Launch News (Failure) Phobos-Grunt and YingHuo-1 atop Zenit-2 on November 8/9, 2011

I studied the question and the answer is a clear no. The Orlan backpack hatch makes this impossible, the EVA hatch clearance is to small. Only a Sokol suit could get through, but it is not designed for EVA ; it would inflate very much like Leonov's first EVA. Do any work under those conditions would be suicidal.

Send me up now, and I'll surely squeeze through.
 
http://interfax.ru/news.asp?id=216152

Two ESA telemetry stations will assist saving of Phobos-Grunt

Nov 10, 2011, 11:57

Moscow, Nov 10. INTERFAX.RU - Space communications stations of the ESA located at Kourou cosmodrome (French Guiana) and in Australia, will try to obtain telemetry information from Russian interplanetary probe Phobos-Grunt today, told René Pischel, head of ESA representative office in Moscow to INTERFAX-AVN.

"Today we'll switch our tracking stations in Kourou and Australia to receive signals from Phobos-Grunt. If we are able to get something, we'll relay that information to our Russian colleagues", said Pischel.

Does someone know coordinates of these stations?
 
http://interfax.ru/news.asp?id=216152



Does someone know coordinates of these stations?
There are 2 on Oz. Both in WA. Both "near" Perth.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perth_Station"]Perth Station - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Norcia_Station"]New Norcia Station - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
 
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=15610.msg827076#msg827076

My friend at U.S. Deep Space Network's control center provides the following:
U.S. DSN's Goldstone Antenna Complex received one ping from Spacecraft. SC performed TM downlink via all available channels, this is indicating an anomaly detected by SC computer. During SC testing, Roscosmos inserted an SC slew commanding sequence in the flight program to point the SC's antennas toward the North (to be pointing at U.S., European, Russian ground stations) in the event of a problem before the burn(s) so that data can be more quickly obtained. This allows them to analyze the data and try again another day since MDU is completely powered by SC's solar panels. Goldstone DSN is indicating that SC is in a contingency safe mode. Contact was lost at planned LOS (with no first burn) and was picked up by Europe's first tracking station, TM unreadable at moment. Sun pointing for solar panels cannot be confirmed at this time (may not have been established before battery charging was commenced by flight computer). SC can be commanded to reset if need be.
 
Last edited:
Another item: why on Earth use Darmstadt ESOC for mission control? This split setup is asking for failure since it is not always possible to concentrate brains in one place for emergency troubleshooting.

Of course, the ESOC is one of the best mission controls for unmanned (and manned) missions in the world, on par with the big US mission control centers. And it has access to a much bigger LEO capable tracking station network.

And ESOC does have international experts for the recovery of lost spacecraft.

http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/operations/Recovery/recovery_team.html
 
BTW, it makes difference that passes near the ESA stations will happen while the spacecraft is in the sunlit part of its orbit (unlike Baikonur passes). Maybe it still can work while feeding from sunlight.
 
BTW, it makes difference that passes near the ESA stations will happen while the spacecraft is in the sunlit part of its orbit (unlike Baikonur passes). Maybe it still can work while feeding from sunlight.

Also, it could be possible that they want to manually command it into sun orientation for charging the battery, if that failed after the failed first burn. The batteries of Phobos-Grunt would not be very large compared to LEO satellite batteries, they are designed for a Mars mission with different occultation phases.
 
Also, it could be possible that they want to manually command it into sun orientation for charging the battery, if that failed after the failed first burn. The batteries of Phobos-Grunt would not be very large compared to LEO satellite batteries, they are designed for a Mars mission with different occultation phases.

I also gathered, it's a big problem to command the spacecraft anything while it wheezes past a ground station allowing only 5 minutes long visibility windows. Kind of communications protocol requires a bit of time to establish a dual direction link. One purpose for a higher intermediate orbit was just allowing for that.

Hopefully, they can find a hack for this situation.
 
*crosses fingers*
 
Come on! Don't let this mission fail! It's too awesome to fail!

I skimmed through the thread, but I couldn't find the current orbit. Is there any data on that? Generally it's a good idea for parking orbits to be very low, but we all know that low = unstable.
 
Come on! Don't let this mission fail! It's too awesome to fail!

I skimmed through the thread, but I couldn't find the current orbit. Is there any data on that? Generally it's a good idea for parking orbits to be very low, but we all know that low = unstable.

Code:
1 37872U 11065A   11314.14749491  .00157546  11383-4  16174-3 0    80
2 37872 051.4303 354.3546 0100276 029.0578 331.5579 16.00454140   213

206 x 340 km

Will hang around for two weeks or a month before decaying. A very painful month.
 
Guess what everyone!

The Great Galactic Ghoul just had lunch!

:(
 
Amateur video of Phobos-Grunt Engine Burn

Category: Project news
Confirmations of the Phobos-Grunt engines first burn are received from three observers groups in Brazilia.

One of them (coelholokofilms) has carried out video.

It was done from the point near San-Paolo.
Links:
Phobos-Grunt Engine Burn
From here.
I think it's a good news. Hope is not dead yet ;)
 
Back
Top