DDE Posted November 21, 2022 Share Posted November 21, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Beccab said: Woah, that was so unexpected So unexpected I couldn't be bothered to post it when I saw it. Maybe the Tsar's Wolves can investigate this unprecedented schedule slippage. Edited November 21, 2022 by DDE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted November 22, 2022 Share Posted November 22, 2022 Oryol can't be older than something today because it's not manufactured yet. While CST and Orion arer already obsolete, being built a decade ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 On 11/22/2022 at 5:56 AM, kerbiloid said: Oryol can't be older than something today because it's not manufactured yet. While CST and Orion arer already obsolete, being built a decade ago. This makes no sense, but you know that already so there's no point arguing Also, today's the 50th anniversary of the last N1 flight! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 Well, as we still don't have any Starship flight, let it be N1. N1 at least has tried. P.S. Technically, this thread title doesn't limit the launches with ballistic ones, of course... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codraroll Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 1 hour ago, kerbiloid said: Well, as we still don't have any Starship flight, let it be N1. N1 at least has tried. P.S. Technically, this thread title doesn't limit the launches with ballistic ones, of course... Starship has flown higher than N1 ever did. Well, maybe parts of the N1 went higher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted November 23, 2022 Share Posted November 23, 2022 (edited) 47 minutes ago, Codraroll said: Starship has flown higher than N1 ever did. Starship has hopped with six (or three?) engines of 30 required. It hasn't even proven that it can ignite them at once and not explode. The altitude means nothing. R-5 was flying higher than Starship. Edited November 23, 2022 by kerbiloid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted November 24, 2022 Share Posted November 24, 2022 Interview with Vladimir Degtyar', CEO and Chief Designer of KB Makeyev (for the last 25 years). Clearly a puff piece with a very recognizable pace of a Soviet article meant for his fellow bigwigs. https://rg.ru/2022/11/23/silnee-argumenta-ne-byvaet.html Three key takeaways are, close work between Makeuev and munition designers at VNIIEF, including on designs that afford up-armijg of existing SLBMs, a continuing push for the next-gen SLBM to be liquid-fuelled (thus forcing MIT out of Makeyev's fiefdom), and Sarmat-based asteroid defense using a Lagrange-point-based soace surveillance system (inspired by the Chelyabinsk meteor, in the very literal sense of it being visible from Miass). The asteroid defense effort includes conceptual studies for a kill vehicle capable of intercepting "objects" 10-100 m in diameter at 1-2 mln km. There are, of course, no other known use for such a capability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted November 24, 2022 Share Posted November 24, 2022 56 minutes ago, DDE said: and Sarmat-based asteroid defense using a Lagrange-point-based soace surveillance system Very good. Much better than hitting dydymuses with astronomic tools. Any words about Orion drive for that? 58 minutes ago, DDE said: The asteroid defense effort includes conceptual studies for a kill vehicle capable of intercepting "objects" 10-100 m in diameter at 1-2 mln km. Now we know the Orion (SLS) working orbit. That's where they are going to place the orbital fortress supplied with Orionss (SLS). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted November 25, 2022 Share Posted November 25, 2022 EVA scrub due to suit cooling issues https://t.me/space78125/1401 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted November 28, 2022 Share Posted November 28, 2022 Plesetsk, Soyuz-2.1b, Cosmos-2564, likely a Glonass-M https://ria.ru/20221128/plesetsk-1834853074.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted December 1, 2022 Share Posted December 1, 2022 Soyuz-2.1b, Plesetsk, plural payloads https://www.interfax.ru/russia/874904 NSF doesn't have a good explanation for the paylaod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insert_name Posted December 14, 2022 Share Posted December 14, 2022 Kosmos 2560, the payload from the most recent Angara launch has deorbited, possibly by design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted December 14, 2022 Share Posted December 14, 2022 10 hours ago, insert_name said: possibly by design Just as planned. Didn't need that satellite anyway! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted December 15, 2022 Author Share Posted December 15, 2022 Soyuz leak? Leak in MS-22 service module. 6 hour, 37 min spacewalk canceled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted December 15, 2022 Author Share Posted December 15, 2022 Leak is coolant. From MSS (direct comms): "Cooling loop. Polymethyl siloxane" (direct comms to me) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted December 15, 2022 Share Posted December 15, 2022 Eek. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted December 15, 2022 Share Posted December 15, 2022 It went on for over 3 hours, and ended up cancelling the EVA. Discussion about what to do with MS-22 continues tomorrow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted December 15, 2022 Share Posted December 15, 2022 Apparently they got the chance to put the ERA robot arm to use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted December 15, 2022 Author Share Posted December 15, 2022 Which they could visualize the leak point. Wonder if it was a failure of some kind, or if it was an impact? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted December 15, 2022 Share Posted December 15, 2022 (edited) 54 minutes ago, tater said: Wonder if it was a failure of some kind, or if it was an impact? Krikalyov: it's probably a micrometeorite. https://m.tvzvezda.ru/news/202212151641-mwFvc.html Edited December 15, 2022 by DDE ё моё! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted December 15, 2022 Share Posted December 15, 2022 47 minutes ago, DDE said: Krikalyov: it's probably a micrometeorite. BTW, are tiny fragments of destroyed satellites called micrometeorites too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted December 15, 2022 Share Posted December 15, 2022 Only tiny ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimate Steve Posted December 15, 2022 Share Posted December 15, 2022 In Scott Manley's video he brings up a good point, the station has been in constant sunlight for a few days now and that could have lead to above average stresses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted December 15, 2022 Share Posted December 15, 2022 A cooling system can't have no backup or redundancy, and they aren't going to be flying for three days. They are already docked, and need a short deorbit burn. After that they don't need the damaged thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted December 15, 2022 Share Posted December 15, 2022 1 hour ago, kerbiloid said: A cooling system can't have no backup or redundancy, and they aren't going to be flying for three days. They are already docked, and need a short deorbit burn. After that they don't need the damaged thing. The most obvious redundancy is to have multiple radiator panels in parallel and the option to disconnect them if you get a leak. Now if this cools the service module and it looses all cooling things can get bad so bad IIS might have to drop it, if it has some redundancy they are likely good. Its also some chance they don't want to risk crew on it, we has to wait for diagnostic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.