Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
ISS Space

Russia Left Without Access to ISS Following Structure Collapse During Thursday's Launch (nasaspaceflight.com) 77

Posted by EditorDavid from the launch-dates dept.
After a successful November 27th launch to the International Space Station, Russia discovered an accident had occurred on their launch site's mobile maintenance cabin — when a drone spotted it lying upside down in a flame trench. "The main issue with the structure collapse is that it puts Site 31/6 — the only Russian launch site capable of launching crew and cargo to the International Space Station (ISS) — out of service until the structure is fixed," reports the space-news site NASA Spaceflight There are other Soyuz 2 rocket launch pads, but they are either located at an unsuitable latitude, like Plesetsk, or not certified for crewed flights, like Vostochny, or decommissioned and transferred to a museum, like Gagarin's Start at Baikonur. As a result, Russia is temporarily unable to launch Soyuz crewed spacecraft and Progress cargo ships to the ISS, whose nearest launch (Progress MS-33) was scheduled for December 21....

When the rocket launched, a pressure difference was created between the space under the rocket, where gases from running engines are discharged, and the nook where the [144-ton] maintenance cabin was located. The resulting pressure difference pulled the service cabin out of the nook and threw it into the flame trench, where it fell upside down from a height of 20 m. Photos of the accident showed significant damage to the maintenance cabin, which, according to experts, is too extensive to allow for repairs. The only way to resume launches from Site 31/6 is to install a spare maintenance cabin or construct a new one.

Despite the fact that the fallen structure was manufactured in the 1960s, two similar service cabins were manufactured recently at the Tyazhmash heavy-engineering plant in Syzran for other Soyuz launch complexes at the Guiana Space Center and Vostochny Cosmodrome. The production of each cabin took around two years to complete, however, it was not for an emergency situation.
"Various experts gave different possible estimates of the recovery time of the Site 31 launch complex: from several months to three years."

Russia Left Without Access to ISS Following Structure Collapse During Thursday's Launch More | Reply

Russia Left Without Access to ISS Following Structure Collapse During Thursday's Launch

Comments Filter:

  • It was their idea, after all.

  • Much as I enjoy mocking Russia... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Monday December 01, 2025 @01:42AM (#65827407)

    This sort of thing just happens sometimes.

    But I will be curious to see how this plays out, given the Russians have already gone back and forth regarding whether they're going to stick with the ISS to the end of its operational life. They might decide the decision's been made for them.

    • Surely the obvious thing to do, if it's important to keep launching to the ISS, is to move one of the cabins from another site? The article mentions two being recently built. That would take the other site out of action, but it's a question of which site is more important.

      • Agreed. There is no reason not to bring one of the other cabins in quickly and then spend a few months/years replacing the spare. This feels like a lot of drama over a minor (albeit weird) event.

        On the other hand if the flying maintenance cabin caused damage elsewhere on the pad, that's a different problem that may take longer to fix.

        • Two issues, firstly despite its name this isn't a Portacabin, it's an enormous piece of metalwork presumably weighing hundreds of tons (I haven't been able to find any data but from the video it's not small), and secondly each one is most likely custom-built for the unique launch complex it's intended for, meaning you can't just unplug it at site A and slot it into site B.

    • This is indeed a tricky one for Russia. It's a public display of their wealth (or lack thereof). Their choices would seem to be:

      1) Fix it up quickly, show the world Russia is still doing just fine and that sanctions and the war aren't defining their economy
      2) Fix it up slowly, show the world that sanctions and the war are hurting, but not enough to stop Russia doing things
      3) Leave it broken, admit that they're broke, and broadly speaking lose manned access to space, and pull out of (probably) the last Inter

    • They might decide the decision's been made for them.

      I'd be with you if that weren't one of the most un-Russian things I have ever read ;)

    • I'm just wondering if NASA is going to hold this over Russia the way Russia tried to be dicks to NASA between Shuttle being retired and Crew Dragon being able to ferry people to the ISS.

      What goes around, comes around.

  • Why? (Score:3)

    by RitchCraft ( 6454710 ) on Monday December 01, 2025 @02:07AM (#65827423)

    Why can't we fly the Russians to the space station like they did for us between the shuttle retiring and Dragon being crew certified?

    • Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Monday December 01, 2025 @02:25AM (#65827431)

      We can, and likely will. The headline is poorly worded and misleading - de rigueur for Slashdot unfortunately.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      They could, but probably the only real reason why they maintained access to the ISS is because they get paid for it, and because they wanted to keep their independent capability alive. Aside from those reasons, they probably aren't all that interested in going there.

    • No reason why not, and that's likely what will happen.

      Despite everything going on with Russia, the space sciences have remained cooperative. And likely will continue to be. They have managed to mostly operate outside of politics.

      So we may see them buying launch capacity from SpaceX in the interim.

    • Why can't we fly the Russians to the space station like they did for us between the shuttle retiring and Dragon being crew certified?

      They regularly do. At least four have flown on SpaceX Dragon flights to the ISS so far. First in 2022, most recent this year.

    • SpaceX can probably accelerate their flight schedule to accommodate Russian crew needs. There's the question of if Russia is able/willing to pay nearly $100m per seat. Their flights on Crew Dragon are currently paid through NASA in a seat exchange program where they provide flights from this site on Soyuz for US astronauts. They don't actually pony up the cash.

      This launch site is also essential to attitude control of ISS. To refuel the ISS stabilizer thrusters and hold it steady while the gyroscopes are rel

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by TWX ( 665546 )

      The issue isn't just crew launches, it's all the supply-launches. The 'progress' cargo craft make regular runs from this pad.

  • unattainable tech (Score:5, Informative)

    by roman_mir ( 125474 ) on Monday December 01, 2025 @03:15AM (#65827471) Homepage Journal

    The destroyed 8U216 service cabin used for Soyuz launches was manufactured at the Novokramatorsk Machine Building Plant in Kramatorsk, Donetsk region.

    Of course this plant was bombed by ruzzia multiple times since the February 2022.https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YQDNpqEf5us

    ruzzia has a few options there.
    1. leave everything as is and stop making launches, fire the unnecessary staff, forget about space.

    2. get one of the platforms that were built and installed elsewhere (there are 3 of these used by their military in Plesetsk, 1 in Vostochny, this one is used once per year. Ask the one in French Guiana (South America) to be returned, it is no longer in use anyway. Ask the Kazakhs for the first one that was used to launch the first Vostok rocket with Gagarin to be moved from the museum site.

    3. build a new factory somewhere, train new staff, construct a new platform.

    4. fix the one that was blown to pieces.

    AFAIC ruzzia can and needs to go to hell. I hire people, I won't hire a ruzzian, the world needs to get its act together and start using space wothput them.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Viol8 ( 599362 )

      Putin has gone way beyond any semblence of being an intelligent leader. He's become nothing more than a white equivalent of a psychopathic and corrupt african style banana republic leader who only cares about money and staying in power. He won't give a damn about russias space ability now.

    • Yes that is a perfectly sane assumption. Assume that just because only one factor built something 50 years ago that that is still the case now. Yep. Makes perfect sense. Which company's strategy team do you work for? Asking for someone who likes shorting stock...

      • of course it is a sane assumption. Their nuclear missile launch tests fail for a good reason as well, rocket engines, airplane engines and parts were made in Ukraine, the engineers who made them were Ukrainians. All of the ruzzkies capacity is used up to rebuild tanks and produce military equipment, missiles, gun rounds, shahed drones, whatever. Building a gigantic complex platform actually requires resources they do not have.

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by drinkypoo ( 153816 )

          And Russia can't build tanks like they used to either because lots of the tank parts were made in Ukraine, too.

        • As much as I like to live in your fantasy world, the reality is pointing to singular incidents doesn't help. If what you said was remotely relevant the war would have been over as soon as we hoped. Unfortunately in the real world it seems Russia is perfectly capable of manufacturing.

          Sorry, I really really want to get behind your delusion. I too would love to think that Russia only exists because of the brilliance of the people they are attacking, but there's just zero evidence to back that up, and plenty of

          • you understand that the war that was supposed to last for maybe a week or two is now closing on 4 years, right? That all of the western powers were absolutely certain that prior to 2022 ruzzia was a world level super power with the military that was somewhere in the top 2 or 3 maybe, right? That this supposed super power was stopped by a country with 1/3 to 1/4 of the population, with 1/28 of size, with no oil or gas mining to speak of. Today ruzzia is occupying significantly less territory than at the e

    • I hire people, I won't hire a ruzzian,

      Why wouldn't you? The Russians I know frequently complain about how bad the situation is in Russia; that you cannot be a lawyer in Russia because whatever you say in Court, it the party that PAYS the judge THE MOST (both need to pay, that is) that wins; or the party that has family in the local circles of power, in which case it's pointless to plea. Many Russians honestly disagree with their regime, and they'll say "[they're] not into politics" because that's what you say in Russia when you don't want to di

      • for the same reason I wouldn't hire an Islamist or a palestenian sympathiser.

        • There is a difference between a political opinion and a place of birth.

          With another Russian candidate interviewed in my story, the HR person asked "how long he would need to get a visa in the current geopolitical context". Answer was something on the line: don't worry it's just an SMO all will be back to normal soon. Well then Mr. supporter of Putin, the job is not for you. While the former, the Physics Professor uncomfortable to elaborate why he needed another country real quick, got a job with us.

          • there is no d8fference where it comes to ruzzians. Majority are pro putin there or they do not care, very few are truly against this or especially are vocal about it. I used to work with them back between 2009 and 2014 and supported the work I uaed to do for them umtil 2022. Then I saw what they really where, the young, the old, doesn't matter. A good test is to ask "whose is Crimea". At this point I decided that I am not a specialist in sorting through various types of shit, I wrote them all off.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by PPH ( 736903 )

              Majority are pro putin there or they do not care, very few are truly against this or especially are vocal about it.

              1. Survival.
              2. Blind loyalty. Putin is an idiot. But he's OUR idiot.

              • no, the biggest reason is neither, it is the resentment, feeling that nobody actually cares about ruzzia and its role, its status, basically not being the big scary ruzzia, the bear that the ussr was. While their own lives are small, insignificant, unimportant, at least these russkies feel that this war puts ruzzia back at the global stage to be the center of attention. They first felt it back in 2014, when putin orchestrated taking of Crimea and part of Donetsk and Luhansk regions. Now was the second wa

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by PPH ( 736903 )

                  The whole idea of building one's reputation through the fear among neighbors and the world in general should have died out after WWII. Territorial gains and colonization don't mean squat any more. The losers of that war went on to build great cars, cameras and other machinery within their own borders. Russia needs to figure this out. If they can't excel at home, why do they think that more land will help?

                  • they only care about one kind of reputation - fear. This is what keeps them warm at night, the thought that the West is afraid of them, because it is definitely not gas that keeps them warm.

              • I am typing this on my phone, while on a train from Kyiv to Lviv, laying down in the dark, I have all of the autocorrect functions disabled on the phone, one thing is hitting the wrong keys and still have a more or less recognizable word come out than having the word changed completely by the stupid autocomplete feature (dumb ass grandfather of whatever we call AI today). That is why the words are often scrambled.

    • It wasn't clear to me from the article whether the service cabin needs to be replaced or the damage to the launchpad was the biggest issue. I would have thought they can do without a service cabin but presumably the launch pad needs at least a patch.

      • It is impossible to launch Soyuz/Proton rockets without this service cabin. The launchpad itself is a huge slob of armored concrete with a hole in the center, used to direct hot gases into a gigantic pit, ot takes a few years to dig out that pit and build the multistory tall launchpad. The service cabin is a multistory metal structire that provides access to set up various umbilicals and to set up the chemical matches, lit electrically, that are inserted into the rocket engines (yes, that is how they ligh

  • Must keel Moose and Squirrel!"

  • The setup looks rickety to me. (Score:3)

    by Qbertino ( 265505 ) <moiraNO@SPAMmodparlor.com> on Monday December 01, 2025 @03:55AM (#65827497)

    Given, the Soviet-Russian style of space technology has always been more pragmatic. But this looks rickety and somewhat ghetto-style, like deterioration by neglegt. Or they used chinesium for the structure and it failed before EOL.

    However, it could also very well be that they've been using those exact same folding gantries for decades beyond EOL now and the finally simply failed due to wear and tear, no matter how rugged they initially were built.

    It's probably a combination of both.

    It would be absolutely hilarious if they can repair this russian-Soyuz style with a crew of welders and junk from a scrapyard in two weeks or so, spec-ing be damned. I wouldn't be surprised if exactly that happens. LOL!

  • I'm sure that number will rely on how much economic aid the Russian space agent can extort from NASA. I hope that the number is zero... let SpaceX do it instead.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by PPH ( 736903 )

      let SpaceX do it instead.

      Want to motivate them to fix the service cabin? Offer them flights on the CST-100 instead.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by BigFire ( 13822 )
      NASA will have to throw significant amount of money to SpaceX, Northrup Grumman or Boeing to make an adopter to dock to Soviet Standardized Vehicle Port Zvezda has. They also need to figure how to transfer hypergolic propellant from the vehicle to Zvezda. Both are non-trivial amount of redesign and fab.

Slashdot Top Deals

Often statistics are used as a drunken man uses lampposts -- for support rather than illumination.

Close