It's not rocket science. Oh wait...
A Progress capsule filled supplies for the International Space Station today blasted off from the Baikonur Cosmodrome spaceport in Kazakhstan. Now its controllers have admitted the MS‑04/65P mission has been annihilated. The podule was carrying 5,300 pounds (2,404 kilograms) of food, water, propellant, and a spare space suit …
"What kind of anomaly?"
"Well I hesitate to call it supernatural but it certainly wasn't scientific"
Actually SpaceX might launch as early as 16 December according to Iridium Communications, but I'm not holding my breath.
Progress or Soyuz, the russians have lost 15 of them in recent times and fingers are pointing at construction quality.
Whilst they do take more care with man-carriers sooner or later this isn't going to end well if the russian space program continues to be poorly funded.
It's slightly confusing having both the manned spacecraft, and the launch vehicle both called Soyuz.
So, Soyuz is launched on Soyuz, but Progress is also launched on Soyuz.
(Technically recent Progress launches have been on the Soyuz FG [11A511FG] version of the launcher, where as manned launches are still using the Soyuz U [11A511U]. There seems to be some changes in the third stage, but they're the same engine and the same size)
Do the astros have enough potatoes to get them through
Yep. The station has several months of reserves, depending on the system and hardware failure. The last time a Progress had an in-flight disassembly (April 2015), projections were that supplies wouldn't hit warning levels until late July 2015, and wouldn't run out until early September. It varied a bit depending on the system and ISS hardware failures.
Thing is that as far as design/development is concerned the Soyuz-u is enough of a redesign that it is pretty much a new design. I've said it before and I think this is still valid. Until now the Russian space program had been using Soviet tech, often using stocks of spares and parts left over from all those years ago. Now that stocks are dwindling and are becoming old they've had to pretty much look at the entire design part for part and redesign and replace anything out of date. This means that for the first time in a dozen or so years engineers have to make new rocket part designs. Something they are no longer as intimately familiar with as in the fast paced cold war era development era. This is bound to lead to unexpected problems and glitches as the bugs are ironed out of the new design. I have no doubt they'll get there eventually, but it'll take some more rapid unscheduled disassemblies before that happens.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019