Military Review

Astronauts have sat down, and the accident presses on NASA

37
The active discussion of the Soyuz-FG launch vehicle crash that failed to deliver the Soyuz MS-10 spacecraft to orbit continues. It is already obvious that this accident will seriously affect the Russian space program, and in addition, it will hit international projects. The current situation has become a matter of concern for experts, and also excited the press. His view on the accident and its consequences presented the American edition of The Washington Post.


A few hours after the crash of the launch vehicle, the publication published an article “Astronauts make harrowing escape, but Russian rocket failure roils NASA” - “The astronauts completed an emergency landing, and the Russian accident puts pressure on NASA. The authors of the article were Anton Troyanovsky, Amy Ferris-Rothman and Joel Ashenbach. As the title suggests, The Washington Post tried to deal with the current situation and predict its impact on all current projects.



The article begins with a description of the situation over Kazakhstan. On Thursday, 11 October, the Soyuz launch vehicle went to the International Space Station, but two minutes after the launch, it ran into problems. Because of this, the crew rescue system worked, and the descent vehicle landed in the steppes of Kazakhstan, approximately 200 miles from the spaceport. American astronaut Tyler N. "Nick" Haig and Russian cosmonaut Alexei Ovchinin made half the way to orbit, after which they returned. According to NASA, the descent began from a height of about 31 miles. The astronauts were quickly found and returned to the starting point, where they were met by families.

The Washington Post believes that a launch vehicle crash effectively halts Russian and American activity in space until the investigation is completed. Thus, over the past seven years, the United States, having abandoned its own Space Shuttle, was forced to send astronauts on Russian ships.

In connection with the October 11 incident, pressure is increasing on Boeing and SpaceX companies. Now they are developing commercial manned spacecraft, and earlier this technique was planned to be presented in 2018 year. However, both projects are faced with problems and do not fit into the old schedule. As a result, one cannot expect that new ships will be able to fly earlier than the middle of next year.

NASA reports that the three astronauts currently working on the ISS are safe. They have the required food supplies, due to which they can work not only until December 13 - the planned return date. Their return to Earth will be made with the help of the Soyuz spacecraft, now on the ISS. At the same time, there are some limitations: the backup ship is required to be returned from orbit before the expiration date of its fuel.

Another crew of three is scheduled to be sent to the ISS in December, but this mission is now in doubt due to the accident of the only carrier used. NASA management does not rule out such a development in which the current crew of the ISS will be returned home without sending a replacement, and the station will go offline. However, NASA is not happy with such prospects. Experts are not eager to leave the complex worth 100 billion dollars in orbit, controlled only by commands from the Earth.

The leaders of the space industry have to make big decisions, but for now they can be optimistic about the rescue of astronauts. The Washington Post notes that October 11 was a terrible day, but not at all tragic. The head of the ISS program at NASA, Kenny Todd, said that the day did not go according to plans, but the astronauts returned to Earth. He called the space program a complex matter, connected with certain difficulties.

Media crash

The American edition resembles the course of events during an emergency launch. The rocket was launched as planned, until the red indicator inside the spacecraft was lit. A translator from the Russian Flight Control Center explained the situation: “carrier crash”. Automatic control systems took control of the ship and gave the command to separate the descent vehicle. The crew reported a jolt and subsequent weightlessness associated with the transition to free fall.

T. Haig and A. Ovchinin transferred his ship to the ballistic trajectory to return to Earth. On the descent, they are faced with increasing overload. The maximum value of this parameter has reached 6,7. The descent on the new trajectory lasted 34 minutes, and during this time the crew had no connection with the PCO.

American astronaut Gregory R. Wiseman said that the question “where would the lander fall?” His heart began to pound. At this point, the descent of the "Union" controlled only gravity. Search and rescue helicopters rushed to the area of ​​the proposed landing of astronauts.

The descent vehicle automatically released a parachute and landed on the steppe grass. A little later, the first photograph from the landing site was published: one of the astronauts was lying on the parachute cloth, the other was kneeling. Three rescuers approached them. The doctors examined A. Ovchinin and T. Haig and stated the absence of injuries.

The cosmonaut of the European Space Agency Alexander Gerst, who worked on the ISS several years ago, expressed joy for his colleagues on his Twitter page. He added that space travel is a serious and difficult work. But experts will try for the benefit of all mankind.

Russian officials quickly responded to the accident. They said that manned spacecraft launches would be temporarily suspended until the investigation was completed and the causes of the accident were clarified. The Russian news agency Interfax, citing unnamed sources in the space industry, indicated that the result of the accident could be the transfer of all launches planned for the remainder of the year.

The Washington Post notes that the emergency launch occurred in an important period for international relations in the field of cosmonautics. Both countries maintain good relations at heights over 250 miles above the ground, even in difficult periods. This cooperation, as the American edition writes, was not prevented by friction related to the annexation of the Crimea and interference in the presidential election of 2016 of the year.

At the same time, the US and Russia have not yet agreed on the reasons for the appearance of a small hole in the Soyuz MS-09 spacecraft, now located on the ISS docking station. Moscow claims that the recently repaired hole was intentionally made and is the result of sabotage. The US space agency, in turn, this week announced the need for an investigation.

Against the background of these events, the head of NASA, Jim Brydenstein, went to Kazakhstan at the Baikonur cosmodrome. He planned to attend the new launch of a manned spacecraft, as well as meet with his Russian counterpart Dmitry Rogozin. However, the meeting turned out to be more dramatic than expected.

D. Rogozin said that, in accordance with his order, a state commission had been formed, which was to investigate the causes of the accident. The publication reminds that it was the first accident with the "Union" for the entire twenty years history launches to the International Space Station. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Yury Borisov, who oversees the space program, expressed his willingness to cooperate with the American side during the investigation. Russia is ready to share with the US all the necessary information.

Commercial space race

The authors of The Washington Post believe that the Soyuz-FG launch vehicle crash leads to serious pressure on NASA. In addition, the position of Boeing and SpaceX, which are developing advanced manned spacecraft, is becoming more complex. Both private companies face difficulties causing certain delays. NASA recently announced that the projects of both companies this year will not be able to reach the stage of test flights. The first launches with people on board will take place no earlier than the middle of next year.



The American edition cites the curious words of Laurie Garver - the former deputy administrator of NASA for promising projects, who had previously actively supported projects of private companies. She pointed out that the space agency would like to have several manned spacecraft available, but in fact now their number is zero.

University Professor John Washington John M. Logsdon offers a look into the recent past and evaluate the events of that time. He recalls the decision to abandon the Space Shuttle spacecraft and subsequent events. In the first years after this decision, Congress did not allocate sufficient funding for the development of new spacecraft. The result was the problems of SpaceX and Boeing projects. If we take into account all known events, then the decisions of the Congress cannot be called wise or far-sighted.

The publication recalls the current successes and failures of promising American projects of manned ships. So, in June, tests of the ship from Boeing ended in failure. During the testing of the engines of the rescue system there was a fuel leak. The prototype remained intact, but needs some kind of refinement.

The SpaceX device also ran into serious problems, but it is argued that as early as January it can be sent to the ISS, although without people on board. However, Phil McAllister, who oversees the program of private ships at NASA, recently warned about the lack of clear plans for such projects. Starting dates remain uncertain, and may change as the deadlines approach.

The Washington Post recalls that the last crash in the program of Soviet and Russian manned flights occurred back in 1983 year. The Soyuz launch vehicle exploded on the launch pad, and the automation was able to save the astronauts. Vladimir Titov and Gennady Strekalov successfully left the danger zone and landed near the launch complex.

***

As American journalists rightly point out, the recent accident of the Soyuz-FG launch vehicle has the most serious consequences in the context of the prospects for the manned space program of leading countries and the project of the International Space Station. The only country that has the ability to deliver people to the ISS cannot yet solve these tasks, and other participants in the international program are not yet able to replace it.

At the moment, people can get on the ISS and return to Earth only with the help of the Soyuz series ships and launch vehicles of the same name. The accident of the Russian rocket leads to the suspension of flights for some time and, accordingly, closes the only available path into orbit.

The prospective ships Boeing Starliner and SpaceX Dragon V2 are considered as possible competitors of the Soyuz. They are proposed to put into orbit using the carrier rockets Falcon 9 and Atlas 5, respectively. However, while these projects are at the stage of ground tests, and the first flights of such ships are planned only for the next year. Their full operation, respectively, starts even later.

Apparently, investigating the causes of the recent accident and ensuring the prevention of new incidents of this kind will not take long. As a result, missiles and ships of the Soyuz series will be able to return to operation before potential competitors manage to cope with all the necessary tests. Thus, there is reason to believe that for a certain time the Soyuz spacecraft will once again become monopolists in the matter of delivering astronauts to the ISS. How events will develop in the future - time will tell. However, it is clear that in the very near future, specialists from the two leading countries will have to seriously work and improve their equipment.

The article "Astronauts make harrowing escape, but Russian rocket failure roils NASA":
https://washingtonpost.com/world/american-russian-alive-after-soyuz-rocket-headed-to-space-station-fails-on-launch/2018/10/11/b9f3ae88-cd36-11e8-920f-dd52e1ae4570_story.html
Author:
37 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Same lech
    Same lech 16 October 2018 05: 51
    0
    The accident of the Union for me showed how imperfect is still space technology in terms of safety and reliability.
    We need new inventions and approaches to launching spacecraft into Earth orbit.
    It will take more than a decade, and maybe a century, until the launch of spacecraft will be as safe as a trip by car.
    1. LSA57
      LSA57 16 October 2018 05: 58
      +14
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      The accident of the Union for me showed how imperfect is still space technology in terms of safety and reliability.

      But in general there is an absolutely trouble-free and safe technique?
      1. Same lech
        Same lech 16 October 2018 06: 01
        0
        But in general there is an absolutely trouble-free and safe technique?

        There is ... a cart smile but seriously, the more complex the technique, the greater the likelihood of its failure ... such is the pattern what .
        Although computers have learned to deal with serious breakdowns.
        For example, my computer has been working for several years without breakdowns ... I only occasionally blow it from dust ... it works faster after that.
        1. LSA57
          LSA57 16 October 2018 06: 04
          +6
          Quote: The same LYOKHA
          There is ... a cart

          Yes, and that wheel sometimes bounces along the way
          but seriously, the more complex the technique, the greater the likelihood of its failure ... such is the pattern

          and there’s always a human factor, and you won’t get anywhere request
      2. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 16 October 2018 06: 03
        +3
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        0
        The accident of the Union for me showed how imperfect is still space technology in terms of safety and reliability.

        on the other hand, the security system worked at 5.that is good.
        1. LSA57
          LSA57 16 October 2018 06: 06
          +1
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          on the other hand, the security system worked at 5.that is good.

          when I served there were 2 trials of pilot emergency rescue systems. both unsuccessful
          1. vik669
            vik669 16 October 2018 23: 18
            0
            Because there then you "served", but to whom you served - from this place in more detail!
            1. LSA57
              LSA57 16 October 2018 23: 57
              0
              Quote: vik669
              but to whom he served - from this place in more detail

              how to whom? NATO block and personally the CIA. Do you understand that?
              1. vik669
                vik669 17 October 2018 10: 06
                0
                Mina only understands why this is so and without protection or already ...?
    2. Gray brother
      Gray brother 16 October 2018 10: 45
      +4
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      in terms of security

      That's not bad at all. At the Soyuz, at least. This is not a shuttle that, in an accident, turns into a crematorium without options.
    3. nickname7
      nickname7 16 October 2018 11: 02
      +1
      how imperfect is space technology in terms of safety and reliability.
      Of course, imperfection and entropy can be philosophized, but there is an opinion that with the loss of mechanical engineering, aircraft manufacturing, scanty investments in science, etc. There is a loss and degradation of the industry.
      1. Alexey Novikov
        Alexey Novikov 16 October 2018 11: 57
        +3
        It is believed that you are just a balabol. Soyuz-U had 20 accidents for 778 flights, the reliability was 97.5%, and Soyuz-FG, developed with the loss of mechanical engineering, aircraft building and blablabla, had 1 accident for 65 launches, and reliability was 98.5%.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 16 October 2018 12: 18
          +1
          Quote: Alexey Novikov
          developed with the loss of engineering, aircraft building and blablabla Soyuz-FG

          The letters FG stand for "(new) nozzle heads". Designed by RN, yes.
          1. Alexey Novikov
            Alexey Novikov 16 October 2018 12: 31
            +1
            Well, yes, yes, it’s just that the nozzle heads have been changed, and so is the good old R-7.
            1. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 16 October 2018 12: 37
              +2
              Quote: Alexey Novikov
              Well, yes, well, yes, just the nozzle heads changed

              A lot of things are changing for us slowly.
              However, the word "designed" does not seem appropriate to me.
              1. Alexey Novikov
                Alexey Novikov 16 October 2018 12: 39
                0
                You can in your mind replace it with "designed and implemented", if it is so important.
    4. iouris
      iouris 16 October 2018 14: 05
      +2
      An accident is not a disaster. Accidents are in some ways helpful. From each accident, you need to learn a maximum of lessons. This technology of putting people and cargo into orbit today is the safest and most effective. Another thing is that if degradation processes are going on in the state, then they are going on in the industry.
  2. shamil
    shamil 16 October 2018 05: 52
    -2
    It's time to seriously look around and shout, who will ride to the ISS? But there is no one but Russia! Everything else is just PR! Oh, sorry, but China? I wonder why not China?
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 16 October 2018 05: 59
      +1
      I wonder why not China?

      For China, its own space program is a priority ... I read about their plans for space exploration ... everywhere the calculation is to use my strength and capabilities.
      Our Roscosmos is trying, in cooperation with other countries, to conduct its space programs ... of course it is cheaper ... but at the same time it will be dependent on the actions of partners.
      1. shamil
        shamil 16 October 2018 06: 03
        +2
        Mentioning China, I wonder why no one addresses them?
        1. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 16 October 2018 06: 37
          +2
          Quote: shamil
          Mentioning China, I wonder why no one addresses them?

          Do they need it? China has never participated in the ISS project. They have their own space development program.
          1. shamil
            shamil 16 October 2018 06: 44
            +2
            Yes of course. They have nowhere to put the dollars themselves. Those. conclusion, the Chinese respond sharply to all the hints, no. Or are there still insufficient capacities?
            1. Mordvin 3
              Mordvin 3 16 October 2018 07: 09
              0
              Quote: shamil
              Or are there still insufficient capacities?

              And where did they get the power if they launched their first cosmonaut 15 years ago? And the first docking was carried out in the 10s. However, at such a pace they will soon overtake us all.
        2. Mar.Tirah
          Mar.Tirah 16 October 2018 07: 00
          +3
          Quote: shamil
          why no one addresses them?

          A spaceship is not a horse that can be harnessed to any cart. There are many technological solutions that are suitable only for our and American ships. For example, the docking stations of the station and carrier ships.
        3. Hole puncher
          Hole puncher 16 October 2018 07: 47
          +1
          Quote: shamil
          Mentioning China, I wonder why no one addresses them?

          Its LV and spacecraft are not certified by NASA and the probability of this is about zero.
        4. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 16 October 2018 08: 55
          0
          Quote: shamil
          Mentioning China, I wonder why no one addresses them?

          Because the Chinese have a non-standard docking station.
          Its LV and spacecraft are not NASA certified

          The Union, too, is pretty obscure with NASA certification.
    2. nickname7
      nickname7 16 October 2018 11: 28
      0
      But there is no one but Russia!
      You have outdated infa, states, in recent years they have intensified the space industry, they are carrying out restructuring, and large-scale injections of money, and despite the fact that they had in the 90s, they saved and increased, and the Russian Federation left the horns and legs of the industrial power of the union that you cannot compete with the West. Vaughn even buy tractors and excavators abroad, the tractor factory went bankrupt, what missiles.
      1. Alexey Novikov
        Alexey Novikov 16 October 2018 12: 25
        -3
        All this "industrial power" of the USSR was not worth a penny, ineffective and obsolete for decades. In the 90s, factories were cut not because they were surrounded by enemies, but because they could exist exclusively within the framework of a planned economy and the Iron Curtain. What is GAZ worth - when the iron curtain collapsed, it suddenly turned out that the Volga with an archaic design from the 60s is more expensive than foreign cars with windows and kondeem. And what kind of industrial power was in microelectronics, when Western processors were stupidly removed layer by layer in laboratories and then spanked like domestic ones.
  3. jonht
    jonht 16 October 2018 06: 45
    -2
    We turn on conspiracy theories, suppose that the calculation for the emergency was originally, what in theory do we get?
    1. Suspension of manned flights;
    2. Decrease in activity on the ISS;
    3. Phobias for flights in the Unions.

    Of the big minuses are reputational losses, and a possible decrease in active manned flights.
    But this situation has its advantages ... Although it is possible, in reality, some kind of carpet games began in space, only they told us the truth
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 16 October 2018 06: 57
      +3
      Although it’s possible, in reality, some kind of carpet games began in space, only they told us the truth

      Yes, really hell is going on with Roscosmos ... then a hole in the Russian segment of the ISS ... then ships fall into the ocean with the most important and expensive satellites ... it feels like a detachment of saboteurs is sitting there and intensively drilling holes wherever possible. what
      1. Hole puncher
        Hole puncher 16 October 2018 07: 50
        +1
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        the feeling as if a detachment of saboteurs sits there and intensively drills holes wherever possible.

        You are surprised at quite trivial things. Our president recently announced to the whole world that he considers espionage and prostitution to be the most important professions, should bad news from Roscosmos be surprised after that.
      2. nickname7
        nickname7 16 October 2018 10: 53
        +2
        what the hell is going on with Roscosmos
        This is not damn it is a natural result of the rule of compradors.
        Russian space, it seems, is now just in the stage of final fading. One of the last complex systems with a ramified intersectoral structure is no longer able to function not only normally, but in general. The crash of the Soyuz rocket with its crew (which fortunately survived) is one of the last markers signaling the death of the industry.

        The catastrophe itself is not an indicator, but in conjunction with endless failures everywhere - both on earth and in space itself - it is an indicator of decay in all its undisguised abomination.
        1. Alexey Novikov
          Alexey Novikov 16 October 2018 12: 27
          -1
          Could you list at least 20 fakaps from a series of endless failures, och interesting.
  4. The comment was deleted.
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. Maalkavianin
    Maalkavianin 16 October 2018 08: 08
    -2
    A good video on the topic.

  7. Old26
    Old26 17 October 2018 00: 29
    -1
    Quote: Gray Brother
    Quote: The same LYOKHA
    in terms of security

    That's not bad at all. At the Soyuz, at least. This is not a shuttle that, in an accident, turns into a crematorium without options.

    Sergei! Buran could turn into a crematorium under certain conditions. Both the Shuttle and "Buran" in the event of an accident of the carrier undocked and landed at alternate airfields. Well, in an explosion, neither one nor the other would have survived.
    The same Americans had similar emergency rescue systems on disposable carriers that took out their ships of the Mercury, Gemeni and Apollo series. But it was already impossible to make a similar one on shuttles ...

    Quote: Alexey Novikov
    It is believed that you are just a balabol. Soyuz-U had 20 accidents for 778 flights, the reliability was 97.5%, and Soyuz-FG, developed with the loss of mechanical engineering, aircraft building and blablabla, had 1 accident for 65 launches, and reliability was 98.5%.

    If we take the launches of the entire R-7 family, including ICBMs, the accident-free rate was 95,8%, that is, of the 1887 launches, only 79 were emergency. If we remove the ICBMs, then the accident-freeness will be 96,5% (64 emergency on 1828 launched). Well, for some modifications accident-free were sometimes 100% of launches
  8. shinobi
    shinobi 26 November 2018 01: 36
    0
    And what? And nothing. Marriage, and it is he who happens everywhere and just not the Yankees reproach us for them. The astronauts are alive, well, and wonderful.
  9. kig
    kig 9 January 2019 02: 59
    0
    Question to the editors: why publish news, which is no longer news at all?
    And yet, how to understand this: T. Haig and A. Ovchinin transferred his ship to a ballistic trajectory for return to Earth So you want to say that the descent was controllable ...