|
|
|
|
|
Posted by Brian Gaff on October 5, 2006, 4:27 am
Please log in for more thread options
OK, so this is more suited to the iss group, but I thought I'd ask why they
are all leaving the station to move the soyuz, surely if it blew up or
something, its better to still save one. OK pretty depressing thought, but I
thought in the past with three crew, this was only done with two people?
This was spurred by a news item in sci.space.news
Brian
--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
|
|
Posted by John Doe on October 5, 2006, 4:52 am
Please log in for more thread options
Brian Gaff wrote:
show/hide quoted text
>
> OK, so this is more suited to the iss group, but I thought I'd ask why they
> are all leaving the station to move the soyuz, surely if it blew up or
> something, its better to still save one. OK pretty depressing thought, but I
> thought in the past with three crew, this was only done with two people?
Mission rules: ISS only has as many humans as there are available
escape-vehicle seats.
When the Soyuz undocks, there are 0 escape-vehicle seats left on the
station, so 0 humans can stay in ISS.
If something happens while the soyuz is in transit between two ports and
the soyuz cannot redock, then the lone occupant is left stranded on the
station.
If something happens to the station while the soyuz is in transit, and
the soyuz has difficulty redocking, the station occupant may long be
dead by the time the soyuz does find a docking port that is usable.
|
|
Posted by Brian Gaff on October 5, 2006, 1:33 pm
Please log in for more thread options There is something wrong with the logic there I feel. If one were still in
the station it would be no different to the situation we have been
discussing here with a stranded shuttle where many people would be on the
station with no usable craft to get back on till a rescue mission was
launched.
If one remained on the station, and something happened to the Soyuz, at
least he would be alive till another vehicle arrived.
Brian
--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
show/hide quoted text
> Brian Gaff wrote:
>> OK, so this is more suited to the iss group, but I thought I'd ask why
>> they
>> are all leaving the station to move the soyuz, surely if it blew up or
>> something, its better to still save one. OK pretty depressing thought,
>> but I
>> thought in the past with three crew, this was only done with two people?
> Mission rules: ISS only has as many humans as there are available
> escape-vehicle seats.
> When the Soyuz undocks, there are 0 escape-vehicle seats left on the
> station, so 0 humans can stay in ISS.
> If something happens while the soyuz is in transit between two ports and
> the soyuz cannot redock, then the lone occupant is left stranded on the
> station.
> If something happens to the station while the soyuz is in transit, and
> the soyuz has difficulty redocking, the station occupant may long be
> dead by the time the soyuz does find a docking port that is usable.
|
|
Posted by Skylon on October 5, 2006, 3:42 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Brian Gaff wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> There is something wrong with the logic there I feel. If one were still in
> the station it would be no different to the situation we have been
> discussing here with a stranded shuttle where many people would be on the
> station with no usable craft to get back on till a rescue mission was
> launched.
The difference there is that in a shuttle rescue scenario you are in a
contingency mode that is far from nominal.
That's like criticizing a ship at sea's Captain for taking on more
survivors from a shipwreck than he has lifeboats. What happens if HIS
ship sinks?
-A.L.
|
|
Posted by Jeff Findley on October 5, 2006, 4:40 pm
Please log in for more thread options
show/hide quoted text
> OK, so this is more suited to the iss group, but I thought I'd ask why
> they are all leaving the station to move the soyuz, surely if it blew up
> or something, its better to still save one. OK pretty depressing thought,
> but I thought in the past with three crew, this was only done with two
> people?
> This was spurred by a news item in sci.space.news
They all ride along because if something does happen to either the Soyuz or
ISS such that docking is impossible, your lifeboat is gone.
Jeff
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
- B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919)
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Moving heavy objects at zero-G | July 12, 2006, 5:01 pm |
| OT Moving troops fast across the globe | August 5, 2008, 8:12 pm |
| NASA Moving Toward Tuesday Launch Attempt For Shuttle Discovery | July 21, 2005, 5:17 am |
| US will NOT pay for Soyuz | October 16, 2005, 11:33 am |
| Shuttle or Soyuz? | August 27, 2006, 9:24 pm |
| could soyuz dock with shuttle? | August 13, 2005, 1:58 pm |
| Falcon 9 and Apollo/Soyuz | September 13, 2005, 4:25 am |
| Risk Assessment: Soyuz | February 26, 2006, 12:37 am |
| Brazilian Astronaut to Fly to ISS via Soyuz | October 7, 2005, 12:34 am |
| Bumpy ride in Soyuz? | April 10, 2006, 6:09 am |
|
|
|
XML Sitemap
> OK, so this is more suited to the iss group, but I thought I'd ask why they
> are all leaving the station to move the soyuz, surely if it blew up or
> something, its better to still save one. OK pretty depressing thought, but I
> thought in the past with three crew, this was only done with two people?