tater Posted February 11, 2023 Author Share Posted February 11, 2023 What are the chances 2 vehicles withthe same cooling system got stuck with micrometeorites? Just now, Beccab said: Micrometeorites have decided to have revenge on Roscosmos and will only hit the cooling systems on Soyuz service modules indeed Alternately... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Beccab said: And now it's confirmed Then it makes things easier, as it's a recurring error rather than a random one. P.S. Meanwhile, Roscosmos has performed 100 successful launches in a row, but of course it's a not interesting, dull thing . (As you can see (on TV), it's more important to have reliable launch vehicles able to deliver payload.) P.P.S. Another interesting thing. If Katya tells the truth, maybe it will help to find and neutralize the leak not only in a coolaing contour, but also in Roscosmos itself, talking too much. (Contacts, contacts...) Edited February 11, 2023 by kerbiloid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 https://www.rbc.ru/technology_and_media/11/02/2023/63e7c4599a794784bcd49ef2?from=from_main_1 S. Krikalyov confirmed the coolant leakage "same as on Soyuz". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, Beccab said: Micrometeorites have decided to have revenge on Roscosmos and will only hit the cooling systems on Soyuz service modules We have to entertain another, very familiar possibility. *beat* The ULA Sniper. Anyway... https://blogs.nasa.gov/spacestation/2023/02/11/international-space-station-operations-update-crew-continues-normal-activities/ As per NASA, the internal hatch is open. This indicates it is an external leak. It is also easily reconciled with Roscosmos statement: you'd want to open the hatch if the leak isn't internal. Edited February 11, 2023 by DDE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 (edited) I'd also like to highlight how, much like the MS-9 air leak, this issue had a curious way of manifesting with a very significant delay. That's an ill-advised approach to sabotage due to its unpredictability - any half-***ed seal you apply might actually last for the whole flight. Doesn't mitigate the risk of the culprit being identified (after the Yaskin fiasko, I imagine no-one who's ever been near a Soyuz is allowed to ever cross the border), but does increase the chance the sabotage efforts don't pan out. Edited February 11, 2023 by DDE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthgently Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 Occam's razor. I'd look for why the cooling system might be more exposed or more vulnerable to micrometeorite damage or perhaps a manufacturing weakness that looks like micrometeorite damage after failure maybe. Sabotage seems highly unlikely. The cooling system is probably pressurized refrigerant, so in vacuum in orbit the pressure difference and temp extremes and service durations may be beyond what the manufacturer is testing for currently on earth because of some corner cases not considered Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 Also, I decided to look if NASA has publicly concurred with the Roscosmos party line. It doesn't seem that they have. This is presently what amounts to their final word: Quote A robotic inspection of the suspected leak area was completed December 18, using cameras on the Canadarm2 robotic arm. A small hole was observed, and the surface of the radiator around the hole showed discoloration. Roscosmos is evaluating the imagery to determine if this hole could have resulted from micrometeoroid debris or if it is one of the pre-manufactured radiator vent holes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 3 minutes ago, DDE said: Also, I decided to look if NASA has publicly concurred with the Roscosmos party line. It doesn't seem that they have. This is presently what amounts to their final word: To add to that: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthgently Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 The manufacturer and crew may be on different pages from reality on how long the radiators can be in direct sunlight, for example. Or maybe reflected and focused sunlight from other parts are creating hotspots or similar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 1 minute ago, Beccab said: To add to that: Hey, if they did, at least everyone was in the same boat. NASA had officially dismissed the Geminids as the culprits. That's about it. 12 minutes ago, darthgently said: Occam's razor. I'd look for why the cooling system might be more exposed or more vulnerable to micrometeorite damage or perhaps a manufacturing weakness that looks like micrometeorite damage after failure maybe. Another option someone bounced around on NASASpaceflight is damage from fairing separation. This too would be fairly replicable, although doesn't quite match the visual description provided by NASA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 https://www.rbc.ru/technology_and_media/11/02/2023/63e7c4599a794784bcd49ef2?from=from_main_1 The Progress depressurization happened on Feb, 11, a week before its planned undocking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 I have seen numerous reports that MS-21 lost "cabin pressure" and also numerous reports that it lost "coolant pressure". Can someone please definitely say which (or both) of those things actually happened? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 19 minutes ago, mikegarrison said: I have seen numerous reports that MS-21 lost "cabin pressure" and also numerous reports that it lost "coolant pressure". Can someone please definitely say which (or both) of those things actually happened? The most reliable source on this (NASA blog) says there was another leak in the service module's radiators, and the hatch is open (i.e. no loss of cabin pressure) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 12, 2023 Author Share Posted February 12, 2023 Gotta be an issue with the cooling system. Bad batch of some part from a subcontractor, perhaps? Something enough below spec that in the space environment it tends to fail after some time interval (day/night cycles, whatever)? In such a harsh environment it would not take much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 7 hours ago, mikegarrison said: I have seen numerous reports that MS-21 lost "cabin pressure" and also numerous reports that it lost "coolant pressure". The problem is that the original statement was "a depressurization has occurred", full stop. That would cover either scenario. As you can see a page back, I too hadn't immediately jumped to blame the cooling loop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codraroll Posted February 12, 2023 Share Posted February 12, 2023 On 2/11/2023 at 7:20 PM, DDE said: Also, I decided to look if NASA has publicly concurred with the Roscosmos party line. It doesn't seem that they have. This is presently what amounts to their final word: It's not entirely controversial to say that Russia has certain challenges when it comes to quality control and accurate reporting of issues up and down the chain of command. If this is indeed the cause of these two failures, it is worrying. But if Roscosmos has been aware of it and still chooses to blame external factors instead of giving NASA an accurate rundown, we're crossing the threshold from worry into something rather more serious. Because that indicates they are willing to sweep some really serious issues under the rug, and it makes you wonder what else may be lying underneath that rug already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 Reminding of https://tass.com/science/1561119 So, the words are the words. It's not known, what exactly happened to PMS-21. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 Could it be someone testing a Macron cannon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 13, 2023 Author Share Posted February 13, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthgently Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 8 minutes ago, tater said: The staining around the breach is maybe from coolant boil off. I'd like to see the hole better. From that pic it almost looks like the edges are angled outward. But if the metal were heated and softened enough from an impact, the escaping pressurized coolant might bend the edges outward. But other than that I'd think a micrometeorite would have the edges angled inward. Need better pic. Will be interesting to find it more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 13, 2023 Author Share Posted February 13, 2023 A crater rim is consistent with an impact on metal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbiloid Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 https://www.rbc.ru/technology_and_media/13/02/2023/63ea5b1b9a79473c691e9ca2 The Soyuz MS-23 launch is postponed till early March, as they are studying the Progress MS-21 hole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 13, 2023 Author Share Posted February 13, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDE Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 3 hours ago, darthgently said: But other than that I'd think a micrometeorite would have the edges angled inward. No, it wouldn't. For what it's worth, this does look a fair bit like a hypervelocity impact. Anyway, Ilya Ovchinnikov posits that this is quite close to where the solar panel hold-down bolts are. https://t.me/space78125/1558 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthgently Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 4 hours ago, tater said: A crater rim is consistent with an impact on metal. That's right, I was thinking lower velocity and thinner metal at range 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.