Soyuz

Author
Discussion

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

121,779 posts

264 months

Thursday 7th July 2016
quotequote all
In keeping with the separate threads for different types of spacecraft, I thought that it would be worthwhile starting one purely to cover Soyuz based missions, both manned and unmanned. After all, the Soyuz series and its predecessors have been a very successful series and is currently what keeps the space station project going.

Last night a brand new and upgraded version of thee Soyuz spacecraft made its maiden flight. The new version, known as Soyuz - MS replaces the previous generation Soyuz TMA family.

Video of the launch here -




scubadude

2,618 posts

196 months

Thursday 7th July 2016
quotequote all
Off-topic perhaps but I've always been intrigued that the Soyuz reentry module is such a different shape (bell rather than cone) than the Apollo, I'd have thought the conditions where so harsh as to limit the options for shape/size... (on the other hand the shuttle sort-of worked and was neither small nor shaped suitably for reentry :-)

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

121,779 posts

264 months

Thursday 7th July 2016
quotequote all
The important aspect of any re-entry vehicle is the base to which the heat shield is attached. The rest of the body can be any shape as long as the sides are kept away from the high temperature plasma that surrounds the vehicle.

Apollo (and now Orion) have quite steeply sloped sides because they re-enter(ed) the earth's atmosphere at speeds substantially higher than a spacecraft re-entering from earth orbit i.e. 25,000 mph compared to 17,500. That is what dictates their shapes.

Earlier American earth orbiting capsules (Mercury and Gemini) had sides that were not as acutely tapered as Apollo or Orion.

Soyuz is more akin to Gemini in the heat loads it experiences.

Russian Rocket

872 posts

235 months

Thursday 7th July 2016
quotequote all
if only the Americans had continued to develop to Saturn rocket in the same way the Russians did soyuz.

The F1 engine seems to have been very good, they just seem to be re-inventing the wheel

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

121,779 posts

264 months

Thursday 7th July 2016
quotequote all
Not really now. They definitely re-invented the wheel with the Space Shuttle. However, nearly all the current launchers in use are evolutions of pre-existing technology. Don't forget the Americans also use Atlas and Delta, which have a pedigree as old are the R-7 Semyorka rocket.

The exception is of course, the Falcon family - but even their rocket motor technology is not particularly ground breaking.

scubadude

2,618 posts

196 months

Friday 8th July 2016
quotequote all
[quote=Eric McApollo (and now Orion) have quite steeply sloped sides because they re-enter(ed) the earth's atmosphere at speeds substantially higher than a spacecraft re-entering from earth orbit i.e. 25,000 mph compared to 17,500. That is what dictates their shapes.

[/quote]

I assumed the Soyoz was intended to be Russia's Moon shot command and re-entry module, in which case it would have had to make a full speed re-entry from Lunar transit trajectory? (To be honest I've not looked for the planned Russian lunar mission profile, maybe they intended a different schedule than NASA used?)

I notice that most other things designed for re-entry follow the cone shape format, whether its probes entering other solar system body atmosphere's or our own.

Would we need to move to a more extreme shape for a Mars-Earth return re-entry? (Assuming that would be coming back hotter than a Moon-Earth return?)

FWIW- I had assumed the shape was just to minimise the diameter so it could ride atop a narrow rocket aerodynamically.

RizzoTheRat

25,085 posts

191 months

Friday 8th July 2016
quotequote all
scubadude said:
FWIW- I had assumed the shape was just to minimise the diameter so it could ride atop a narrow rocket aerodynamically.
It needs to be both stable in re-entry, and shielded from heat, which effects the shape a fair bit, the centre of mass needs to be below the aerodynamic centre.

patmahe

5,744 posts

203 months

Friday 8th July 2016
quotequote all
Obviously they need to be as minimal as possible with wasted space, but that cabin/pod or whatever looks seriously cosy. We seem to be entering a new age for space exploration these days, some seriously interesting stuff happening.


Eric Mc

Original Poster:

121,779 posts

264 months

Friday 8th July 2016
quotequote all
That is a very good point. The Soyuz was indeed designed to withstand lunar mission re-entry speeds. In fact, a number of Zond flights which looped around the moon in 1968 (unmanned) were in fact, tests of the Soyuz lunar mission profile.
So the Soyuz re-entry module COULD survive a 25,000 mph re-entry.

Like Apollo, Zond/Soyuz was also ballasted offset so that its angle during re-entry could be altered to achieve a skip glide technique, which reduced aerodynamic loads, heat loads and g-loads on the craft during re-entry.

Some of the Zonds actually splashed down American style rather than landed on land.

As you can see from the picture, Soviet recovery forces were rather less ambitious than those employed by the US.


Eric Mc

Original Poster:

121,779 posts

264 months

Saturday 9th July 2016
quotequote all
Some of the best and clearest TV images I've seen on a Soyuz docking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXmiMPmkjX4

The MS-01 craft docked with the ISS on 8 July after two days chasing.

In the past few years, the time for a Soyuz to catch up with the ISS was reduced from a few days to a few hours.

However, because this is the first flight of a new variant of Soyuz, they reverted to the slower catch up routine - presumably to give the Soyuz commander time to wring out any bugs on what was, in effect, a test flight.

Halmyre

11,148 posts

138 months

Tuesday 19th July 2016
quotequote all
patmahe said:
Obviously they need to be as minimal as possible with wasted space, but that cabin/pod or whatever looks seriously cosy. We seem to be entering a new age for space exploration these days, some seriously interesting stuff happening.
Soyuz is positively palatial compared to its predecessors. The Russians crammed three people into Voskhod 1, basically a glorified Vostok (one-man) capsule, to achieve the first multi-manned spaceflight. It was so cramped the crew couldn't wear spacesuits, and even had to go on a diet beforehand.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

121,779 posts

264 months

Tuesday 19th July 2016
quotequote all
The crew capsule for Voshkod 1 was on display at the Science Museum earlier in the year.



It was seriously cramped. Not only were three men squeezed in to what was effectively a one man Vostok, in order to get three in, they had to rotate the crew sideways on. This meant that the main instruments were to one side of the crew - rather than directly in front of them. It was a real lash-up job and only proceeded with so the Soviets could get three men into space before the Americans launched their first two man Gemini spacecraft.

Soyuz also has a spherical "Orbital Module" attached to the front of the craft which contains storage space and, most importantly, a small loo.




Havoc856

2,072 posts

178 months

Saturday 23rd July 2016
quotequote all
This thread is seriously cool. Answered one of my questions regarding the probe on the end and door opening.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

121,779 posts

264 months

Saturday 23rd July 2016
quotequote all
I'm working on a Soyuz model at the moment and will post up some pictures when it's finished - which won't be for a couple of weeks I estimate.

MartG

20,622 posts

203 months

Tuesday 17th January 2017
quotequote all
Seems they are blaming a possible engine fire for the recent launch failure

http://spaceflightnow.com/2017/01/17/launch-failur...

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

121,779 posts

264 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
I just realised that I intended to post up some pictures of my finished Soyuz model - and then forgot. I did post some pictures in the Scale Models forum but I'm sure not all of you go there.









anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
Looks great Eric.

Eric Mc

Original Poster:

121,779 posts

264 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
Interesting to see how small it is compared to an Apollo.

Blaster72

10,772 posts

196 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
Does anyone know what that is packed above their heads and held in with the orange straps? I'd guess it was the parachute but that would mean some compromises to allow the chute to deploy (such as an open hatch in the capsule when deployed).

Looks very snug in there!


Evil Jack

1,619 posts

227 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
Good grief that's horrific!