New Russian ISS Nauka Module Starts Firing Thrusters Randomly;
Atlas V Launch Postponed Indefinitely
July 29, 2021 Doug Messier News >http://www.parabolicarc.com/2021/07/29/new-russian-iss-nauka-module- >starts-firing-thrusters-randomly-atlas-v-launch-postponed-indefinitely/
From above:
Russia?s new Nauka module started firing its thrusters randomly
after it docked with the International Space Station (ISS) on
Thursday as the crew on board struggled to shut the system down
manually, a source familiar with the situation told Parabolic
Arc.
What a shit show!
Jeff
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message news:MPG.3b6cd757b41f4c53989df4@news.eternal-september.org...
New Russian ISS Nauka Module Starts Firing Thrusters Randomly;
Atlas V Launch Postponed Indefinitely
July 29, 2021 Doug Messier News >http://www.parabolicarc.com/2021/07/29/new-russian-iss-nauka-module- >starts-firing-thrusters-randomly-atlas-v-launch-postponed-indefinitely/
From above:
Russia?s new Nauka module started firing its thrusters randomly
after it docked with the International Space Station (ISS) on
Thursday as the crew on board struggled to shut the system down
manually, a source familiar with the situation told Parabolic
Arc.
What a shit show!
Jeff
Yeah, one source said that Nauka used up all its propellants so this won't happen again. But well umm... it wasn't supposed to happen in the first place.
And why do I suspect we'll never get a straight answer from the Russians?
Did we ever get a straight answer from them on the leak in the Soyuz?
And this is after Nauka had problems getting into the correct orbit.
The Russians keep threatening to undock their segment and go on their own. I'd have no problem with that at this point.
And why do I suspect we'll never get a straight answer from the Russians?
Did we ever get a straight answer from them on the leak in the Soyuz?
And this is after Nauka had problems getting into the correct orbit.
The Russians keep threatening to undock their segment and go on their
own. I'd have no problem with that at this point.
On 2021-07-29 4:41 PM, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
And why do I suspect we'll never get a straight answer from the Russians?Oh come on Greg, you know the drill.....
Did we ever get a straight answer from them on the leak in the Soyuz?
And this is after Nauka had problems getting into the correct orbit.Yeah I just heard about this for the first time on the radio yesterday.
I've been head down recently and not paying much attention to Space.
I may have more to say after I read up a bit....
The Russians keep threatening to undock their segment and go on their
own. I'd have no problem with that at this point.
"Well I would hate to pass judgement on Plan R just because of one small >slip-up." -- Gen. "Buck" Turdgeson
In article <sdv3p3$ep7$1@reader1.panix.com>,
mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com says...
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
news:MPG.3b6cd757b41f4c53989df4@news.eternal-september.org...
New Russian ISS Nauka Module Starts Firing Thrusters Randomly;
Atlas V Launch Postponed Indefinitely
July 29, 2021 Doug Messier News
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2021/07/29/new-russian-iss-nauka-module-
starts-firing-thrusters-randomly-atlas-v-launch-postponed-indefinitely/
From above:
Russia?s new Nauka module started firing its thrusters randomly
after it docked with the International Space Station (ISS) on
Thursday as the crew on board struggled to shut the system down
manually, a source familiar with the situation told Parabolic
Arc.
What a shit show!
Jeff
Yeah, one source said that Nauka used up all its propellants so this
won't
happen again. But well umm... it wasn't supposed to happen in the first
place.
Agreed.
And why do I suspect we'll never get a straight answer from the Russians?
I doubt it.
Did we ever get a straight answer from them on the leak in the Soyuz?
I don't think so. Wikipedia says the official answer was:
In September 2019, the head of Roscosmos Dmitry Rogozin claimed
that Roscosmos exactly knows what happened, but that the agency
would keep this information secret.
Cite:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_MS-09#Air_leak
And this is after Nauka had problems getting into the correct orbit.
Yes, that was nerve-wracking.
The Russians keep threatening to undock their segment and go on their
own.
I'd have no problem with that at this point.
Same. At this point in time, I think the US could come up with
replacements for the Russian functionality. For example, attitude
control provided by a Cygnus that had extra fuel tanks instead of a >pressurized section.
Jeff
New Russian ISS Nauka Module Starts Firing Thrusters Randomly;
Atlas V Launch Postponed Indefinitely
July 29, 2021 Doug Messier News http://www.parabolicarc.com/2021/07/29/new-russian-iss-nauka-module- starts-firing-thrusters-randomly-atlas-v-launch-postponed-indefinitely/
From above:
Russia?s new Nauka module started firing its thrusters randomly
after it docked with the International Space Station (ISS) on
Thursday as the crew on board struggled to shut the system down
manually, a source familiar with the situation told Parabolic
Arc.
What a shit show!
Jeff
instead, and see how that works out.-- Katy Jennison
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2021/07/29/new-russian-iss-nauka-module- starts-firing-thrusters-randomly-atlas-v-launch-postponed-indefinitely/
On 2021-07-29 16:19, Jeff Findley wrote:
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2021/07/29/new-russian-iss-nauka-module- starts-firing-thrusters-randomly-atlas-v-launch-postponed-indefinitely/
Would it be correct to state that the thrusters on Nauka could not
exceed the torque limits of Nauka being docked to Station? (aka: cause mechanical damage or jeoperdize mechanical integrity of the station)
Say Dr Evil got control of the software, could he start firing the
trhusters in a sequence that would cause some harmonics like the Tacoma Bridge and cause major structural damage/breakup of station?
Or is everything on station in such slow motion and with so little
thrust compared to station mass that this isn't a consideration?
from https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/07/29/nauka-docking-oft-2-delay/
It states that the CMGs were back on-ine at time of firings which
happened some 3 hours post docking. So until saturated, they would have likely fought the thrusters. The article also notes that the Zvezda and Progress thrusters also kicked in to fight Nauka (yet Nauka appears to
have won since it managed to tilt the station 45°).
This this owuld have happened at tha time when they would have been converting Nauka from an autonomous spacecraft to a permanent module of
ISS (and this integrating it to russian segment software) I suspect
either procedures forgot to include a step (or software missed a some
synch of parameters etc).
Say Dr Evil got control of the software, could he start firing the
trhusters in a sequence that would cause some harmonics like the Tacoma Bridge and cause major structural damage/breakup of station?
Or is everything on station in such slow motion and with so little
thrust compared to station mass that this isn't a consideration?
On 2021-07-29 16:19, Jeff Findley wrote:
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2021/07/29/new-russian-iss-nauka-module-
starts-firing-thrusters-randomly-atlas-v-launch-postponed-indefinitely/
Would it be correct to state that the thrusters on Nauka could not
exceed the torque limits of Nauka being docked to Station? (aka: cause >mechanical damage or jeoperdize mechanical integrity of the station)
Say Dr Evil got control of the software, could he start firing the
trhusters in a sequence that would cause some harmonics like the Tacoma >Bridge and cause major structural damage/breakup of station?
Or is everything on station in such slow motion and with so little
thrust compared to station mass that this isn't a consideration?
from https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/07/29/nauka-docking-oft-2-delay/
It states that the CMGs were back on-ine at time of firings which
happened some 3 hours post docking. So until saturated, they would have >likely fought the thrusters. The article also notes that the Zvezda and >Progress thrusters also kicked in to fight Nauka (yet Nauka appears to
have won since it managed to tilt the station 45°).
This this owuld have happened at tha time when they would have been >converting Nauka from an autonomous spacecraft to a permanent module of
ISS (and this integrating it to russian segment software) I suspect
either procedures forgot to include a step (or software missed a some
synch of parameters etc).
Considering the integration based on what this article stated (where
even the Progress thursters started to fire), I would think that each
module has no autonomy and just listens to Zvezda for commands such as
"fire for 1 second" as opposed to each module being told of correct
attitude and deciding by itself how to reach the desired attitude. (all
the more important sicne Zvezda coordinates with US segment because the
CMGs do a lot of the work).
Consider if they start to integrate Nauka to ISS, but faile to disable >Nauka's independant ship software first and that independant ship
decides it has wrong attitude.
It would seem to me that there may have been good software for each othe
ship vs ISS module functions, but the switchover between ship to ISS
module had problems that confused a still active "ship" software.
The "Ship" function that would have been last in use was the docking >software. If it is still active, but the conversion process first pulled
the inputs from it, that software may have lost awareness it was docked,
and wouldn't see the target and might have been programmed to change
attitude until it found a target.
The crew (and ground) would know exactly at what stage of integration
they were at at the time of firings and what command to continue the >integration initiated the firing.
This will take some time for Russian sofwtare engineers to confirm the
logic that resulted in this, confirm that the "ISS module" software is >correct and integration can be completed and then write the rrpots to
their bosses which then write a more condense report to theior bosses
and so on until it gets to a level high enough to be handed over to NASA.
BTW, is Boeing more transparent than the Russians on Starliner? On
Boeing 737 MAX? I know the Russians are an easy target but curious if
the standard of transparency against which we criticize the Russians is
the same as the standard expected of Boeing.
BTW: Is there an attitude of ISS where solar panels would be unable to
turn to catch sunlight which would then cause an emergency since they
would need to get back to an attitude when solar panels can power ISS
again before batteries run out? Or are the panels able to match olympic >gymbnsats and flip and bend over backwards to cacth sunlight from any
ISS orientation, even if it is upside down?
The Scott Manley tubecast I cited
There's battery power to handle the occasional eclipses. So they'd use the >> batteries until they could reorient.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 57:41:14 |
| Calls: | 6,652 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 12,200 |
| Messages: | 5,331,029 |