Winston
Lorenzo von Matterhorn
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 9,560
- Reaction score
- 1,749
The Soyuz 11 thread here got me thinking about Soyuz 1 and researching it.
There were 203 known flaws in the spacecraft just weeks before launch. Soyuz 1 had all kinds of issues once in orbit as detailed on these two excellent sites:
https://www.svengrahn.pp.se/histind/Soyuz1Land/Soyanaly.htm
https://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz1.html
Short story, upon it's necessary early return, Soyuz 1's drogue 'chute deployed, but the main 'chute wasn't pulled out of its container by it as it should have been. The auxiliary chute was manually activated and it deployed, but it tangled with the drogue chute.
From the investigation, the why:
An investigation, headed by V.V. Utkin of the Flight Research Institute of the Aviation Industry, revealed that Soyuz 1’s parachute container had opened at an altitude of 11 km, but had become ‘deformed’. This had squeezed the main canopy and thus prevented it from opening correctly. Although the small drogue chute had emerged, the main canopy simply could not exit the container, but not just because of the deformation. The drogue was designed to impart a force of 1,500 kg to pull out the main canopy, but it actually required upwards of 2,800 kg to be effective, perhaps due to the effect of air pressure in the descent module pushing against the container. Although these problems had never arisen in ground tests, Utkin’s panel determined that the ‘abnormal’ and ‘random’ conditions of Soyuz 1’s re-entry had conspired against it. Future missions would benefit from enlarged and strengthened parachute containers.
Yet there is one final, chilling, part to the story. Had Soyuz 1 succeeded (that is, if it not had issues that required it to return to Earth which would have then allowed the planned docking with Soyuz 2), it is certain that Soyuz 2 would have followed on 24 April, with cosmonauts Bykovsky, Yeliseyev and Khrunov. In his seminal work Challenge to Apollo, Asif Siddiqi explained that both Soyuz 1 and 2 were coated with thermal protection materials during their pre-launch preparations and inserted into high-temperature chambers for testing. Both were then subjected to a punishing sequence of tests, with their parachute containers in place, but lacking covers. The consequence was that the interiors of both craft’s parachute containers acquired a polymerized coating, which formed a very rough surface and contributed to the failure of Soyuz 1’s parachute deployment. Shockingly, it would have had the same effect on Soyuz 2. “The most chilling implication of this manufacturing oversight,” wrote Siddiqi, “was that both Soyuz spacecraft were doomed to failure. That is, if Komarov had not faced any troubles in orbit and the Soyuz 2 launch had gone on as scheduled, all four cosmonauts would have died on return.”
One excuse I've read for the parachute compartment covers not being in place during the thermal protection heat test (or curing process) was because of the rush in the program, the parachute compartment covers for Soyuz 1 and 2 weren't yet available and it was apparently thought they were unnecessary anyway during that test/cure.
The Soyuz parachute compartment cover:
There were 203 known flaws in the spacecraft just weeks before launch. Soyuz 1 had all kinds of issues once in orbit as detailed on these two excellent sites:
https://www.svengrahn.pp.se/histind/Soyuz1Land/Soyanaly.htm
https://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz1.html
Short story, upon it's necessary early return, Soyuz 1's drogue 'chute deployed, but the main 'chute wasn't pulled out of its container by it as it should have been. The auxiliary chute was manually activated and it deployed, but it tangled with the drogue chute.
From the investigation, the why:
An investigation, headed by V.V. Utkin of the Flight Research Institute of the Aviation Industry, revealed that Soyuz 1’s parachute container had opened at an altitude of 11 km, but had become ‘deformed’. This had squeezed the main canopy and thus prevented it from opening correctly. Although the small drogue chute had emerged, the main canopy simply could not exit the container, but not just because of the deformation. The drogue was designed to impart a force of 1,500 kg to pull out the main canopy, but it actually required upwards of 2,800 kg to be effective, perhaps due to the effect of air pressure in the descent module pushing against the container. Although these problems had never arisen in ground tests, Utkin’s panel determined that the ‘abnormal’ and ‘random’ conditions of Soyuz 1’s re-entry had conspired against it. Future missions would benefit from enlarged and strengthened parachute containers.
Yet there is one final, chilling, part to the story. Had Soyuz 1 succeeded (that is, if it not had issues that required it to return to Earth which would have then allowed the planned docking with Soyuz 2), it is certain that Soyuz 2 would have followed on 24 April, with cosmonauts Bykovsky, Yeliseyev and Khrunov. In his seminal work Challenge to Apollo, Asif Siddiqi explained that both Soyuz 1 and 2 were coated with thermal protection materials during their pre-launch preparations and inserted into high-temperature chambers for testing. Both were then subjected to a punishing sequence of tests, with their parachute containers in place, but lacking covers. The consequence was that the interiors of both craft’s parachute containers acquired a polymerized coating, which formed a very rough surface and contributed to the failure of Soyuz 1’s parachute deployment. Shockingly, it would have had the same effect on Soyuz 2. “The most chilling implication of this manufacturing oversight,” wrote Siddiqi, “was that both Soyuz spacecraft were doomed to failure. That is, if Komarov had not faced any troubles in orbit and the Soyuz 2 launch had gone on as scheduled, all four cosmonauts would have died on return.”
One excuse I've read for the parachute compartment covers not being in place during the thermal protection heat test (or curing process) was because of the rush in the program, the parachute compartment covers for Soyuz 1 and 2 weren't yet available and it was apparently thought they were unnecessary anyway during that test/cure.
The Soyuz parachute compartment cover:
Last edited:
