Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
redflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 3910
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

Soyuz Replacement Unveiled

Fri Apr 03, 2009 2:34 pm



Quote:
The spacecraft, currently known only by the Russian abbreviation PPTS, for Prospective Piloted Transport System, would be able to reach low-Earth orbit or to enter orbit around the Moon.

The Earth-orbiting version of the ship would have a mass of 12 tonnes, carry a crew of six, along with no less than 500kg of cargo; while its "lunar cousin" would weigh 16.5 tonnes, have four seats and be capable of delivering and bringing back 100kg of cargo.

The unmanned cargo version of the vehicle would be required to carry no less than 2,000kg to Earth orbit, and return at least 500kg back to the planet's surface.

Roscosmos has reserved the option of making the crew module of the spacecraft reusable, reckoning that a cone-shaped capsule could fly up to 10 missions during its 15-year lifespan.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7980824.stm

It was inevitable that their Soyuz workhorse would eventually be put out to pasture. Hopefully PPTS will prove to be as reliable.

And it also looks as though the Russians expect to make it to the Moon this time around.
A government big enough to take away a constitutionally guaranteed right is a government big enough to take away any guaranteed right. A government big enough to give you everything you need is a government big enough to take away everything you have.
 
TheSonntag
Posts: 4536
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 7:23 pm

RE: Soyuz Replacement Unveiled

Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:38 pm

The Russians have presented a lot of ideas, and usually those were very good, but when it comes to realising new spacecraft, they were quite low on funds. The new Soyuz TMA has a lot of changes from the preceding Soyuz, but is still a quite conservative evolution.

So I only believe in this spacecraft when I see it. But I hope they will build it.
 
Thorny
Posts: 1508
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 8:44 am

RE: Soyuz Replacement Unveiled

Fri Apr 03, 2009 5:47 pm

Believe it when you see it on the launch pad. Russia's list of new projects that promise to be the Next Big Thing (tm) and then never see the light of day is even longer than NASA's.

It will be nice if this one bucks the trend, though.
 
GDB
Posts: 14335
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Soyuz Replacement Unveiled

Fri Apr 03, 2009 9:34 pm

Agreed, lets hope this does happen.
Things in favor perhaps this time.

1. The Soyuz really does need replacing, having to change capsules in the 'lifeboat' role on ISS every 6 months is a cost in itself, double that duration you save on flights. It is also totally at the end of it's development potential.

2. Russia wants to reassert it's standing, so far this has been in the area of military or political posturing, a new spacecraft could fit in with this. Also with a new launcher allows Russia to bring more to any future international space project party.
Their experience in stations kept them in the game when ISS emerged.

3. Despite all the mishaps Mir had in it's later years, manned spaceflight is one area where Russia maintains a proud record, in the area of spaced station operations. Worth noting that Mir did very considerably exceed it's design life, through it all they kept it going, albeit with considerable help from NASA in it's later years, but even once the Shuttle/Mir flights began, the station was already long past it's original retirement date.

4. NASA's new spacecraft, all being well, offer the potential of supplanting the Soyuz in the space station/Earth orbit operations role, so they'll want to have something to match it.

5. If nations like China and possibly India, are at least discussing Lunar flights maybe in the post 2020 period, Russia will not want to be left out. Also for them, unfinished business after the abortive 60's and 70's programme.
 
Thorny
Posts: 1508
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 8:44 am

RE: Soyuz Replacement Unveiled

Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:42 pm



Quoting GDB (Reply 3):

1. The Soyuz really does need replacing, having to change capsules in the 'lifeboat' role on ISS every 6 months is a cost in itself, double that duration you save on flights.

There is still going to be a problem with longevity for the lifeboat role, as long as the spacecraft uses hypergolic propellants. We want hypergolics because they are simple (mix them and they'll burn) in an escape situation, you don't want to worry about igniters not working or cryogenic propellants having boiled off in the meantime. But once you fire up hypergolics, the clock starts running until the seals and other parts break down. NASA got around the problem with its X-38 design by not flying itself to the Space Station. It would have ridden to the Station as payload in the Shuttle, and not fired its hypergolics until it was needed. That gave it a two-year life expectancy on orbit. We lose that capability with Shuttle retirement.

You watch... that one-year lifetime will be quietly dropped along the way. The 200-day figure mentioned in the article is the same as Soyuz. That will end up baseline for the standard version as well.
 
connies4ever
Posts: 3393
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:54 pm

RE: Soyuz Replacement Unveiled

Sat Apr 04, 2009 5:14 pm



Quoting RedFlyer (Thread starter):
The Earth-orbiting version of the ship would have a mass of 12 tonnes, carry a crew of six, along with no less than 500kg of cargo; while its "lunar cousin" would weigh 16.5 tonnes, have four seats and be capable of delivering and bringing back 100kg of cargo.

This seems to me to be remarkably similar to the specification for Orion. Do they plan to use Ares boosters as well ?  Big grin
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
 
Alessandro
Posts: 4961
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:13 am

RE: Soyuz Replacement Unveiled

Tue Apr 07, 2009 6:19 am



Quoting GDB (Reply 3):
Agreed, lets hope this does happen.
Things in favor perhaps this time.

1. The Soyuz really does need replacing, having to change capsules in the 'lifeboat' role on ISS every 6 months is a cost in itself, double that duration you save on flights. It is also totally at the end of it's development potential.

2. Russia wants to reassert it's standing, so far this has been in the area of military or political posturing, a new spacecraft could fit in with this. Also with a new launcher allows Russia to bring more to any future international space project party.
Their experience in stations kept them in the game when ISS emerged.

3. Despite all the mishaps Mir had in it's later years, manned spaceflight is one area where Russia maintains a proud record, in the area of spaced station operations. Worth noting that Mir did very considerably exceed it's design life, through it all they kept it going, albeit with considerable help from NASA in it's later years, but even once the Shuttle/Mir flights began, the station was already long past it's original retirement date.

4. NASA's new spacecraft, all being well, offer the potential of supplanting the Soyuz in the space station/Earth orbit operations role, so they'll want to have something to match it.

5. If nations like China and possibly India, are at least discussing Lunar flights maybe in the post 2020 period, Russia will not want to be left out. Also for them, unfinished business after the abortive 60's and 70's programme.

Why, it´s the best nowadays together with the expensive Spaceshuttle which soon will
be retired.
A new Russian spacecraft after the Buran experience? I start to doubt it. Mir was a successtory.
NASA won´t get the money to build a replacement for the spaceshuttle, it´s like the
large part of 1970ies, no manned US spacecraft availble after the retirement of the spaceshuttles.
China are still progressing slowly with their version of the Sojuz. India I doubt will spend money on a manned spacecraft.
From New Yorqatar to Califarbia...
 
Thorny
Posts: 1508
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 8:44 am

RE: Soyuz Replacement Unveiled

Tue Apr 07, 2009 5:37 pm



Quoting Alessandro (Reply 6):
NASA won´t get the money to build a replacement for the spaceshuttle, it´s like the large part of 1970ies, no manned US spacecraft availble after the retirement of the spaceshuttles.

I'm not certain about that. President Obama has expressed support for NASA's new spacecraft, the Orion and his budget calls for retiring the Shuttle next year. But Congress (both the House and Senate) are working to add funding to keep flying the Space Shuttle until a successor is available (either NASA's Orion or a commercial alternative such as SpaceX's manned Dragon.)

I think as long as Orion is tied to the Ares rocket infrastructure, it will be more and more delayed because or Ares's high cost. However, if the new NASA Administrator (which we should get pretty soon now) orders a change to a different launch system (probably Atlas or Delta) a lot of money can be saved and Orion can be flying by 2012 or 2013. With a Shuttle extension to 2011 or 2012, that could cut the gap to only one year, which is acceptable (we had longer gaps after the two Shuttle accidents.)
 
gsosbee
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:40 am

RE: Soyuz Replacement Unveiled

Thu Apr 09, 2009 4:18 pm



Quoting Thorny (Reply 7):
President Obama has expressed support for NASA's new spacecraft

He has also said he wanted more C-17's and recon aircraft; so he said what would get him votes. Now we see the real man who wants nothing to do with national defense and space.
 
Areopagus
Posts: 1338
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 12:31 pm

RE: Soyuz Replacement Unveiled

Thu Apr 09, 2009 5:00 pm

How do the deep space probes like Voyager and Cassini manage to operate their hypergolic engines many years after they were first used for mid-course corrections?
 
Thorny
Posts: 1508
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 8:44 am

RE: Soyuz Replacement Unveiled

Thu Apr 09, 2009 5:07 pm



Quoting Gsosbee (Reply 8):
He has also said he wanted more C-17's and recon aircraft; so he said what would get him votes. Now we see the real man who wants nothing to do with national defense and space.

I'm not his biggest supporter either, but his FY10 budget fully funds Orion. So that campaign promise, at least, he is keeping.

Quoting Areopagus (Reply 9):
How do the deep space probes like Voyager and Cassini manage to operate their hypergolic engines many years after they were first used for mid-course corrections?

They use monopropellants.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos