Russian launch pad incident raises concerns about future of space station

"We are going to learn just how important the ISS is to leadership."

See full article...

 

[Asbestos Muffins]

If one could identify them correctly, there are likely plenty of Russian technicians that have the knowledge to get repairs done quickly. Not having the organizational and incentive structures in place is a massively bigger problem. Even bigger than the material logistics.

I don't know Russia. I do have considerable experience with poorly functional American companies. Their employees suddenly became far more effective at different companies, mostly after the poor one folded.

it might be as easy as build scaffolding and lift the thing back into place but it might also be that the existing structure got cooked and is no longer viable. we know so little right now

 

[Chopfuna]

Any replacement will most definitely be in an orbit or inclination not easily reached from a Russian launch site. I’ve often wondered why manned space flight & space stations dont use polar orbits.

Lack of protection from radiation near the poles.

 

[I glide for fun]

I checked 25-page thread on Novosti Kosmonavtiki forum.
Major points:
1. This 'cabin' big and complex part of ground infrastructure. Not transportable and not designed to be dismantled. 'Months' would be needed to rebuild as crash project, even if some parts can be cannibalized elsewhere.
2. Soyuz pad at Vostochny was not designed to launch Soyuz or Progress crafts. Substantial modifications of pad hardware would be needed to accommodate Progress. Soyuz launches from Vostochny is completely unrealistic.
3. Propaganda message are pushed that pad will be repaired very fast. But this may be immediate post-disaster propaganda 'damage containment'.

It will be interesting to see what the solution is and how long it takes to implement it.

 

[Markkf]

Lack of protection from radiation near the poles.

Thank you

 

[SpikeTheHobbitMage]

“The launch pad was inspected, as is done every time a rocket is launched. Damage to several launch pad components was identified. Damage can occur after launch, so such inspections are mandatory worldwide. The launch pad’s condition is currently being assessed.”

translation:
“The launch pad was inspected, as is done every time a rocket is launched. Damage to several launch pad components was identified. Damage can occur after launch, but only if you F something up, so such inspections are mandatory worldwide. The launch pad’s condition is currently being assessed, someone will be leaving the facility shortly to make their Eastbound train."

Correction: The Ukrainian front is to the west.

 

[SpikeTheHobbitMage]

It would involve Russia being willing to humiliate itself (in the broken minds of Russian ultranationalists) by launching their flagship cargo vehicle on a Western vehicle. They're more likely to just let the ISS fall out of service and focus their energy on the new Chinese space station (inferior orbital access for Russia be damned).

Three points:

• Russia hasn't been involved in the PRC's space program since they sold them the Soyuz and Mir blueprints.
• Tiangong isn't reachable from any Russian launch facility. Not 'inferior' access, no access.
• The PRC has no interest in allowing Russians to participate in their space program.

 

[SpikeTheHobbitMage]

There are an awful lot of non-leaders who are complicit or active participants in war crimes every day.

True, but we were talking about Russia.

 

[RockIslandLine]

this was a huge investment of national resources that couldn't be spent on directly solving problems on earth.

It's not a competition and you are wrong to make it one.

 

[Markkf]

Three points:

• Russia hasn't been involved in the PRC's space program since they sold them the Soyuz and Mir blueprints.
• Tiangong isn't reachable from any Russian launch facility. Not 'inferior' access, no access.
• The PRC has no interest in allowing Russians to participate in their space program.

I thought Russia said they were joining China for the next Gen. Although their involvement might be like Canadian or ESA with NASA.

 

[Darkness1231]

Did you see the bit that Russia is not paying its soldiers because it ran out of money?
Financial and political stability are a great combination
The lack thereof is not

 

[beb01]

It would involve Russia being willing to humiliate itself (in the broken minds of Russian ultranationalists) by launching their flagship cargo vehicle on a Western vehicle. They're more likely to just let the ISS fall out of service and focus their energy on the new Chinese space station (inferior orbital access for Russia be damned).

Russia would more like launch Progress on an Angara before using a Falcon9. The bigger question would be how would they load and intergrate the Progress before mounting it on a rocket.

 

[NetMage]

Not from Russia. They can’t afford it.

I wonder how Soyuz costs compare to F9+Dragon.

 

[beb01]

I agree its difficult to measure the benefits of different research against each other. Obviously the JWST is telling us far more about the universe and its beginnings than the ISS ever could. But I'm an advocate of human exploration of the inner solar system, and the ISS gave us invaluable information to help us with that.

The real question is ISS worth the cost, ie could we not have gained this information in a much less costly manner? I think so, and I think we should strive to do so in the future. Its time to retire the ISS and replace it with a new station or stations that are not only better, but far more cost efficient.

The Space Station could have built for less if each module was autonomous docking. Then they could have been launched on a Delta Heavy ($400 Million versus $1 billion+. But the ISS exist solely to give the Shuttle a destination so there was never a chance to build ISS for less.

 

[EllPeaTea]

Thanks! Any chance they could use that custom deorbit dragon, or maybe cygnus, to handle the attitude control instead?

Dragon has quite a bit of potential off-axis thrust, which might provide enough control authority, depending on what they need. Won't the gyros still be available for getting the initial orientation lined up, too?

I have no idea where the deorbit dragon will be relative to the station's CG, though, that could affect things significantly.

The deorbit vehicle will be docked to Node 3 forward. Pretty much as far away from the CG as you can get.

 

[drwho9437]

Thing is, most of those microgravity experiments could've just as easily - and far more cheaply - been accomplished by launching as payloads on dedicated satellites. Just about the only experiments not so easily replaceable, were ones involving astronaut health studies during long-duration missions.

Indeed. I looked at the list of 20 breakthroughs and they are either vague or oh look we wrote a paper. I'm glad I provoked a discussion of the value proposition. People's comment on the politics of it are correct.

NASA is either the most popular US agency or one of the because of the huge momentum of the propaganda from the space race. Then you needed people, computers were barely a thing. Space is not a good place for people. But the idea of it being prestigious and the pork around it are still there driving things forward. People want to go to Mars would wouldn't spend a week in a tent or a month on a ship crossing the ocean.

People are also right that congress wouldn't have taken the money and built flagship missions. It is actually also true we could have 10x the science return by not doing flagship missions the way we do them. I wish we could spend resources logically for ROI but we just don't do this. The people making the choices are mostly scientifically illiterate and/or have other more important priorities.

 

[mpotter1024]

While no expert you’d think there would be a flashing light on the launch consoles that indicate the platform is unlocked better yet an interlock preventing launch countdown. After all microwave ovens won’t start while the door is open and if open door while in operation the oven stops. Not exactly rocket science to have such a feature in a launch system.

 

[Waco]

I've seen both a clutch and a neutral sensor, on some cars. Agree that I've never seen a brake sensor on a manual car, but almost all the ones I've driven were 1980s or earlier.

I've seen the same on anything pre-2020. Sometimes a neutral switch, always a clutch switch, sometimes a bypass stock.

My '22 Veloster won't start without the clutch down and the brake on, though.

 

[NetMage]

The people making the choices are mostly scientifically illiterate and/or have other more important priorities.

Other priorities- I’m not sure they are always more important priorities.

 

[EatThatQuestion]

While no expert you’d think there would be a flashing light on the launch consoles that indicate the platform is unlocked better yet an interlock preventing launch countdown. After all microwave ovens won’t start while the door is open and if open door while in operation the oven stops. Not exactly rocket science to have such a feature in a launch system.

"Oh that blinking light? Don't worry about it, the sensor has been broken for years. We don't have the money or time to fix things that aren't mission critical. Are you here to stare at lights or launch rockets?"

 

[Spuwho]

Doing a review of Balknour from some recent sat imagery it appears there are still 2 other pads that are "Soyuz Ready". The N1 Moon Rocket pads are still there but definitely look abandoned. Most of the Angara and Zenit pads have been scrapped and appears their flame trenches have been ground up and probably recycled. Many of the remote pads don't have the needed fuel works as the piping was stolen by scavengers during Yeltsin. The first thing I thought of was why not Vostochny? It is Soyuz capable. What is so special about this particular pad that requires ISS and Progress launches to occur here?

 

[kiarash]

just cooking.

 

[Bill Swallow]

Doing a review of Balknour from some recent sat imagery it appears there are still 2 other pads that are "Soyuz Ready". The N1 Moon Rocket pads are still there but definitely look abandoned. Most of the Angara and Zenit pads have been scrapped and appears their flame trenches have been ground up and probably recycled. Many of the remote pads don't have the needed fuel works as the piping was stolen by scavengers during Yeltsin. The first thing I thought of was why not Vostochny? It is Soyuz capable. What is so special about this particular pad that requires ISS and Progress launches to occur here?

The site needs more than merely the ability to launch a Soyuz booster. There are additional configuration requirements for it to be able to support the payloads on top of those boosters - the Soyuz Crew Capsule and the Progress Resupply Vehicle.

No other launch facility other than the Site 31 pad at Baikonur has that configuration, and I gather that setting that up on a different pad is not a simple operation.

I have not seen details on what this support configuration entails, but perhaps someone here can provide this information.

 

[Ted.Starchild]

While no expert you’d think there would be a flashing light on the launch consoles that indicate the platform is unlocked better yet an interlock preventing launch countdown. After all microwave ovens won’t start while the door is open and if open door while in operation the oven stops. Not exactly rocket science to have such a feature in a launch system.

As far as I understand from discussions between insiders, ground infrastructure has sensors to indicate that platform is retracted, but 'brakes' are completely manual devices.
This is reminder that Soyuz is rocket from 1950ies and many things on launch pad require manual labor.
Perhaps craziest thing about this launch pad: workers are required to work below fully fueled rocket.

 

[FranzJoseph]

Not sure it had been mentioned yet, but IIRC the whole 30‑tonnes or so service platform is supposed to retract behind a blast shield before launch.

Which makes this mishap even more puzzling than just a forgotten wheel chock.

Although, Russia being Russia, everything is possible ("Soviet Russia – The Land of Limitless Possibilities" as used to be said).

 

[Ted.Starchild]

Doing a review of Balknour from some recent sat imagery it appears there are still 2 other pads that are "Soyuz Ready". The N1 Moon Rocket pads are still there but definitely look abandoned. Most of the Angara and Zenit pads have been scrapped and appears their flame trenches have been ground up and probably recycled. Many of the remote pads don't have the needed fuel works as the piping was stolen by scavengers during Yeltsin. The first thing I thought of was why not Vostochny? It is Soyuz capable. What is so special about this particular pad that requires ISS and Progress launches to occur here?

1. Another Soyuz pad at Baikonur is Pad 1/5 also known as Site 1 or 'Gagarin's Start'. This pad was temporarily closed in 2019 for reconstruction, but in 2023 decision was made to not invest into this pad. Russia is in process of leaving Baikonur and anyway Putin ordered to cut down non-military government spending since 2022... Pad 1/5 is transferred to Kazakhstan to be converted to museum site.
2. Vostochny pad requires substantial ground infrastructure modifications to launch Progress. As far as I understand, biggest issue is that rocket with Progress (or Soyuz) can not physically fit into existing structures. On top of that, all ground infrastructure for Progress/Soyuz spacecraft pre-launch processing is located in Baikonur only.

BTW, N1 pads and all associated ground infrastructure has been converted for Energya rocket and Buran. All that infrastructure is quietly rusting since 1990ies.

 

[Ted.Starchild]

Not sure it had been mentioned yet, but IIRC the whole 30‑tonnes or so service platform is supposed to retract behind a blast shield before launch.

Which makes this mishap even more puzzling than just a forgotten wheel chock.

Although, Russia being Russia, everything is possible ("Soviet Russia – The Land of Limitless Possibilities" as used to be said).

Platform was retracted, but because platform was not properly secured, pressure differential sucked platform out.
There is speculation that platform may be not properly secured in past launches but ground crews got lucky in those cases.

 

[FranzJoseph]

Platform was retracted, but because platform was not properly secured, pressure differential sucked platform out.
There is speculation that platform may be not properly secured in past launches but ground crews got lucky in those cases.

Well, that sucks indeed ;-)

IIRC the flame diverter trench is to one side only, right? That would make it into a really big Venturi vacuum tube...

 

[Ted.Starchild]

it might be as easy as build scaffolding and lift the thing back into place but it might also be that the existing structure got cooked and is no longer viable. we know so little right now

Wooden scaffolding is discussed in forums, but Soyuz engines still use concentrated hydrogen peroxide monopropellant for turbines. Peroxide and wood mixes way too energetically...

 

[wk_]

Well, that sucks indeed ;-)

IIRC the flame diverter trench is to one side only, right? That would make it into a really big Venturi vacuum tube...

Yes, indeed, because rocket engines have spectacular power. Soyuz produces 3MN of force. If we multiply it with 3km/s of exhaust gases (both values from AI) it is 10GW of power.

Just the turbopump of Saturn 5 had 51MW, and there were 5 of them on the rocket.

 

[blackhawk887]

Tiangong isn't reachable from any Russian launch facility. Not 'inferior' access, no access.

It's inclination is 5 degrees below Biakonur, but that's an additional 700 m/s or less. Soyuz could probably do that with reduced payload.

 

[FranzJoseph]

It's inclination is 5 degrees below Biskonur, but that's an additional 700 m/s or less. Soyuz could probably do that with reduced payload.

Even if so, the Chinese likely won’t have them unless as paying passengers on their own capsule.

 

[Markkf]

"Oh that blinking light? Don't worry about it, the sensor has been broken for years. We don't have the money or time to fix things that aren't mission critical. Are you here to stare at lights or launch rockets?"

That’s sounds like Chernobyl. The dreaded bypass alarm switch.

 

[Markkf]

1. Another Soyuz pad at Baikonur is Pad 1/5 also known as Site 1 or 'Gagarin's Start'. This pad was temporarily closed in 2019 for reconstruction, but in 2023 decision was made to not invest into this pad. Russia is in process of leaving Baikonur and anyway Putin ordered to cut down non-military government spending since 2022... Pad 1/5 is transferred to Kazakhstan to be converted to museum site.
2. Vostochny pad requires substantial ground infrastructure modifications to launch Progress. As far as I understand, biggest issue is that rocket with Progress (or Soyuz) can not physically fit into existing structures. On top of that, all ground infrastructure for Progress/Soyuz spacecraft pre-launch processing is located in Baikonur only.

BTW, N1 pads and all associated ground infrastructure has been converted for Energya rocket and Buran. All that infrastructure is quietly rusting since 1990ies.

My guess is little or nothing has been done at site 1. Except just rusting away.

 

[Hydrargyrum]

it might be as easy as build scaffolding and lift the thing back into place but it might also be that the existing structure got cooked and is no longer viable. we know so little right now

Cooked and seriously mangled from dropping quite a few metres. I’m not an expert but structurally it looks more like “wreckage” than “out of place” to me. Perhaps some components might be salvageable but I’d be pretty surprised to hear that the original service platform is being repaired rather than replaced.

 

[Hydrargyrum]

Not sure it had been mentioned yet, but IIRC the whole 30‑tonnes or so service platform is supposed to retract behind a blast shield before launch.

Which makes this mishap even more puzzling than just a forgotten wheel chock.

Although, Russia being Russia, everything is possible ("Soviet Russia – The Land of Limitless Possibilities" as used to be said).

The blast shield appears to be integrated directly into the service platform (steel plates on one end). Looks like it acted more like a sail then a shield, due to the lack of locking…

 

[Malmesbury]

Not sure it had been mentioned yet, but IIRC the whole 30‑tonnes or so service platform is supposed to retract behind a blast shield before launch.

Which makes this mishap even more puzzling than just a forgotten wheel chock.

Although, Russia being Russia, everything is possible ("Soviet Russia – The Land of Limitless Possibilities" as used to be said).

What happened is fairly simple.

The blast shield was attached to the end of the platform. So when retracted, the shield on the platform sealed the space the platform was in.

Due to simple aerodynamics, the rocket exhaust creates a suction effect.

This pulled on the blast shield - which rolled forward, towards the rocket exhaust, with the service platform. When the service platform got hit by the exhaust if the ascending rocket, it was smashed off its rails, into the flame trench.

For the want of a wheel chock…

 

[tipoo]

Poka-Yoke vs TRIZ round 3,659,431

 

[Markkf]

The Soviet design is so unlike American. The pad is like a giant platform suspended over a huge flame trench. The bottom of the rocket is inserted in a hole in the platform. This requires a service platform to be extended under the platform. Is this the