PDA

View Full Version : Would you trust the Soyuz in light recent problems with Russian rockets?



banquo's_bumble_puppy
2015-Jun-14, 06:10 AM
Would you trust the Soyuz in light recent problems with Russian rockets? The Soyuz has been highly reliable over the years. The most recent crew to return from the ISS experienced abnormal spinning of the entry vehicle and it had a hard landing. I viewed the video of the craft after it landed and it looked really crispy. Now there have been hard landings experienced during what are called ballistic entries; so that is not out of the ordinary. It is the only taxi to the ISS. Would you trust it with your life?

Superluminal
2015-Jun-14, 08:06 AM
Would you trust the Soyuz in light recent problems with Russian rockets? The Soyuz has been highly reliable over the years. The most recent crew to return from the ISS experienced abnormal spinning of the entry vehicle and it had a hard landing. I viewed the video of the craft after it landed and it looked really crispy. Now there have been hard landings experienced during what are called ballistic entries; so that is not out of the ordinary. It is the only taxi to the ISS. Would you trust it with your life?
The Soyuz has been used since the 60's or 70's, so I'd trust it. The rockets, not so much. But then again, don't go to Mars. That seems to be where they have most of their trouble.

Trebuchet
2015-Jun-15, 08:18 PM
I think the question was in light of the recent problem with the Soyuz-derived Progress. The Soyuz rocket has been tremendously reliable, except for some upper stage problems.

If they'd let me, and I didn't have people depending on me, I'd take a ride in a heartbeat.

publiusr
2015-Jun-19, 10:27 PM
R-7 is a perfectly good rocket.

Shuttle was the best way to come back--but R-7 is the best way to get to ISS

Soyuz has actually been able to catch up more quickly
http://www.gizmag.com/soyuz-record-iss/26859/

selvaarchi
2015-Sep-07, 03:21 PM
The craft that carries the crew has been evolving since its first introduction. The outward appearance of the Soyuz hasn't changed much since it was first launched in November 1966. However, the interior has been constantly re-equipped with modernized avionics.

The current version is called Soyuz TMA-M. They are already working on the Soyuz TMA-MS. This will be easier to manufacture, and its total empty weight is 70 kg less than that of the predecessor.

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/New_Life_for_Old_Buddy_Russia_Tests_Renewed_Soyuz_ MS_Spacecraft_999.html


The Soyuz is not reuseable; a new one is built for each flight and is docked to the ISS. The old one is piloted by the crew returning to Earth; the central crew cabin separates from the other two compartments (these burn up in the atmosphere), and makes a ballistic re-entry, parachutes deploying to slow it down before touchdown on Earth.

The development of the previous manned version, the Soyuz TMA-M, which is now on a mission to the International Space Station (ISS), was primarily aimed at upgrading its digital computer and telemetry transmission system.

Earlier Soyuz craft were fitted with an analog telemetry system. The new solution is more compact, and has an advanced TsVM-101-class computer.

The modernization saw the replacement of the original 36 obsolete instruments with 19 newly designed ones, necessitating corresponding updates to the on-board control system and thermal control system.

The new craft is easier to manufacture, and its total empty weight is 70 kg less than that of the predecessor.

The Soyuz TMA-MS will be equipped with more efficient solar panels featuring photovoltaic converters. The docking and attitude control thrusters would be rearranged for reliably linking the ship to the ISS even if one of the thrusters failed, and safely return to Earth if two thrusters failed.

Unlike previous versions of the craft, the Soyuz-MS will be equipped with a GLONASS/ GPS satellite navigation system, an advanced control radio link with a satellite communication channel, and the Kurs NA automated docking system, which is two times lighter than the previous one and consumes three times less power.

NEOWatcher
2015-Sep-07, 07:35 PM
Either:
- They are upgrading it for future use as an alternative craft to their new craft (http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?154786-Russia-s-Moon-ambitions&p=2310239#post2310239) (like the U.S. planning on multiple options)
- The existing systems, while historically reliable, just can't be used or manufactured much longer.
- They are not sure if the new craft will still stay on it's earlier target or have issues.
- or any combination of the above.

selvaarchi
2015-Sep-07, 10:06 PM
Either:
- They are upgrading it for future use as an alternative craft to their new craft (http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?154786-Russia-s-Moon-ambitions&p=2310239#post2310239) (like the U.S. planning on multiple options)
- The existing systems, while historically reliable, just can't be used or manufactured much longer.
- They are not sure if the new craft will still stay on it's earlier target or have issues.
- or any combination of the above.

Missing the point. Their new craft will only be ready in 2021. They do say "The Soyuz is not reuseable; a new one is built for each flight ". The outer hull stays the same but only the interior, like the electronics is being upgraded. The present machine that is docked at the ISS has had - "The development of the previous manned version, the Soyuz TMA-M, which is now on a mission to the International Space Station (ISS), was primarily aimed at upgrading its digital computer and telemetry transmission system."

NEOWatcher
2015-Sep-08, 01:23 AM
Missing the point...
Nope, my point is still the same. A new one may be built for each flight, but it takes a lot more money to design in the upgrade and testing than to just continue building the current design until it's replaced.
They could have just stuck with the current design for 6+ more years.

selvaarchi
2015-Sep-08, 01:51 AM
Nope, my point is still the same. A new one may be built for each flight, but it takes a lot more money to design in the upgrade and testing than to just continue building the current design until it's replaced.
They could have just stuck with the current design for 6+ more years.
They have not modified the structure but upgraded the electronics. It of course cost money but they get a digital system which today is easier to build and use. As an added benefit, it will be lighter than the analogue system it replaced.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Zartan
2015-Sep-08, 06:22 PM
I think the question was in light of the recent problem with the Soyuz-derived Progress. The Soyuz rocket has been tremendously reliable, except for some upper stage problems.


AFAIK the man-rated Soyuz rocket comes from different assembly line than 'regular' ones, with many extra quality checks and price tag of about double compared to unmanned rockets.


In general, Soyuz failures (along with Proton failures) in recent years likely tell from wide-ranging problem in Russian rocketry industry: very experienced Soviet era technicians and engineers have died/retired and new generation isn't quite up to par with the old beards.

selvaarchi
2015-Sep-11, 08:49 AM
AFAIK the man-rated Soyuz rocket comes from different assembly line than 'regular' ones, with many extra quality checks and price tag of about double compared to unmanned rockets.

Looks like their normal line is now holding up.

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz-lv-vs12-galileo-foc-m3.html


The liftoff of the Soyuz-ST-B rocket from the ELS pad near Kourou, French Guiana, took place as scheduled on Sept. 10, 2015, at 11:08:10 p.m. local time in French Guiana (10:08 p.m. EST). (It was already September 11, 02:08 GMT and 06:08 Moscow Time.) The 12th Soyuz launch from Guiana (under designation VS12) carried a total of 1,601 kilograms of payload, including a pair of 716-/715-kilogram Galileo FOC M3 satellites and a dispenser built by RUAG Space.

selvaarchi
2015-Sep-12, 02:04 PM
Nope, my point is still the same. A new one may be built for each flight, but it takes a lot more money to design in the upgrade and testing than to just continue building the current design until it's replaced.
They could have just stuck with the current design for 6+ more years.

Came across this article (http://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz.html) which gives a history of how the Soyuz capsule has evolved.

NEOWatcher
2015-Sep-13, 01:26 AM
Came across this article (http://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz.html) which gives a history of how the Soyuz capsule has evolved.
Except for the modification to to a digital computer, any major evolutions for the capsule have been for a new purpose. This is a major evolution with no new purpose that we know of at this time.

selvaarchi
2015-Sep-13, 02:21 PM
Except for the modification to to a digital computer, any major evolutions for the capsule have been for a new purpose. This is a major evolution with no new purpose that we know of at this time.

To me this is good enough reason - "The modernization saw the replacement of the original 36 obsolete instruments with 19 newly designed ones, necessitating corresponding updates to the on-board control system and thermal control system.
The new craft is easier to manufacture, and its total empty weight is 70 kg less than that of the predecessor."

The upgrades will be tested out in their cargo vessel in October this year. The new craft coming out in 2021 will be for BEO.

NEOWatcher
2015-Sep-13, 04:23 PM
The new craft coming out in 2021 will be for BEO.
I created a new thread for it (http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?158458-Soyuz-Replacement). It is clearly a replacement for Soyuz. (every article say that)

Squink
2015-Sep-15, 12:57 PM
Would I trust it? Sure.
I want to get to the ISS.
Can't take Pan Am, gotta go with what is, and it hasn't killed many people yet.