ISS Astronauts are Safe. But NASA and Russia Disagree on How to Fix Leak (space.com) 20
"NASA has emphasized the ISS crew is in no immediate danger," reports Space.com. "The leaking area in the Russian segment of the orbital complex has been ongoing for five years," and "there was a temporary increase in the leak rate that was patched earlier this year..."
Former astronaut Bob Cabana emphasized that troubleshooting is ongoing during a brief livestreamed meeting on Wednesday. But NASA and Roscosmos "don't have a common understanding of what the likely root causes or the severity of the consequences of these leaks." "The Russian position is that the most probable cause of the cracks is high cycling caused by micro-vibrations," Cabana said, referring to flexing of metal and similar components that heat and cool as the ISS orbits in and out of sunlight. "NASA believes the PrK cracks are likely multi-causal — including pressure and mechanical stress, residual stress, material properties and environmental exposures," Cabana continued.
NASA and Russia disagree about whether "continued operations are safe", he added, but the remedy for now is to keep the hatch closed between the U.S. and Russian side as investigations continue.
The two agencies will continue meeting to seek "common understanding of the structural integrity", Cabana pledged, but he did not provide a timeline. Academic and industry experts will also be consulted.
Former astronaut Bob Cabana emphasized that troubleshooting is ongoing during a brief livestreamed meeting on Wednesday. But NASA and Roscosmos "don't have a common understanding of what the likely root causes or the severity of the consequences of these leaks." "The Russian position is that the most probable cause of the cracks is high cycling caused by micro-vibrations," Cabana said, referring to flexing of metal and similar components that heat and cool as the ISS orbits in and out of sunlight. "NASA believes the PrK cracks are likely multi-causal — including pressure and mechanical stress, residual stress, material properties and environmental exposures," Cabana continued.
NASA and Russia disagree about whether "continued operations are safe", he added, but the remedy for now is to keep the hatch closed between the U.S. and Russian side as investigations continue.
The two agencies will continue meeting to seek "common understanding of the structural integrity", Cabana pledged, but he did not provide a timeline. Academic and industry experts will also be consulted.
don't fix it (Score:3)
The ISS is being junked soon(ish) anyway. If the leak is not an imminent threat, don't waste time trying to find/fix it. Just monitor it to make sure that it stays non-threatening.
Not worth the time/effort/cost to fix.
Re: (Score:2)
Because this same situation could never happen again.
Re: (Score:2)
Because this same situation could never happen again.
Leaks? They are not a new thing.
If you are trying to say that you think we can learn something useful by going thru the exercise of finding and fixing this particular leak then by all means explain.
Re: (Score:2)
OP is quite literally the local idiot. just fyi
Re: (Score:2)
reading comprehension failure -you think I am a MAGAt! It does explain the mod-bombing..
Re: (Score:2)
What you overlook, probably because you are not an engineer or not a good one, is that the ISS also serves to find out things needed for future space installations.
It doesn't sound like they disagree on how to fix. (Score:3)
It sounds more like they disagree on how *important* it is to fix.
The disagreements on why the failure occurred don't seem to be mutually exclusive at all.
Seems implausible (Score:5, Funny)
I've been in several situations in the industrial world where serious failures showed symptoms in advance - usually days or weeks but sometimes years - that were considered not serious, not likely to progress, or "risk analyzed" away with 0-5 qualitative rankings on a spreadsheet matrix. It seems implausible that there is a failure mode in a life- and mission-critical system (breathing air at least, and possibly structural integrity), that NASA has no understanding of the root cause, yet it is declared that "the astronauts are safe" and "can be fixed sometime between now and ISS deorbit". This is the same organization that does contingency analysis on what happens if an astronaut passes gas 10 times in a day instead of the nominal 8 but they have no root cause on a life support system problem?
Re: (Score:3)
You appear to have missed the part where the segment containing the leak can be - and is - sealed off from the rest of the station.
Re: (Score:3)
DId not miss that part. However, it could be very dangerous for those on the Russian side if/when it fails. The problematic segment does get opened, and if that section has reduced pressure due to the leak, opening it up, and the increased pressure from that, could cause whatever is failing a little, to fail a lot. Since the Russians don't seem to know all the sources of the leaks, then you can't be sure there isn't something waiting to be ripped wide open.
The risk to those on the US side does seem to be
Re: (Score:2)
Re: hatch sealed (Score:2)
Forgive the ignorance, but... (Score:2)
Forgive the ignorance, but.. if the material has failed to the point where it's causing leaks... doesn't this mean that these stress fractures can lead to a catastrophic failure, not just another small leak, or an increase in current leak rate? It's inevitable. It's already proven to occur, and the cause is not being removed, nor reduced... so there is nothing preventing additional deterioration. We just don't know how it will fully manifest.
If the module has a rapid loss of pressure (blowout), how is tha
where their mouth is (Score:2)
NASA and Russia disagree about whether "continued operations are safe".
If it's safe, then the Russians should sleep in their module.
Make it a test bed (Score:2)