16 ms·
Another Russian spacecraft at ISS has a coolant leak
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- openplatypus 4y agoAre we at the point we should start suspecting sabotage? Or is this just usual Russian incompetence? This maybe news cycle bias, but since the Ukraine war, and threat of Russian pulling out of ISS program, these malfunctions have been more visible. Is anyone tracking these and similar incidents publicly?
- dgacmu 4y agoIt seems more likely that we're seeing the effects of sanctions or internal choices about how to allocate resources in the face of a huge demand for war production.
- nordsieck 4y ago> Are we at the point we should start suspecting sabotage? What possible reason would the Russians have to sabotage their own side of their won space craft? The only real outcomes would be either having to launch an additional spacecraft to get their people back or suffering the indignity of the US bringing their people back on a US vehicle. If they don't want to be there, it'd be pretty easy to cite something about US/NATO involvement in Ukraine and just abandon ship. They don't need some sort of elaborate gimmick which also happens to paint them in a pretty incompetent light, in order to do that.
- hutzlibu 4y agoWell, sabotage could also have been done by the other side, to point out the russian incompetence and drive them out even earlier, but the risk/reward does not make this likely.
- nordsieck 4y ago> Well, sabotage could also have been done by the other side, to point out the russian incompetence and drive them out even earlier, but the risk/reward does not make this likely. 1. NASA wants Russia to maintain a presence on the ISS. Many of the necessary functions for operating the ISS are spread across both the US (international) and Russian sides. If the Russians left, that would dramatically complicate operations. 2. How would the US even get to the spacecraft in question? It's not like someone could casually take a stroll around the station and pop in a hole with a drift and hammer. 3. Even if the US could access the spacecraft in question, it's not obvious to me that US Astronauts would actually do the deed instead of blowing a whistle. It's not like they're CIA operatives. There's a great deal of camaraderie between the personnel of each side.
- khuey 4y ago4. The Soyuz that had the first coolant leak had an American astronaut on board. Why would the US risk its own people?
- dmurray 4y agoThat seems like the weakest argument against it. If we're talking about the kind of shadowy secret agents who will sabotage a $150 billion project (most of which was paid by their own side) as a manoeuvre in a complicated geopolitical game, surely they're not above sacrificing a few innocent lives for it.
- upsidesinclude 4y ago>NASA wants Russia to maintain a presence NASA is not the DOD >drift and hammer Adding incompatible ionic compounds causes material failure >It's not like they're CIA operatives Hmm that's a pretty strange assumption to make.
- wongarsu 4y agoNASA isn't in the business of sabotaging, that would be the CIA. That means that 1. NASA cares about keeping the ISS alive, the CIA might have other priorities and care more about how this humiliates Russia much more than NASA 2. I would be more surprised if there were no CIA agents in the manufacturing pipeline of Soyuz spacecraft, never mind the launch site. Just strategically weaken some parts so they fail in orbit. 3. So let's use CIA operatives I'm not saying it was the CIA. The CIA has motive and capability to do it. But it could as well be Russian corruption somewhere in the supply chain, or just bad luck
- latchkey 4y ago> What possible reason would the Russians have to sabotage their own side of their won space craft? Some people believe the Nord pipeline blowup was self-sabotage. Update: I did not say I believe this myself. I'm just using this as a counter argument to say that the reasons might not be obvious at first glance and people tend to believe all sorts of things.
- karpierz 4y ago... because it gets them out of contractual obligations to deliver gas.
- bigdict 4y agoBut… they want to sell gas.
- bandyaboot 4y agoRight up until they prefer to deliver retribution by withholding gas.
- bigdict 4y agoRight, but the weapon is not the cutting of the supply, it's the threat. The fear that comes with uncertainty. There is no uncertainty when the pipeline is damaged irreparably.
- bandyaboot 4y agoRussia had already been increasingly cutting gas supplies to Europe before the Nordstream pipeline was sabatoged. They weren’t just threatening.
- bigdict 4y agoIf that's true, why blow up your own infrastructure when you can just cut the supply?
- bombolo 4y ago> What possible reason would the Russians have to sabotage their own side of their won space craft? Same reason why they blew up their own pipeline (they didn't but our propaganda must paint them as complete morons).
- philwelch 4y ago“The Russians”? No. “Some guy in Russia?” Lots of reasons why some guy in Russia might be mad and try and sabotage a Russian spacecraft. OTOH, Russia also has a sordid history of unsubstantiated accusations of sabotage to cover up for their own incompetence.
- rjsw 4y agoWasn't the previous leak down to a micrometeorite strike?
- kibwen 4y agoWondering whether Kessler Syndrome is kicking in earlier than we anticipated.
- sschueller 4y agoUsually the cause of most leaks on ISS.
- hunter-gatherer 4y agoRoscosmos sabotaging its own cosmonauts? I'd also be more deliberate with throwing around sound bites like "usual Russian incompetence". While I agree with there is a lot of cultural and political incompetence in Russia (and elsewhere) some incredibly advanced science and engineering has come fro Russia.
- fastball 4y agoDidn't most of the advanced science and engineering come from the USSR?
- seanstev 4y agoUSSR =! Russia. Majority of main advances came from the satellites, such as Ukrainians (Glushko, Korolev, chelomei, etc.).
- m4rtink 4y agoNot to mention some of the early tech having German origin (same in the West).
- hunter-gatherer 4y agoI wasn't referring to the USSR. Had I wanted to refer to the USSR, I would have typed "USSR". My point is that the West doesn't have a monopoly on great ideas and innovation. The existing Russian (and others) state is not a conglomerate of incompetence, and has plenty of advanced engineering feats under her belt. I am suggesting it is not just disingenuous, but unwise to be so dismissive of Russian capabilities, especially when the geopolitical atmospher is the way it is right now.
- bilqis 4y agoMajority of main advances came from cooperation and how education, science and engineering was organised and funded. So all achievements are Soviet achievements, not Russian/Ukrainian/Georgian/etc, saying otherwise has been a common political tool of nationalist in all post-ussr countries.
- samwillis 4y ago> is this just usual Russian incompetence? I don't think there is an impression of that or really ever has been. Russia has successfully launched humans into space more regularly and at a lower cost than the US for the last 60 years. (Well until the last few years) I think it's more likely that this is just an occurrence of something akin to the birthday paradox and sometimes things just happen. It's the narrative due to the current (horrendous) political direction of Russian foreign policy that then colours the interpretation of these events. -- Edit: Your comment has been downvoted significantly and was briefly "dead" I think unfairly, and while I disagree with part of it and don't believe the sabotage hypothesis, you are asking the questions that most people will be asking. The reply's are a worthwhile discussion in my view, and so I vouched for it.
- abracadaniel 4y agoIt wasn’t that long ago they drilled a hole in a Soyuz, then patched it with epoxy and sent it up anyway, only for the epoxy to come out and cause a leak.
- fsh 4y agoAlso not that long ago, they tried launching a Proton M which had the angular velocity sensors installed upside down: https://www.russianspaceweb.com/proton_glonass49.html#culprit https://www.russianspaceweb.com/proton_glonass49.html#culpri... Looks like decades of rampant corruption and political violence are not exactly good for high-tech industry. Who would have thought?
- LarryMullins 4y agoOnce in KSP Iinstalled MechJeb (a modded autopilot component) upsidedown and my rocket failed in precisely this way, trying to make a u-turn right off the launch pad. Pretty funny to see it happen IRL, since nobody got hurt.
- wcoenen 4y agoI don't think you can attribute this failure to a political system. Space is hard. NASA's Genesis sample return capsule also failed due to an upside-down sensor[1]. Fun fact about the Proton M failure: the sensor was designed so that it could only be mounted correctly, but apparently it had been forced in the wrong way somehow. Possibly with a hammer. From [2]: By July 13, investigators simulated the improper installation of the DUS angular velocity sensors on the actual hardware. As it turned out, it would be very difficult to do but not impossible. To achieve that personnel would need to use procedures and instruments not certified either by the design documentation or the installation instructions. As a result, the plate holding the sensors sustained damage. Yet, when the hardware recovered from the accident was delivered to GKNPTs Khrunichev, it was discovered that the nature of the damage to the plate had almost exactly matched the simulated version. [1] https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn9331-crashed-spacecraft-was-faster-cheaper-but-not-better/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn9331-crashed-spacecra... [2] https://www.russianspaceweb.com/proton_glonass49.html#culprit https://www.russianspaceweb.com/proton_glonass49.html#culpri...
- ezconnect 4y agoThat's like saying the Russian blown up the Nordstream pipeline to sabotage their own revenue stream.
- abracadaniel 4y agoA revenue stream that could only flow again if Putin were kicked out. Hard to imagine who might want a giant price on Putin’s head taken out.
- simion314 4y agoMany do this mistake to consider "Russia" instead of just Putin, those two entities interests do not align, so shit that might not make sense for Russia to do might make perfect sense for Putin to do. We had the cases where instead of admitting that their warship was hit Putin regime pushed the narrative that it was just Russian incompetence. So for sure it makes no sense for Russia to want their popes sabotage, but I am not sure about Putin, I can't understand his thinking, wither I am missing some information or his mind got corrupted by his own propaganda.
- bilqis 4y agoIt’s also a mistake to think that Putin is some kind of Czar with absolute ultimate power.
- simion314 4y agoPlease tell me who can stop Putin? - the chances that the parliament can do it are zero - the chances that the army can do it are small sicne he put in charge his incompetent but loyal people and has created his own military branch for his personal protection - the chance that public protestsc could do it are also small China has more influence on what Putin ca n\t do then Russians.
- bilqis 4y agoPutin doesn’t exist on his own and doesn’t act on his own. He has support from FSB, from capital, from right people there and there, he has influence. He can be removed and influenced by many many people. But you’re right with your assessments that nor parliament nor public protests can do shit with Putin and his goons.
- duxup 4y agoI have trouble imagining Russians wanting their own spacecraft to look bad. It just doesn’t make sense.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- HybridCurve 4y agoIt's a government space agency in a kleptocratic state, what other result would you expect? Roscosmos has been under scrutiny for corruption and fraud for some time. I don't even think you could even attribute it to incompetence (on behalf of the professionals) because if you keep reducing funds and resources problems are going to manifest regardless.
- justinator 4y agoI think resources in general are getting a little hard to find in Russia, especially for things like space ships. Most likely those resources are being diverted into making missiles, either officially, or through black market channels. Russia will fight until Moscow falls, it not a matter of if a Soyuz or two doesn't come home.
- Kukumber 4y agowhy would russia sabotage their own space station? it would be a job for the US , just like with nordstream2, they were never able to make one and china recently made their own (smaller), so they are maybe jealous, or it does give the impression that Russia is a scientifically advanced country, that would go against the current dogma? let's take a step back and appreciate how the west was never able to put something habitable into orbit for this long impressive
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- sigil 4y agoAs the resolver for a Manifold prediction market, I've been following this story closely for the last couple months. [0] Back in December, HN user JanSolo wondered if the three astronauts assigned to the leaking Soyuz MS-22 might be evacuated via the Dragon Capsule. [1] Since the default evacuation plan was to send the next Soyuz MS-23 up early and unmanned, Dragon seemed unlikely...unless, of course, the coolant leak was due to a design or manufacturing defect affecting other Roscocosmos craft. This latest Progress MS-21 news makes the defect hypothesis much more likely, in my view. A joint NASA-Roscocosmos investigation found that the original MS-22 coolant leak was caused by a micrometeroid about 1mm in diameter. I don't expect them to walk that back, so perhaps the defect makes these coolant lines more susceptible to puncture than before? [0] https://manifold.markets/alangrow/will-the-three-iss-astronauts-assig https://manifold.markets/alangrow/will-the-three-iss-astrona... [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33995082 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33995082
- upsidesinclude 4y agoThis comment section looks ridiculous. If the purpose of propoganda stories is to paint the Russians as untrustworthy to the Western world (hint: that is the purpose!) then it is surely effective.
- debacle 4y agoNot sure why you are being downmodded, there's no need for "Russian" to be in the title here. This is a very common trope from alt-right media. If the culprit is ever black, Muslim, or an immigrant, they will absolutely let you know in the headline.
- InTheArena 4y agoThere have been 5 major incidents at the ISS since 2018 that could have led to loss of the station if it were caught later. One of which was only ameliorated by a module running out of fuel. The problem here appears to be that the quality standards of roscosmos is in steep decline. This is why Russia is in the title. Now if you want to draw the linkage between the Ukraine war and regressions to their space program, the evidence is certainly there, but I think this story stands quite well on its own.
- 5560675260 4y agoDoesn't alt right love Russia and especially Putin? How did it get on your "black, Muslim, or an immigrant" shortlist?
- alphanullmeric 4y agoClassic case of enemy of my enemy
- 0xDEF 4y agoYes, the far-right in North America and Western Europe loves Russia.
- bigdict 4y agoThere is no way someone quoting "the usual Russian incompetence" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34764133 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34764133) is asking in good faith…
- radium3d 4y agoFrom what I've heard these leaks were caused by a micrometeor impact, but I am not up there checking myself... https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/science/micrometeoroid-strike-could-be-cause-russian-spacecraft-leak-official-2022-12-15/ https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/science/micrometeoroid-str...
- InTheArena 4y agoWhen you start seeing repeated failures in the same place the micrometeorites theory looks less likely.
- _0w8t 4y agoIt was plausible for the first case. But when the second time it happened on the Russian section again one starts to wonder if there was more to the story. I.e. why have not micrometeorites hit equipment of other countries?
- rdl 4y agoTangentially: What purpose does ISS serve today? It cost $150 billion to get to this point, but is it doing anything which justifies the operating and maintenance costs? vs. other uses of the money. On Earth, direct replacement with new in-orbit infrastructure/new station, or other space operations.
- bombolo 4y agoScience? Must every human endeavour generate profit?
- rdl 4y agoIt doesn't have to generate profit, but it does need to generate more science/better science than the next best alternative way to spend the money. (It's presumably not optimized solely for science, but also engineering and politics, both domestic and international, but it doesn't seem to be the most efficient way to accomplish what it accomplishes.)
- dotnet00 4y agoThe issue that comes up with 'efficiencies' in this context is that much of the money that has been spent at all on ISS-based science would probably not have been spent at all if it had to be done otherwise, because instead of a large up-front cost of the ISS + smaller cost of an experiment to be done inside or just tossed out an airlock, there would be no upfront cost and a large cost for a dedicated science satellite. This is why Artemis is structured the way it is, the best way to guarantee that the US sticks to a commitment instead of every other president trashing the last one's work is to tie in so many international partners and so much large-scale up-front spending that it becomes too prestigious to cancel. On top of that, there are lots of engineering benefits, where it's useful that we've learned the lessons from the ISS instead of needing to learn them later at the Moon or Mars or needing to have a sufficiently slow and expensive waterfall design process where they get figured out on the drawing board. Eg. simply being a destination for crewed spacecraft to go to is in itself useful as it creates a standard target to aim for. It allows SpaceX to discover that their toilet can leak urine into a compartment sometimes much faster because they're flying and refurbishing regularly. It'd similarly be hard to quantify the benefit of things like regular resupply flights needed etc, considering that a big part of what helped SpaceX establish itself as a leader in the industry (and thus also giving rise to all of the other new launch companies and their potential technological improvements, private funding and cost reductions) was the ISS cargo resupply contract they won. Creating that regular demand has a similar effect on funding and costs as the emergence of megaconstellations as a viable project have had. So, I'd say that ultimately the ISS is proving to have been worth the cost for the US. Without it acting as an easy destination, our space industry would be kinda like the SLS, absurdly expensive, very corrupt, barely usable and essentially non-existent (compared to the rest of the industry).
- 0xDEF 4y agoWhat has been happening to the Russian space agency is a travesty. From 2018 to 2022 the Director General of Roscosmos, Dmitry Rogozin, was an actual Sieg Heiling neo-Nazi. He was also a co-founder of the ultra-nationalist party Rodina that wants to ban Jewish organizations and buildings in Russia: https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1605707101640298496 https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/16057071016402984... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Rogozin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Rogozin Imagine letting a Sieg Heiling neo-Nazi run the legacy of the Soviet space program.
- dangerwill 4y agoIt's easy to imagine because the US did just that with NASA, except with an OG-Nazi instead of a neo-Nazi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun
- jryle70 4y agovon Braun didn't run US space program. He was in charge of rocket development. And why mention von Braun without mentioning the similar effort by the Soviets? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Osoaviakhim https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Osoaviakhim