwww!!!

Driving to work early morning, I've heard in the radio that Starliner launch will be delayed, because of problems caused by "Nauka" docking to ISS!!! :0.0:

Remembering some of my own, less than stellar attempts at docking in KSP, my first thought was "Did "Nauka" ram into the ISS!?!"

It's good to learn everything is more or less OK spaceside.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Not a problem anymore. It has been propelled and docked, and never needs them again.

Still a problem on a conceptual level. Even though the issues with propulsion and docking are now over, they still launched a module without knowing what was wrong with it. If they missed the defects in the propulsion and docking systems, they could also have missed other critical defects in other systems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DDE said:

Apparently it went into the docking abort mode.

And amazingly, tha almost worked. It's hard to abort docking after it is over, but Nauka gave its best and  was very close to making it so.

On a more serious note, I'm apalled that there are no safety checks on this. You don't write mission critical code that simply executes to completion if a particular routine got called. This is a known bad practice. Whoever's in charge of software needs to be fired and replaced with someone who knows how to write safe code.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Codraroll said:

Still a problem on a conceptual level. Even though the issues with propulsion and docking are now over, they still launched a module without knowing what was wrong with it. If they missed the defects in the propulsion and docking systems, they could also have missed other critical defects in other systems.

The propulsion system was rebuilt on the already assembled module instead of the native one.

The docking system performed the autodocking perfectly. The unknown issue was on its activation after launch, and as we can see it was removed by the mouse clicking  (no repair brigade was preesent there).

Beyond the remade propulsion system, everything other looks native.

So, it's mostly a bad PR problem.

***

On the positive side: on Baikonur they start preparing Soyuz for the filming crew.

The launch is planned on October, 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kerbiloid said:

So, it's mostly a bad PR problem.

No, it's a bad QC problem, which may become the mother of several other problems. The flaw is not so much that the defects happened, so much that it was that the defects were allowed to happen. There's a big difference. If a faulty wire in your house starts creating sparks, your problem is not that a wire in your house is sparking. That's just a symptom. Your problem is that you used a shoddy electrician, and you better have somebody take a long, hard look at the rest of the work performed by that guy. The wire you see sparking is a problem you can manage, but you have reason to worry that there's a similar wire spitting sparks inside a wall.

Likewise, the undetected defects in Nauka's propulsion and docking systems are bad in themselves, but they are symptomatic of a management problem among the people who built it and declared it fit to fly. That's the real reason to worry. The dangers of failure with propulsion and docking are over, but there can be all sorts of other nasty surprises that haven't revealed themselves yet, because they didn't look hard enough to find them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Codraroll said:

No, it's a bad QC problem, which may become the mother of several other problems. The flaw is not so much that the defects happened, so much that it was that the defects were allowed to happen.

This didn't prevent the Salyuts, Mir, and the previous ISS Russian modules from happily flying since 1970s.

The QC was same or even worse (due to more primitive diagnostic equipment).

And the module is much more complicated than the Western ones, which are basically just habitats without other system.

The Russian modules are same for decades, only scientific equipment changes.

20 minutes ago, Codraroll said:

The dangers of failure with propulsion and docking are over, but there can be all sorts of other nasty surprises that haven't revealed themselves yet, because they didn't look hard enough to find them.

I would recall two shuttles lost due to inattention to the engineering notices in the first case, and engineering problems in the second case, let alone the problems with heat protection in every second flight.

Also we still can't see how much problems will be with new Western modules if they come for LOP-G, Bigelow, etc.
They don't have a shuttle now, so the propulsion system will be own in every flight.

Did Boeing properly check their clock before testing CST-100?

There is no 100% guarantee ever that nothing will go wrong. And the victim count stays same 1:70.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

I would recall two shuttles lost due to inattention to the engineering notices in the first case, and engineering problems in the second case, let alone the problems with heat protection in every second flight.

Also we still can't see how much problems will be with new Western modules if they come for LOP-G, Bigelow, etc.
They don't have a shuttle now, so the propulsion system will be own in every flight.

Did Boeing properly check their clock before testing CST-100?

There is no 100% guarantee ever that nothing will go wrong. And the victim count stays same 1:70.

Let's not turn this into a "Western spacecraft are uncomplex and dangerous" discussion. Nauka has clearly suffered some very critical issues with QC. This isn't a matter of national pride. This is solely the fault of the men and women who allegedly tested the software. It doesn't necessarily reflect on Russia. All the same... &)

Now hopefully the astronauts and cosmonauts up there can relax after that *little* incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SOXBLOX said:

Let's not turn this into a "Western spacecraft are uncomplex and dangerous" discussion. Nauka has clearly suffered some very critical issues with QC.

Let's don't tell about others' QC like something magically better, and the national pride is absolutely  has nothing to do here.

It's somewhat funny to hear the apocalyptic drama-drama about a Nauka propulsion issue (happily solved in flight with no people on board) from people who hasn't performed any flight for a decade and never delivered a space station module without the shuttle, whose QC was the reason of that break (let alone that "QC" allowed to fly with crew of 7 without any emergency option at all, except the handwaving about the "flight break modes").

There is a bunch of orbital station projects, but still nothing in actual "material" plans, isn't it?
LOP-G, Axiom, Bigelow, lunar station (which suddenly appeared to be not even selected from artistis designs, let alone the engineering).
Any module ever delivered since 2011 (except several small attachable things delivered inside the Dragon trunk)?
Are you sure they will have less problems than Nauka? Or at least, will ever be created at all?
To the date, all assembly operations were provided by manually berthing something delivered in the shuttle cargo bay. Yet exactly zero Western modules were delivered directly, like all of the listed projects require. Will it run easy? Or somebody will forget to wind the watch again, despite of the QC?

(While the ROSS modules are actually having built, we could see them.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Let's don't tell about others' QC like something magically better, and the national pride is absolutely  has nothing to do here.

Nowhere did I say that anybody else is doing it better or compared it to any other spacecraft. I'm just saying that huge blunders have been made with Nauka specifically, and we can't be sure if these are the ends of it.

Hopefully, whoever is in charge manages to sit down and review their procedures instead of launching a big rant of whataboutism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.interfax.ru/russia/781858

The ROSS creation is approved by the Council for Engineering&Science of Roscosmos..

The Russian segment of ISS will work till 2028.
By this time the ROSS should start working, either as a part of ISS, or as a separated station.

They stated that after 2024 the keeping of the Russian segment will cost as much as a new station development, so recommended to start designing the future station to get ready by 2025, and include these works in 2025 plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

https://www.interfax.ru/russia/781853

Nauka has been integrated into the ISS.

  Reveal hidden contents

Found new device:  Unknown
The device info found successfully: Nauka Module
Updating firmware: ...
 

 

I think this actually means they've gotten rid of most metal dust and shavings that tend to appear post-launch and in zero-G. I recall a similar procedure for the other modules well over a decade ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DDE said:

I think this actually means they've gotten rid of most metal dust and shavings that tend to appear post-launch and in zero-G. I recall a similar procedure for the other modules well over a decade ago.

To show the customer that the station is not second-hand, it's right from the forge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the NASA officials, Nauka has rotated ISS not by 54° as it was erroneously stated earlier, but by 540°

(by ~1.5 turns there, and by ~0.5 turns back)

***

Of course, somebody will expectedly post about "steps to the left, then steps to the right", but actually we have been present at the first successful artificial gravity test on ISS, both direct and reversal.

Let's hope that this case will force the orbital station builders to keep everything properly attached onboard and avoid that horrible forest of temporary cable snots hanging here and there which would not be forgiven to a humble student IT on the Earth.

It hurts the IT feelings every time when they show the interior of the ISS.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would the ISS have had enough fuel to counter the rotation if Nauka had had more fuel in it and taken longer to be stopped? 

Neither Soyuz nor Dragon are in a great spot should evacuation have been necessary. The station was spinning such that Soyuz would easily hit Nauka if it were detached.

July 29, 2021: International Space Station Configuration

If the station were to run out of fuel, no spacecraft could be docked to it until stability was restored. Radiation pressure and atmospheric drag could do it, but how long would it take?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

There are at least Zvezda module, whose engines stopped the rotation.

But why not just jettison Nauka itself in that case?

I suppose they could try that. If they did it while the station was spinning, though, Nauka would hit Zvezda...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, cubinator said:

. If they did it while the station was spinning, though, Nauka would hit Zvezda...

Why? They were rotating at the same angular speed, so Nauka would escape radially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Why? They were rotating at the same angular speed, so Nauka would escape radially.

If I remember correctly Nauka was thrusting because it wanted to abort docking minutes after hard docking, so the rotation would very likely end up hitting Zvezda in that direction

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...