On Sat, 08 Feb 2003 19:46:12 +0000, Ian Woollard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It has a failure rate per launch of about 2%. The Soyuz has a failure >rate of about 2%. Any mature, good rocket has a failure rate of about 2% >currently. Until we get to launching a lot more often; I don't expect it >to improve any. Actually, the Soyuz failure rate is more like 5%. The critical difference is that most Soyuz failures are survivable. They've had a stage separation failure, from which they aborted and landed hard downrange (both cosmonauts injured, one badly enough to be permanently off flight status); a service module separation failure (equivalent to an Apollo SM sep failure), leading to a landing hundreds of miles off course at -38* C; several hard dock failures, from which they simply went home; a landing on a frozen lake into which the parachute sank, inverting the capsule and putting the escape hatch under water; a main propulsion failure, from they aborted with reserve propulsion; a launch pad fire, from which they ejected the capsule and landed safely... I'm sure I'm forgetting some. The point is, Soyuzes don't kill people any more, though they sometimes still try to. -R -- Every complex, difficult problem has a simple, easy solution - which is wrong. [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ ERPS-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
