Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

  collectSPACE: Messages
  Soviet - Russian Space
  Upsizing Soyuz to accomodate six seats

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Upsizing Soyuz to accomodate six seats
Lou Chinal
Member

Posts: 1306
From: Staten Island, NY
Registered: Jun 2007

posted 07-11-2010 06:50 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Lou Chinal   Click Here to Email Lou Chinal     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm sure this has been thought of before, but it this era of free enterprise - scale up the Soyuz. The Russian reentry module has a base of about 86 1/2 inches while the Chinese Shenzhou is about 100 inches (I don't know the exact dimensions). It's about 13% larger, but still smaller than Apollo.

The Shenzhou has carried three, and they are looking into fitting a fourth crew member aboard.

By increasing the base diameter to about 120-130 inches and using new construction methods, six people could be carried.

Don't forget you would be launching from French Guiana not Baikonur. Again I have not figured out thrust/weight ratio, but I know you would get considerably more bang for the buck.

By new construction methods I mean "Friction Stir Welding" now being developed for Orion. The 120-130 inch diameter would still be much smaller than Apollo at 160 inches was.

During this time of seeking out new ways to achieve low earth orbit this might be an option.

Tonyq
Member

Posts: 199
From: UK
Registered: Jul 2004

posted 07-12-2010 01:59 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Tonyq   Click Here to Email Tonyq     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Lou Chinal:
The Shenzhou has carried three, and they are looking into fitting a fourth crew member aboard.
What is your source for this information?

China have said that the unmanned Shenzhou 8 will be the first production vehicle and that subsequent craft will be the same.

The manned flights to the Tiangong small station, which will follow as Shenzhou 9, 10 etc. have only been mentioned as carrying two or three taikonauts.

Philip
Member

Posts: 5952
From: Brussels, Belgium
Registered: Jan 2001

posted 07-12-2010 02:56 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Philip   Click Here to Email Philip     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Four seats is correct...

The average Taikonaut is smaller than the average Cosmonaut. And there are restrictions in length because after six months in space, the cosmonauts' spine get stretched and they still have to fit in their Sokol spacesuits, which are a one piece spacesuit with the helmet attached to it (the gloves come apart with it).

Tonyq
Member

Posts: 199
From: UK
Registered: Jul 2004

posted 07-12-2010 04:28 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Tonyq   Click Here to Email Tonyq     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
But what is the source of this suggested four person development? Where has this been published in a credible source?

I follow the Shenzhou programme very closely and have never seen any mention of upgrading it to seat four people.

I'd suggest that the size of taikonauts is largely irrelevant. Whilst it may be possible to squeeze more smaller people into the available space, their needs for life support, oxygen, water and consumables must be similar to anyone else and these all take up room and add to the weight.

divemaster
Member

Posts: 1376
From: ridgefield, ct
Registered: May 2002

posted 07-12-2010 09:13 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for divemaster   Click Here to Email divemaster     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Don't you have to bring the launch vehicle into consideration? The Russian's have been using "ol' faithful" for years. To carry more weight, you need a bigger launch vehicle. What's the rule of thumb - four pounds of propellant per 1 pound of cargo. Add two to four occupants PLUS a larger Soyuz and methinks you're going to need a new launch vehicle.

Gee. Maybe they shouldn't retire the shuttle JUST for this reason.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42988
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 07-12-2010 09:23 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Note that Roscosmos does have plans for a six-seat spacecraft, the 'Rus', with a new set of launchers to loft it.

divemaster
Member

Posts: 1376
From: ridgefield, ct
Registered: May 2002

posted 07-12-2010 12:39 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for divemaster   Click Here to Email divemaster     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Are "we" paying for it? Otherwise, I doubt it will [cough] get off of the ground.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42988
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 07-12-2010 12:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The U.S. is not involved in the Rus but the point as it is relevant to this thread is that Roscosmos recently assessed upgrading its launch capability and chose a new design over modifying the Soyuz. That would suggest that adding three more seats is not as easy or efficient as the original post alludes.

Lou Chinal
Member

Posts: 1306
From: Staten Island, NY
Registered: Jun 2007

posted 07-13-2010 03:00 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Lou Chinal   Click Here to Email Lou Chinal     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I would prefer to fly a winged vehicle down to a runway landing, but after the shuttle retires I'm afraid the world is going to be stuck the 'bump down' method.

If we have to go this way, let's make the best of it.

As far as the fourth seat in Shenzhou I have no hard data, but everyone I've talked to who has been inside one says the same thing. Sure you get a fourth seat in here.

Do we really need the orbital module? Soyuz did when there was no ISS to go to. Now that there's a destination to go to, why not leave it at home?

The Zond has been test flown (unmanned).

I am just trying to do this with a minimum of R&D. Research and development equal time and money.

The Russians could crew the entire ISS with one flight.

Tonyq
Member

Posts: 199
From: UK
Registered: Jul 2004

posted 07-14-2010 03:38 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Tonyq   Click Here to Email Tonyq     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Lou Chinal:
As far as the fourth seat in Shenzhou I have no hard data, but everyone I've talked to who has been inside one says the same thing. Sure you get a fourth seat in here.
So your original comment which clearly suggested some definitive Chinese plan is just anonymous guesswork and hearsay...

Lou Chinal
Member

Posts: 1306
From: Staten Island, NY
Registered: Jun 2007

posted 07-14-2010 07:18 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Lou Chinal   Click Here to Email Lou Chinal     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
This is a proposal not a plan. That's the purpose of cS to discuss ideas.

I'm sure the Russians never planned to sell tourist seats on Soyuz when it first flew.

Tracy, that's just my point they need a bigger launch vehicle, and yes I agree the shuttle shouldn't be retired but it is.

John Charles
Member

Posts: 339
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Registered: Jun 2004

posted 07-14-2010 07:58 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for John Charles     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Lou Chinal:
Do we really need the orbital module? Soyuz did when there was no ISS to go to. Now that there's a destination to go to, why not leave it at home?
Lou, the first five in the Soyuz TM series jettisoned the orbital module before the de-orbit maneuver, but on TM-5, a control system malfunction left the crew in orbit overnight in the tiny re-entry module without food or even a toilet. After that, the efficient Soyuz engineers decided that the orbital module was not superfluous and it has stayed attached until after successful deorbit burns ever since.

Amenities aside, the orbital module provides upmass to the ISS, as well as providing crewmembers some minimal comfort between orbit insertion and docking.

According to some who have been there, the re-entry module was not designed for comfort, and lives up to its specifications.

Lou Chinal
Member

Posts: 1306
From: Staten Island, NY
Registered: Jun 2007

posted 07-15-2010 03:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Lou Chinal   Click Here to Email Lou Chinal     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
John, thanks for the info. I guess we know why the Russians never tried a manned moon shot.

I hope their new launch pad at Kourou can accommodate a bigger booster.

All times are CT (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts

Copyright 2020 collectSPACE.com All rights reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a





advertisement