news

After the failure of a rocket, Russia rises its next launch. NASA says it is okay with that.

After the failure of a rocket, Russia rises its next launch. NASA says it is okay with that.

Smoke rises when the boosters in the first phase of the Soyuz FG rocket disintegrate while carrying a Soyuz MS-10 capsule and the crew. to the international space station in October after the launch at the Russian rented Baikonur cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. (Dmitri Lovetsky / AP) The Russians are moving fast. After one of their missiles broke last month, triggering an automatic stop, Roscosmos, the space agency of the country, says it knows what happened and how it can be repaired. Instead of delaying the next flight with astronauts – originally scheduled for December 20 – the launch has increased to December 3. Confidence in his Russian counterpart, NASA has signed this. And Anne McClain, the American astronaut who is the next time in the flight, says she is ready to join and leave. "I would have come to the Soyuz the next day," she told reporters on Friday. On 11 October, a Russian Soyuz rocket suffered less than three minutes' delay when one of the side boosters did not disintegrate and hit the rocket. Roscosmos said that the accident was caused by a "distorted" sensor that was damaged during the assembly of the missile and caused the problem of booster separation. Since the accident, Russia threw the Soyuz three times without crews and restored confidence in the system. In an interview on Friday, NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine said that Roscosmos "has been very transparent, providing us with all the information we need to feel comfortable and sure that we understand the problem and that it is resolved." [Companies in the Cosmos: Explore the new space race] He said the flight had been moved to "get our crew there as soon as possible" since the last mission failed. Scott Kelly, the former NASA astronaut who spent almost a year in space, said that made sense, as two of the three crew members on the next flight were "rookies" who had never been in space before. Going to the station early would give the crew the time to do an effective transfer, he said. "I could see why they would rather move that flight if they could do it safely." Although shocking, the last mission within NASA was seen as a "very successful failed launch," as Bridenstine said, because the crew returned to Earth safely. After the booster collided with the rocket, the spacecraft immediately flew away from the rocket and the astronauts – a Russian, an American – carried on a wild ride near the edge of space. During the escape, the two were thrown back into their seats and experienced 7 G & # 39; s, or seven times the gravity. NASA astronaut Nick Hague recently told reporters that the first thing he noticed was "shaken violently from left to right." The alarm sounded, a light flashed, and "when I saw the light, I knew we had an emergency with the booster. "The Hague and its Russian counterpart, Alexey Ovchinin, were also immediately found by rescue teams, a much better result than a notorious launch aborted in 1975 when Soviet Union landed cosmonauts in a remote part of Eastern Russia on the snowy slope of a mountain and almost tumbled off a cliff. (They were a day later.) But even if aborts go well, they still do not have to happen in the first place, which was dangerously close to what is known in the jargon industry's jargon as a " bad day. "Space travel is inherently risky, but NASA and its partners are trying to buy the risk, it seems to be a" pretty straightforward assembly error they made when they amenable ", said Wayne Hale, former manager of the NASA spacecraft program. "It has nothing to do with the basic design." The accident follows the discovery of a small, drilled hole of mysterious origin in one section. The hole is the subject of a separate investigation by Roscosmos. The Russians have raised the idea of ​​sabotage. The hole was clumsily patched after it was made and when the patch failed, a small leak caused air from the station alarms. The hole has been patched again and is not considered a threat to the Soyuz's return because it is in a part of the spacecraft thrown overboard in space. The two anomalies – the launch failure and the Soyuz hole – are almost certainly not related, according to experts from the industry. But this is a company that wants the current number of anomalies in research to be zero, not two. Bridenstine said that the couple of problems "raises questions" but did not want to respond before the investigation is completed. The incidents also serve as a reminder that the Soyuz is the only way people can reach the International Space Station. If the Soyuz is kept on the ground for a long time, NASA and its partners may have to leave the station temporarily. "I would not let the crew take a risk to keep it manned," said Mike Suffredini, the president and CEO of Axiom Space, who develops private space stations. Similarly, a NASA security advisory panel last month said that with the desire to stay on track "there is the potential for the workforce – the pursuit of meeting unrealistic dates and pressures to get started with it" will subtly erode the right decision-making as a proposed launch data approach. "McClain said she was confident that Roscosmos had solved the problem by asking" the three main questions: What Happened? Why did it happen? And how do we ensure that it does not happen again? No one would give the green light for those three questions were answered. "Read more: Astronauts make harrowing escape, but Russian missile failure provokes NASA NASA chief:" No changes "to space station launches after dramatic Soyuz missile failure Russia gives missile breach by mistake during assembly

Post Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.