Remember way back on December 14 of last year, the fuss about a Soyuz module leaking? There was discussion of whether they would need rescue by SpaceX on a Crew Dragon capsule. The leak was found when two cosmonauts were preparing to conduct a spacewalk, and found their Soyuz MS-22 spacecraft had begun to leak uncontrollably from its cooling system. Russian engineers eventually declared that a micrometeorite had struck the external cooling loop of the spacecraft, and deemed it unsafe to fly home. A replacement Soyuz will be sent up to replace that one, giving a ride back for the crew being rotated back home.
Today we find out that another spacecraft, a Progress supply ship, has been leaking from it's cooling system according to a statement from Roscosmos, the Russian Space Agency. Both Roscosmos and NASA say this leak isn't a threat to the crew of seven on the ISS at the time.
I think the second module having a leak in its cooling system probably puts the idea of both hits being micrometeorite impacts off the bottom of the probability scale. One micrometeorite? Sure. Two? What are the odds of 1? These have to be independent events, so small probabilities become vanishingly small when they're multiplied. That said, I know nothing about the construction of a Soyuz vs. a Progress module and how similar they might be in that aspect of design. There are reports, though, that some preliminary data was received from the Progress vehicle that indicated a similar cooling system issue. External cameras showed flakes moving away from the Progress vehicle—frozen coolant—similar to that observed with Soyuz MS-22.
Roscosmos said Saturday the Progress incident "will have no impact on the future station program." This is likely true for Progress MS-21, at least. The spacecraft already has been packed with trash and other material to be removed from the station, and was due to leave next week, burning up in Earth's atmosphere during reentry.
However, it seems too early to make such a conclusion for future missions. A critical question is what caused the depressurization event observed Saturday.
My imprinting on the Russian way of their space efforts has been that if something works well enough, they put no more effort into designing a newer and possibly better way of doing its job. Look at their Soyuz capsule, which has been flying since the 1960s. It's entirely consistent to think someone might have said the cooling system on Soyuz is well-established design, let's just copy that.
Final words to Eric Berger of Ars Technica because I like the way he puts this together.
A few hours after the Progress depressurization Saturday there are more questions than answers, but none of this will comfort NASA as it partners with Russia to continue operating the space station. This latest Soyuz and Progress failures are just two in a long line of recent issues, including the Nauka module's misfiring thrusters in 2021, a Soyuz booster failure in 2018 that forced Aleksey Ovchinin and Nick Hague to make an emergency return to Earth, or another leaky Soyuz vehicle.
These are the kinds of problems that one might expect from a space industry in Russia that is reliant on aging infrastructure, aging technology, and quality control issues due to inadequate budgets.
An earlier Progress module departing the ISS, not the ones mentioned in the article. NASA photo.
From what I remember, the only difference between Soyuz and Progress is one is set up as a crewed vehicle and one is just a cargo carrier. Same body, just fitted out differently. Which is why the Russians can produce soall many and throw them away. Assembly-line production and all that.
ReplyDeleteBut between this, and all the other screwups linked to Russian space craft, yeah, nah, Russia sucks. Sucks big time.
Sabotage? There's always that possibility...
ReplyDeleteThe Russians have notoriously BAD welding/brazing/soldering practices.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how old the units are? After all the "international space station" is a composite structure manned since 2000?
ReplyDeleteWear and tear selectively reported can sure sound, ah bad?
Beans, yes, they SUCK, so BAD that we ride THEIR Rockets into space, eh?
Wake me up when NASA gets a new crew into space. If they were smart, they'd let private space flight take over.
The Progress cargo ships are disposables - use once and burn up on the way down. I'm pretty sure the Soyuz capsules aren't reused, but not 100% sure.
DeleteAmerica still flies Soyuz to complete the contract we had with Russia when they grounded the Shuttle fleet. That seems to usually be one American and a few Russians. Partnership in the ISS and all that. Since 2020, Americans going to the ISS have pretty much flown on SpaceX (private space).
The Soyuz capsules are NOT refurbished. One and done.
DeleteThanks, Igor. I was pretty sure based on the newness of anything for human spaceflight being reused, ignoring the STS, of course. Add in the reactions a couple of years ago around Crew Dragons being reused.
DeleteSince 2020 like 3 years ago Greybeard?
ReplyDeleteAs of this year how do we get to the international space station?
Is their private spacecraft docking already? I missed that.
Yup. The mission in May of '20 was technically a demo mission with just two astronauts, but SpaceX has been carrying astronauts to the ISS since then. They've also flown a crew from a private company (Axiom Space) to ISS for a two week long mission, one other private mission (Inspiration 4 - named for the four people, I think) and are working on more private missions. Polaris Dawn says No Earlier Than March 23, which will include a spacewalk. No non-military or non-government astronaut has ever done a spacewalk.
DeleteThe next ISS crew rotation mission, Crew 6, is currently scheduled for Feb. 26th, so ~2 wks. All of these have been four astronaut crews.
There is currently a SpaceX Crew Dragon module docked to the ISS; the one from the Crew 5 mission. Those crews will swap out. The description for Crew 6 says, SpaceX Crew-6 is the sixth operational crewed rotation mission of a Crew Dragon spacecraft to the International Space Station. The crew will consist of commander Stephen Bowen (NASA), pilot Warren Hoburg (NASA), and mission specialists Andrey Fediaev (Roscosmos) and Sultan Al Neyadi (MBRSC).
I know that American astronauts continue to go up on Soyuz missions, but I think it's always one on a mission so the majority fly from the US. Not sure how long that we'll be using Soyuz. It's political, not logical.
Thanks, why am I less than surprised Elon Musk runs it :-)
DeleteNow all we have to do is get around to replacing a 23 year old space station with issues with something a tad more useful :-)
Maybe we can ask Musk to build one.
Hang on another couple of years. Assuming Starship flies and gets close to the specs being quoted, "piece of cake."
DeleteTo quote this blog from February 1st: Constructed piece by piece over dozens of launches, the International Space Station weighs about 420 tons (~925,000 lbs). Two expendable Starships could launch more usable mass to LEO – truly revolutionary if SpaceX can make Starship launches frequent and routine. Two launches instead of dozens? Starship changes Everything.
Ifn I was an astronaut, since Bob and Doug's flight proved Dragon works, I'd be really skeptical over flying Soyuz. I'd almost trust Boeing's Starliner over the latest gen of Soyuz.
DeleteKind of a crapshoot lately...
DeleteWho built Challenger? Space is dangerous, launching yourself out of the womb of mankind on a roman candle of highly volatile chemicals is dangerous.
ReplyDeleteThat danger is what makes hero's out of pioneers, their bravery paved the path.
Mere politics should bow to brave men working together to pave the route to space.
ReplyDeleteNote that these are not modules of the ISS as your headline says; they are shipping to/ from it.
ReplyDeleteAnd I agree with the others - Russia is notorious for poor quality control. It used to be that anything that worked with the West was hand made and closely checked so they didn't look bad, but apparently not anymore...