It is possible that an error in the manufacturing process is behind the leaks observed in Progress and Soyuz spacecraft. The information was released by Joel Montalbano, program manager for the International Space Station at NASA, who said during a conference held on Saturday (11) that Russia is investigating this possibility.
In December, Russia’s Soyuz MS-22 spacecraft, which carried three astronauts to the orbital laboratory, lost all of its coolant compound; country officials attributed what happened to the likely impact of a micrometeoroid. In February, a Progress-82 cargo ship had a leak similar to that of the Soyuz.
Also that month, the Russian space agency Roscosmos released the first images of the source of the Soyuz MS-22 leak:
According to Montalbano, the sequence of incidents led the Russian space agency Roscosmos to investigate the production processes of the country’s spacecraft with Energia, a contractor for Russia’s manned space flight program. “Is there anything there? Has anything changed in the production process for these vehicles?” he added. “That’s exactly what we would do, you look at all the data you have and everything you can.”
As Roscosmos considered that, unless an emergency arose, the Soyuz MS-22 spacecraft could not bring astronaut Frank Rubio and cosmonauts Sergey Prokopyev and Dmitry Petelin back to Earth, it was necessary to send the Soyuz MS-23 spacecraft to the station . Montalbano said that NASA is confident with the new vehicle, but that it is monitoring its situation in case of new occurrences.
Originally, Rubio, Prokopyev and Petelin would return to Earth in March, but due to leaks, they must remain aboard the station until September, to return with Soyuz MS-23. The Soyuz MS-22 ship should return later this month, without a crew on board.
Moltabano pointed out that, during re-entry into the Earth’s atmosphere, the spacecraft will end up ruptured, so it will not be possible to examine the damaged area responsible for the leak — that’s what happened to the Progress spacecraft, which left the orbital laboratory in February and which, due to not having a structure designed to resist re-entry, it ended up burning.
Source: NASA (YouTube)
