Report: Hole in Soyuz Spacecraft Caused by Drill, Not Debris Strike
Soyuz TM spacecraft in orbit
A story in the normally authoritative RIA Novosti website says that the leak in the orbital module of a Soyuz transport docked to the International Space Station was caused by a worker who mistakenly drilled a hole through the hull during production, not by a debris strike as originally believed.
The story says the worker patched the hole with glue. However, the glue was apparently sucked out into the vacuum of space, causing a small leak that lowered the atmospheric pressure on the space station that houses six people.
Astronauts aboard the station have patched the leak. The astronauts were never in any danger from the slow leak.
Russian officials have vowed to find the RSC Energia worker responsible for the mistake.
39 responses to “Report: Hole in Soyuz Spacecraft Caused by Drill, Not Debris Strike”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This URL has the advantage, for many of us, that it leads to an English language article.
https://www.rt.com/news/437…
It also says the worker has been identified. Whether said worker joins the Kamchatka space workers east of Siberia, or the wolves *in* Siberia, or just the wolves within the wolf-hunting expeditions Putin occasionally has, we are not yet informed.
Seriously, this extension of quality control problems into the human spaceflight area of Russian spaceflight is deeply troubling. Especially so, since the person involved knew he’d screwed up, and covered it up *knowing* it was for a manned mission. That sort of problem indicates morale sunk to a level that the action borders on sabotage, with a paper thin border.
Earlier there was a Rogozin quote saying the drilled hole could have been made on the ground or in orbit. I’m sure the Cosmonauts had a few choice comments composed about that, even if they were unsaid.
I saw that but I didn’t take it seriously. Made no sense.
Neither does the Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway, but we’re building it. Stuff doesn’t have to make sense to happen. The truth isn’t even true anymore, I hear.
But if you were in a spaceship, would you drill a hole in the pressure vessel?
No, but that doesn’t refute Emmet’s argument either.
Goes to show why you pay your people right, maintain your equipment and don’t treat your workers as being expendable.
This is Tesla-level workmanship and quality control right here ..
Evidence? Or just another Short Seller?
Probably an owner!
Its well known Tesla build quality is pure trash.
There is a reason Consumer Reports cannot recommend the model 3. If you want to drink the Kool-Aid while rolling deep in the stock… have fun with that.
If you check Consumer Reports’ site, they have been recommending the Model 3 since May this year.
Second that. I’ve got the September 2018 issue here in my hands and Consumer Reports *does* recommend the Model 3 in the luxury compact cars category. Tailhook is completely wrong and is presenting his own opinions as fact.
look up the 1 year maintenance/ review.
That’s where the complaints come in.
The QA stuff is low, parts support is poor, customer service once you get past warranty is spotty.
All fixable, but they need to stop being a cool whizzy silicon valley company and start acting like they sell durable appliances.
I’m neither a Tesla stockholder nor an owner. Don’t have an agenda other than wishing them well. But CR is out there keeping the manufacturers honest. Buyers need it like democracy needs investigative journalists. It burns me up to see lies about CR’s reviews.
You’re likely a Trumptard, spreading fake news just as quickly as you whine about it. Kill yourself.
How does it feel to know that you are provably wrong? Yet another anti-Tesla troll. You probably work for an oil company.
I don’t know.. hasn’t happened yet. Tell me what its like.
well Tesla has great owner satisfaction but the QA is poor.
The big stuff is wonderful, but fit/finish, paint, whacky rattles,
are all a problem. Tesla is 1972 GM QA with 21st century drivelines and electronics.
Bullshit. Tesla has the highest satisfaction rates in the industry and the Model 3 not being recommended is old talk. They reverted it after a firmware upgrade. You naysayers are all short sellers spreading FUD.
“Tesla (TSLA) tops owner satisfaction survey in auto industry again”
https://electrek.co/2017/12…
Seeing as Teslas are considered some of best drives on the market, i would say outside of early production m3 panel fitting, their quality is extremely high, especially in areas it counts, like the batteries, motors and computers, and suspension
Consumer Reports takes your opinion and laughs. Sorry. The Model 3 is a trash can.
Tesla’s are considered ‘some of best drives’ by two types of people… Tesla stockowners, particularly Musky… and those who haven’t even seen, much less driven one, yet. The latter is pretty much everyone for the most part.
Well, have you driven one?
You are wrong. You’ve obviously never read an issue of CR, much less the Sept 2018 issue which contains their Model 3 review.
https://www.consumerreports…
By Patrick Olsen
Last updated: May 30, 2018
“Despite record range and agile handling, issues with braking, controls, and ride quality hurt the Model 3’s Overall Score”
“Editor’s Note: In response to CR’s test results, Tesla has issued a software update to the Model 3 to improve its stopping distances. Based on further testing, CR now recommends the Model 3”
CR did downcheck the M-III but has passed it. However, the QA is still not where it should be.
I think that’s more due to the automotive cousin to New Pad Syndrome, New Line Syndrome.
Plus he must be ignoring the fact that the only negative CR report they got was braking distance, which was improved in a couple weeks via firmware update. Which not only shows it wasn’t a hardware problem but it demonstrated something that only an EV can do, improve without recall, i am guessing all they did was increase the load on the regen braking,
Actual customers disagree
The only negative CR report they got was due to brake distance, an issue they fixed in a couple weeks via a FIRMWARE UPDATE
The reliability reports aren’t where they should be.
hard to get service center time, hard to get parts,
lots of whacky rattles and squeaks.
true but irrelevant.
Now if SpaceX is having this sort of problem, you might have a point.
“Russian officials have vowed to find the RSC Energia worker responsible for the mistake.”
I really feel sorry for that engineer…
And even more sorry for the scapegoat they will pick if they fail to find them. Sending folks who the regime dislikes to prison camps in Siberia is a long tradition in Russia that started with the Czars, not the Soviets, and is still in fashion.
Engineers tell techs where to drill holes, they don’t drill them themselves.
And no engineer tells a tech to use a hand drill without a pilot so the drill head walks all over the surface.
however, an engineer might well fail to make a pilot hole and end up scuffing up the surface.
In other news, the worker had a heart attack and died today. He was 28.
Is this a joke? Because that has actually happened to other workers that messed up on Soyuz vehicles.
https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
I think it is the small hole with writing close to it. The different color from the skin looks to be pushed in. It would have to be a very dull bit to do that. To me it looks like a strike. If it is the large hole there is something sticking up that could be the remains of the glue that the worker used. From the size of the writing , that is near,I would say that is the hole. Unless the inside can not be accessed, there would be damage to check on.