- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Failure of Soyuz launch could leave ISS empty
Posted on 10/11/18 at 7:38 pm
Posted on 10/11/18 at 7:38 pm
LINK
There’s only one Soyuz docked at the ISS and while they investigate what happened won’t be sending up any more. The one docked has been there for a while and the fuel in its tanks are causing too much corrosion to be used much longer. Now they face the decision of what to do because their only lifeboat won’t be useful for much longer.
If they return the crew home the ISS will be vacant for the first time since Nov 2000.
There’s only one Soyuz docked at the ISS and while they investigate what happened won’t be sending up any more. The one docked has been there for a while and the fuel in its tanks are causing too much corrosion to be used much longer. Now they face the decision of what to do because their only lifeboat won’t be useful for much longer.
If they return the crew home the ISS will be vacant for the first time since Nov 2000.
7
Posted on 10/11/18 at 7:41 pm to DavidTheGnome
Who’s going to drive it?
Posted on 10/11/18 at 7:42 pm to jimbeam
Houston I would figure
Posted on 10/11/18 at 7:44 pm to DavidTheGnome
does this push up the timeline of Musks capsule?
Posted on 10/11/18 at 7:46 pm to Jimmy2shoes
They are grounding the Soyuz out of safety concerns, I doubt they rush an untested system to replace it.
Posted on 10/11/18 at 7:57 pm to DavidTheGnome
I'm willing to bet Elon already called Nasa
This post was edited on 10/11/18 at 8:49 pm
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:09 pm to DavidTheGnome
Further proof of how dumb it was to shut down the shuttle before we had our own replacement.
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:24 pm to LSUFanHouston
Shuttle was getting more and more expensive to maintain. It’s one of the the most complex machines ever made and all of those specialized pieces that go into it becoming more difficult and costly to acquire. If the company that still makes it even exists they’ll charge premiums on manufacturing it. At some point the plug had to be pulled. There was a viable alternative in Soyuz so NASA went with it.
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:28 pm to DavidTheGnome
I just think it's fricking amazing that the crew went into free fall after booster failure at around 150,000 feet going at several thousand mph and survived.
And that this is a niche article in the news cycle. Incredible.
And that this is a niche article in the news cycle. Incredible.
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:30 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:How is that even possible?
It’s one of the the most complex machines ever made and all of those specialized pieces that go into it becoming more difficult and costly to acquire.
As things age but remain in constant use, like our airlines, the ability to recreate parts and maintain them should become cheaper and easier.
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:31 pm to foshizzle
Here’s the launch photographed from the ISS
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:34 pm to Scruffy
quote:
How is that even possible? As things age but remain in constant use, like our airlines, the ability to recreate parts and maintain them should become cheaper and easier.
Because the parts are made for the space shuttle and the space shuttle only. Spare parts for a 747 exist because there’s enough 747s to support it. Specialized parts and specialized machines to make specialized parts from a logistics chain from the 80s gets pricey.
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:40 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:But it isn’t as if this is a 60s Mustang with parts that aren’t used anymore because the tech was improved and advanced.
Specialized parts and specialized machines to make specialized parts from a logistics chain from the 80s gets pricey.
This is a one of a kind machine that was consistently used over the decades.
Basically what Scruffy is saying is that there apparently was extremely poor planning on NASA’s part.
They should have either developed less costly and more productive methods to produce the needed parts or they should have stockpiled them.
This post was edited on 10/11/18 at 8:41 pm
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:47 pm to Scruffy
quote:
one of a kind
Exactly
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:47 pm to DavidTheGnome
Almost time to de-orbit the ISS anyway.
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:50 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
There was a viable alternative in Soyuz so NASA went with it.
And that myopic thinking landed us exactly where we are...
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:54 pm to TigerGman
Soyuz is the most tested and reliable system out there. 1700+ flights. I’d say this one (where the safety mechanisms worked and the crew came back unharmed) doesn’t prove NASA made a poor decision.
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:57 pm to DavidTheGnome
Funny how in the 60’s we could get to the moon and now we can’t even get into orbit. Really makes you rethink how real those Apollo missions were.
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:58 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Soyuz is the most tested and reliable system out there. 1700+ flights. I’d say this one (where the safety mechanisms worked and the crew came back unharmed) doesn’t prove NASA made a poor decision.
Did you get this from reddit?
Posted on 10/11/18 at 8:58 pm to Parmen
Nah
Edit LINK
The long heritage of Soyuz — some sources estimate it has flown over 1,700 times — makes it probably the world's longest-lived rocket line. It has had relatively few failures in hundreds of launches, making it an extremely reliable type of rocket. The history of the Soyuz line includes many dozens of crewed flights in support of the Salyut and Mir space station program, as well as the ISS. It also is a proven supplier of cargo to the ISS, with only a few failures across dozens of flights there.
Edit LINK
The long heritage of Soyuz — some sources estimate it has flown over 1,700 times — makes it probably the world's longest-lived rocket line. It has had relatively few failures in hundreds of launches, making it an extremely reliable type of rocket. The history of the Soyuz line includes many dozens of crewed flights in support of the Salyut and Mir space station program, as well as the ISS. It also is a proven supplier of cargo to the ISS, with only a few failures across dozens of flights there.
This post was edited on 10/11/18 at 9:02 pm
Page 1 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News