Rip progress ms-04

[insert_name]

Welp looks like rocosmos lost contact with the latest progress mission during the third stage burn. Attempts to restablish contact have been shaky, only thing we know is that the navigation antennas deployed

http://spaceflightnow.com/2016/12/01/progress-ms04-launch/

[PB666]

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-38173002

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Progress_flights

I was looking at this wiki, the vehicle type had relatively good reliability until about 135 (2011) and since then 3 failures.

[insert_name]

http://spaceflightnow.com/2016/12/01/progress-ms04-launch/

Maybe 4

[Gaarst]

For those speaking Russian:

I doubt it made orbit though, if there was a failure leading to loss of thrust, it's probably somewhere in Siberia by now.

[Kryten]

11 minutes ago, Gaarst said:

For those speaking Russian:

I doubt it made orbit though, if there was a failure leading to loss of thrust, it's probably somewhere in Siberia by now.

The Tuvan Republic, to be precise;

 

[Gaarst]

9 minutes ago, Kryten said:

The Tuvan Republic, to be precise;

 

My knowledge of Russian geography is very limited.

Well, now it's clear: it's been struck down by a meteor! Russia seems to like these (they the biggest country on Earth so it make sense they have more).

Edited December 1, 2016 by Gaarst

[NSEP]

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFREAK!

This is a serious problem!

[NSEP]

)-:

[monstah]

Two threads on the same subject have been merged.

[insert_name]

Looks like the problem was with the third stage, again. Any ideas why?

[Kryten]

This was the penultimate Soyuz-U, so it's not really that serious. It's pretty likely that they just won't fly the last one, rather than going through a whole investigation for just one launch.

EDIT: Loss has been formally confirmed by Roscosmos; http://www.roscosmos.ru/22996/

Edited December 1, 2016 by Kryten

[1greywind]

Anomaly during third stage burn. Clear analogy with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_M-12M - then third stage engine of same Союз-У launch vehicle stopped on 325 second of flight.

[Gaarst]

12 minutes ago, Kryten said:

This was the penultimate Soyuz-U, so it's not really that serious. It's pretty likely that they just won't fly the last one, rather than going through a whole investigation for just one launch.

EDIT: Loss has been formally confirmed by Roscosmos; http://www.roscosmos.ru/22996/

The RD-0110 used on the third stage of the Soyuz-U is the same as for all Soyuz launchers from Soyuz to Soyuz-2.(except Soyuz-2.1b), so if the problem comes from there, the problem can be serious. Even if the engine is not in cause, all Soyuz designs are very close to each other: issues in one version could easily be found on another.

12 minutes ago, 1greywind said:

Anomaly during third stage burn. Clear analogy with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_M-12M - then third stage engine of same Союз-У launch vehicle stopped on 325 second of flight.

A simple engine malfunction wouldn't cause loss of telemetry. For M-12M, the malfunction was transmitted to the ground stations as intended and the guys at Roscosmos knew what was going on straight away.

[_Augustus_]

[Scotius]

So, next up is Japanese HTV - i doubt it will have space for some extra supplies to tidy up ISS until resupply missions will be back on track. It's a bad moment considering that SpaceX and OrbitalATK have problems of their own. IMO it neatly underlines the need for multiple companies handling space transport with their own launchers that overlap. This way, even if one or two companies are unable to do their job, others can and will take over until things balance themselves again. More's the better

[Mitchz95]

SpaceX is due to return to flight this month, aren't they? Not a CRS mission, but once they have a working booster again it shouldn't be long.

[Camacha]

4 hours ago, PB666 said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Progress_flights

I was looking at this wiki, the vehicle type had relatively good reliability until about 135 (2011) and since then 3 failures.

The Soyuz was pretty much a beacon of reliability. It saddens me to see repeated issues with this icon.

[_Augustus_]

17 hours ago, Scotius said:

So, next up is Japanese HTV - i doubt it will have space for some extra supplies to tidy up ISS until resupply missions will be back on track. It's a bad moment considering that SpaceX and OrbitalATK have problems of their own. IMO it neatly underlines the need for multiple companies handling space transport with their own launchers that overlap. This way, even if one or two companies are unable to do their job, others can and will take over until things balance themselves again. More's the better

Once we have Dream Chaser flying I hope that'll be the case. 

17 hours ago, Mitchz95 said:

SpaceX is due to return to flight this month, aren't they? Not a CRS mission, but once they have a working booster again it shouldn't be long.

Yep! Next CRS flight is in January.

15 hours ago, Camacha said:

The Soyuz was pretty much a beacon of reliability. It saddens me to see repeated issues with this icon.

Agreed. But keep in mind that Russia spends less on their space budget in an entire year than the USA did on Curiosity, so it's pretty amazing that it's pretty reliable AND flies a lot.

Edited December 2, 2016 by _Augustus_

[Camacha]

1 minute ago, _Augustus_ said:

Agreed. But keep in mind that Russia spends less on their space budget in an entire year than we did on Curiosity

Wait, the KSP forums spent money on Curiosity?

[_Augustus_]

Just now, Camacha said:

Wait, the KSP forums spent money on Curiosity?

I meant "we" as in USA, sorry.

[Camacha]

Just now, _Augustus_ said:

I meant "we" as in USA, sorry.

Yeah, I noticed Americans tend to do that on the forums, even though it is a hugely international forum operated by a Mexico based company

[kerbiloid]

10 hours ago, Gaarst said:

The RD-0110 used on the third stage of the Soyuz-U is the same as for all Soyuz launchers

Since 1965.

[Gaarst]

9 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Since 1965.

The first Soyuz flight was in 1966, so yeah, for all Soyuz launchers.

[Jonfliesgoats]

To be fair to guys who refer to America as "we" we are all speaking English and KSP has a decidedly NASA slant.  If we were speaking Russian or French, I would assume "we" refers to ROSCOSMOS or ESA.

What offends me is that nobody ever assumes "we" are the New Zealand-based space program.  Kiwis have rockets too!

Also, to my friends at ROSCOSMOS, best of luck.  In the West we tend to undervalue and even insult Russian pilots, aerospace and engineers.  There are some brilliant minds working with far fewer resources than we have over there.  Good luck figuring out what happened.

[Camacha]

6 hours ago, Jonfliesgoats said:

To be fair to guys who refer to America as "we" we are all speaking English and KSP has a decidedly NASA slant.  If we were speaking Russian or French, I would assume "we" refers to ROSCOSMOS or ESA.

That is probably what I meant: we are not team NASA The KSP community is so very charming because it transcends the petty squabbles of nations. As a group, we are interested in space, science and history. We do not care whence it came from. We celebrate Gagarin as much as Armstrong. We cheer as much for Philea landing on 67P as we do for Curiosity touching down on Mars. Maybe it is the realisation that we are all ground monkeys set afloat on a grain of sand, maybe it is the fact that this final frontier receives so little of the attention it deserves in international politics that we feel we need to unite, maybe it is the feeling that the values of science and knowledge are universal in all senses of that word. Maybe I was wrong and we are, in fact, team NASA. We are team NASA as much as we are team ESA, team ROSCOSMOS and team JAXA. We even are team CNSA and ISRO, for they are kindred spirits that we welcome in our middle. Celebrate and rejoice, for we are team KSP. We come from Earth and come in peace.

It is just an observation that Americans posting often refer to we as if everyone is from the US. On international forums, the safe bet is probably to assume that most people are not from the same place you come from. However, no matter where you are from, you are welcome.