Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Russia Loses Inflatable Spacecraft

Posted by timothy on from the last-place-you-look dept.

Treeluvinhippy writes: "This article is a little light on details, but it looks like the Russians lost the Demonstrator-2 spacecraft. For those who don't know this craft was the inflatable launched from a submarine. Slashdot has the scoop of the launch right here"

71 of 180 comments (clear)

  1. Uh-oh by e03179 · · Score: 4, Funny

    My car insurance company will never believe me when I tell them that I ran into a Russian space craft.

    --
    -516
    1. Re:Uh-oh by SEWilco · · Score: 3, Funny

      Did your airbag inflate faster than the spacecraft deflated?

    2. Re:Uh-oh by Afrosheen · · Score: 2

      Maybe next time they'll use something besides helium to inflate it. Woops.

  2. Where was it aimed? by Grip3n · · Score: 4, Funny

    "On Friday, Russia's Ryazan nuclear sub launched Demonstrator-2 on a converted Volna SS-N-18 intercontinental ballistic missile"

    Have they tried looking around the Pentagon to see if it landed there? How about the White House? NORAD perhaps? Sometimes those guys forget to take the target off the defaults you know...

    --
    To make a pun demonstrates the highest understanding of a language
    1. Re:Where was it aimed? by Verizon+Guy · · Score: 1

      This just goes to show that we may have overreacted at that whole "Cold War" thing... see, there was nothing to worry about since the ICBMs would have "mysteriously disappeared" long before they reached us.

      --

      Aw, fuck it. Let's go bowling. - The Big Lebowski

  3. How much does it cost? by foniksonik · · Score: 2

    I wonder how much they are spending on theses launches? I assume that using an ICBM rocket is probably far cheaper and (with nuclear arms cutbacks - especially in long range specs) far more expendable.

    Still this is probably costing several million in administration and R&D alone.

    Hopefully they are learning a lot and this will aid missions in the future.

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    1. Re:How much does it cost? by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 2
      I wonder how much they are spending on theses launches? I assume that using an ICBM rocket is probably far cheaper and (with nuclear arms cutbacks - especially in long range specs) far more expendable.

      Still this is probably costing several million in administration and R&D alone.

      Probably. Rather less than NASA spent on space shuttle tiles I suspect, although I don't know whether this system could handle a vehicle of the Space Shuttle's weight. Then again, it wouldn't need to weigh as much if it used this system.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    2. Re:How much does it cost? by spd_rcr · · Score: 1

      seems like launching it from a submarine would take an aweful lot more money & effort then from land ? it's not like russia has a shortage of space ?

      --
      - tensions in our lives that are attacking our minds, unite themselves together to make our consciousness blind - op'ivy
  4. Now all I need is a beach ball by Subcarrier · · Score: 2

    Earlier, Babakin Space Center spokeswoman Lidia Avdeyeva confirmed the landing, but efforts to locate the vehicle so far have failed to bear fruit.

    And now somebody is sporting the coolest inflatable mattress ever! Keep an eye out for it next time you go to the beach.

    --
    "I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them." -- George H. W. Bush
  5. Here's a pic of the test pilot... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1, Troll

    It took a little digging around, but I finally found a pic of one of the test pilots in training. Click here. I'm surprised at how athletic she appears for a Russian woman.

  6. It could have landed anywhere by buggerdchoirboy · · Score: 1

    If you cannot find it it is useless. These things happen.

    1. Re:It could have landed anywhere by John+Biggabooty · · Score: 1

      Ooopski!

      --
      That's Bigboo TAY! TAY!
  7. missed oportunity by Cyno01 · · Score: 1

    well, a perfectly good oportunity to poke a little fun at the russian space program ruined by a small html flub making this page, like so many movie and airline seats promise to be, extra wide

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  8. Where did I put the needle, oh darn the ship is... by lysacor · · Score: 1

    Sounds like the Russian space agencies and R&D teams were looking at making a really cheap mode of transport recovery... only thing is they forgot that when they take the plug out of the seal... it tends to release whatever air/gas it contains... ooops I guess they didn't read the instructions the designer gave them... well no matter yet another one down the tubes.

  9. Summer's Out.. by snoozebutton · · Score: 1

    ..and the Russians have lost their raft.

    The kids are bored,
    at home
    on a computer they can't afford,

    A first post will not be had
    in these coming weeks.
    and it's sad.

    "I give you me, I give you nothing" - Bad Religion

    More catchy tunes (CARP-free music!!!)

  10. They seem to have figured out why they lost it... by phayes · · Score: 1
    "its ability to inflate two thermo-proof panels it carries to up to 13 feet provides for aerodynamic breaking"

    aerodynamic breaking... LOL.

    Pat

    --
    Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  11. Oh well... by MADCOWbeserk · · Score: 2

    Undoubtably if some Russian engineer had remembered to put batteries in the GPS, the mission would have been a "success."

    Losing a spacecraft is bad

  12. They know where it is... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 2

    They are just waiting on Taco Bell to determine the grand prize winner....

    *rimshot*

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
  13. A Hendrix Poster? by KanSer · · Score: 1

    Inflatable Spacecraft? Lemme guess, the interior is black lights on a velvet poster of Hendrix. Oooohhh yeeeah.

    Combined with the inflatable furniture this thing is a portable bachelors pad! Can't wait till Thinkgeek starts to sell these!

    --
    • MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward Wednesday April 20, @4:20
  14. Re:"Pull cord to inflate" by MADCOWbeserk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's probably as good as anything else Russia's government has produced in the last 10 years.

    Kinda rude.... Russia has maintained her space program, despite the inability of the government to afford it. We have cut the living shit outta ours also, and Nasa hasn't been having such a great time with it. Mars?

    Russia should be commended for trying a cool idea. reusing ICBM's and creating cheap spacecraft seems like a good idea...Too bad

  15. WTF post by ehiris · · Score: 2

    They can track my stolen vehicle in under a minute but they can't locate a space vehicle!?!?

    "If you can't learn to do something well, learn to enjoy doing it poorly"

    1. Re:WTF post by salnikov · · Score: 1

      They can track my stolen vehicle in under a minute but they can't locate a space vehicle!?!?

      Gosh, try to put your vehicle on ss-18 and launch it, then go to police and see where they could track it...

    2. Re:WTF post by ehiris · · Score: 2

      What I meant to say was GPS tracking.

  16. Inflatable? by kasperd · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This makes me wonder, how would they have prevented it from blowing when it reached the vacuum in outer space?

    --

    Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
  17. Umm, are they serious? by Rhinobird · · Score: 2
    The vehicle, developed jointly by the Babakin Center, the European Space Agency and the German-based Astrium space firm, aims to revolutionize cargo deliveries and transportation of astronauts.
    Demonstrator-2 is small in size -- the folded-up vehicle measures less than 3 feet in diameter making it the most compact space vehicle ever made
    Two previous attempts to launch Demonstrator-2 ended in failures
    Uh...yeah
    • I don't know of any 3 foot astronauts.
    • a 3 for 3 failure rate doesn't instill confidence.
    • There seems to be an awful lot of inflatable women posts tonight
    --
    If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
    1. Re:Umm, are they serious? by Asic+Eng · · Score: 2
      I don't know of any 3 foot astronauts.

      Well, if you sit down and hug your knees, you might fit in. You'd feel a bit like inside a cannon ball, I guess. Anyway, that's just a prototype, they'd probably make a bigger one, once they got the system working.

      a 3 for 3 failure rate doesn't instill confidence.

      That's true, but such a rate is not unusal for new technologies in the field of space exploration.

      There seems to be an awful lot of inflatable women posts tonight

      Yeah, now that you mention it... :)

    2. Re:Umm, are they serious? by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 2

      I don't know of any 3 foot astronauts.

      Demonstrator-2 as in not RealImplementation-1.

      This is obviously still in early development. The first plane wasn't a 747 either and if I recall correctly, NASA didn't start with manned missions either for their prototypes.

    3. Re:Umm, are they serious? by foniksonik · · Score: 2

      If you read the full article you would have found out that it is only 3 feet 'Un-Inflated' and inflates to 13 feet:

      " Demonstrator-2 is small in size -- the folded-up vehicle measures less than 3 feet in diameter making it the most compact space vehicle ever made. However, its ability to inflate two thermo-proof panels it carries to up to 13 feet provides for aerodynamic breaking, which can reduce the craft's speed by nearly a thousand times."

      Add to that the potentially rational conclusion that this may only be used for inorganic/non-sentient payloads and it starts to make more sense.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    4. Re:Umm, are they serious? by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      If the vehicle is used to bring down astronauts which are already in orbit, they don't have to fit in the three-foot packing box.

      There are decades-old designs for inflatable reentry craft, particularly for emergency use. They were considered for Skylab, if that had become a permanent station. They've also been considered for the ISS, but a solid lifeboat was approved -- until it was cancelled.

      The simplest design resembles a foil-covered cone, with one or two astronauts at the apex...and a small deceleration rocket someplace. The rocket is most easily used before inflating the reentry vehicle, but then you're committed to reentry whether your shield inflates properly or not.

  18. Something odd was reported in Roswell NM by infonography · · Score: 2, Funny

    Of course details are sketchy.... Nobody is buying the Weather Ballon theory this time.

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
  19. wow... by skydude_20 · · Score: 1

    Slashdot has the scoop of the launch right here

    and I was all excited that Slashdot might have actually done some real investigative journalism, oh well, another post

    --
    Jesus saves souls and redeems them for valuable cash prizes
    1. Re:wow... by foniksonik · · Score: 2

      It would be nice if Slashdot would leverage it's community and reader base into an effective first-hand account news source. The potential is definitely there... motivation and/or purpose seems lacking though.

      Could be a result of being a subsidiary of VALinux/parent company instead of part of a larger media co.

      I think we's all love it if /. became something like the Routers service or even like the BBC.

      Vision:

      Politically neutral tech and tech related news/media/public forum. It is all of these things already but doesn't take itself seriously... and that very well could be a Good(TM) thing.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  20. $10 says... by Smitedogg · · Score: 1

    Odds are that it burned up in re-entry, IMHO. I would assume the Russians know how to aim, so if it's not there it's probably gone. Then again, maybe their aim is so off that we would have all survived a WW3?

    1. Re:$10 says... by foniksonik · · Score: 2

      According to the article:

      "Earlier, Babakin Space Center spokeswoman Lidia Avdeyeva confirmed the landing, but efforts to locate the vehicle so far have failed to bear fruit, TVS reported."

      They may be covering for their short-sightedness, etc though so who knows. I suppose it depends on how high the inflatable re-entry device was released and what sort of protection it had to re-entry forces/temp. I thought of this as a problem with the concept when I first heard about it.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    2. Re:$10 says... by MADCOWbeserk · · Score: 3, Funny

      Then again, maybe their aim is so off that we would have all survived a WW3

      This just in, Canada brutalized by Russian nuclear weapons... 10 dead. Film @ 11...

  21. Knee jerk reaction by theolein · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why is it that every single post on some good idea that does not come from the USA ends up on /. getting trolled and flamebaited to all hell? One would think , or at least hope, that the kind of people who frequent /. would be a little bit more open minded than that.

    Apart from that, I like the idea of this experiment that the Russians are doing. Apart from turning ICBM's into space launchers and having a good way of protecting packages that must return to earth, it seems like it is providing the basic research for Astronaut emergency reentry technology.

    1. Re:Knee jerk reaction by foniksonik · · Score: 2

      "it seems like it is providing the basic research for Astronaut emergency reentry technology."

      I would agree with you if I didn't think that any sort of 'extra-vehicular' (even with these 'escape pods') would seriously be a 'fatally' flawed excercise in futility.

      On the other hand this tech could be used very successfully in future Moon/Mars/other 'in-atmosphere' landings (I'm not confident about the whole high-heat re-entry via invlatable device technique from out of atmosphere orbit).

      Also i don't think this is intended for astronauts or cosmonauts but is intended for robotic probes, etc. which require an unmanned and at least 5 of 9's landing success rate.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    2. Re:Knee jerk reaction by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 2
      Why is it that every single post on some good idea that does not come from the USA ends up on /. getting trolled and flamebaited to all hell?

      It's largely because 'America is the best country in the world'. And Americans know this because their government told them so and the gullible fools actually believe it(!) IMO space is not something that America excels at, although they mostly cover it up by spending obscene amounts of money. I mean, any dog can be made to fly if you throw enough money at it- check out the Space Shuttle! It's a reusable space vehicle that was designed to cost less than an expendable vehicle- but it turns out, it didn't, by a long, long, long way; but they continue to run it! OTOH the Russians built a similar vehicle, launched once, then immediately ditched it, because they found it cost too much. Fair enough, you might argue they should have figured that out before they built it, but you only really know that when you've done it. NASA seems to have entirely missed this point.

      One would think, or at least hope, that the kind of people who frequent /. would be a little bit more open minded than that.

      Yes. But I see little evidence.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    3. Re:Knee jerk reaction by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      ...it seems like it is providing the basic research for Astronaut emergency reentry technology.

      Define "basic research".

    4. Re:Knee jerk reaction by Oswald · · Score: 1
      Since it seems you have given the subject of American arrogance a bit of "thought", here's an honest, no-bullshit tidbit for you to munch on: much American pride stems from the fact that our system and our people produce the "obscene amounts of money" that you seem to consider cheating. We like to think that being rich mother-fuckers is not pure blind luck.

      Doubtless you disagree.

    5. Re:Knee jerk reaction by Tardigrade · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't lump everyong into the same bag. Check out *who* is doing the posting. Perhaps they are trolls, perhaps they are a few US chauvanists. Perhaps they are non-USians who happen to dislike Russia. Good God, they are plenty of possible explanations. Do not just jump on the easy anti-American one. Just because there are a few loud-mouths, does not mean everyone is a jerk.

    6. Re:Knee jerk reaction by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 1
      Nice political system too, how much does it cost to buy a presidency these days? You don't even need anything awkward like a majority either ;-)

      Oh yeah, and funny how it's the other countries with the higher standard of living and per capita income! I think that's not a coincidence either!

      We like to think that being rich mother-fuckers is not pure blind luck.

      No you've practiced that a lot I'd expect. Still, as long as you like to think that, it'll be ok.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    7. Re:Knee jerk reaction by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 2
      Also i don't think this is intended for astronauts or cosmonauts but is intended for robotic probes, etc. which require an unmanned and at least 5 of 9's landing success rate.

      I'm sure that that rate has never, ever been achieve for any reentry vehicle by any country. The landing of the Space Shuttle is one of the most dangerous parts of the mission. Even if it were a 5 9s procedure, we wouldn't know until we had done 100,000 landings.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    8. Re:Knee jerk reaction by mtec · · Score: 1

      Holy Cats! I'd never heard of this project (or most of these). Thanks spaceman!

      --
      Cake or Death? Cake Please!
    9. Re:Knee jerk reaction by theolein · · Score: 2

      I didn't make any assertions as to who was doing the posting, just on the reactions to content.

    10. Re:Knee jerk reaction by Oswald · · Score: 1
      Oh yeah, and funny how it's the other countries with the higher standard of living and per capita income! I think that's not a coincidence either!

      Damn. You've forced me to inject facts into a perfectly good flamewar. Here is a table that seems to indicate that, adjusted for purchasing power, the U.S. comes in third behind Luxembourg and Liechtenstein in gross national income. Which one of those do you live in?

      No you've practiced that a lot I'd expect. Still, as long as you like to think that, it'll be ok.

      Um, practiced which? Being rich, mother-fucking, or blind luck?

    11. Re:Knee jerk reaction by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 2
      Damn. You've forced me to inject facts into a perfectly good flamewar. Here [worldbank.org] is a table that seems to indicate that, adjusted for purchasing power, the U.S. comes in third behind Luxembourg and Liechtenstein in gross national income.

      You see? There's plenty more to life than buying power though. Many of these countries have free medical benefits. Also some other countries have extra bonuses, Sweden has swedish women(!); and if the reports are true about iceland (all of the women look like Sharon Stone), then I'd quite like to live there, even with less spending power; heck that's my next holiday right there! ;-)

      Which one of those do you live in?

      It's not the country, it's the personal circumstances isn't it?

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    12. Re:Knee jerk reaction by Oswald · · Score: 1

      Allright, we can stop now; you seem to be pretty decent guy, and we don't even have to compete for the same women, 'cause I prefer brunettes ;) If I were travelling to meet women, I think I'd try Italy or Israel. (My wife prefers I not do this, however.)

  22. Re:"Pull cord to inflate" by foniksonik · · Score: 2

    " Russia should be commended for trying a cool idea. reusing ICBM's and creating cheap spacecraft seems like a good idea...Too bad"

    Yep and they gotta do 'something' with all those missile/rockets they built during the cold-war... what else are they going to do but strive for an economically appealing and viable use. The US should pay attention, especially at the rate that we obsolete our own National Defense Technology.

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  23. Russian inflatable spacecraft? by fldvm · · Score: 1

    How come when I read Russian inflatable spacecraft I think of something like this.

  24. Why America is best--- by dinotrac · · Score: 1

    Our politicians may be full of hot air,
    NASA officials may be full of hot air,
    we might all be full of hot air,

    but at least our satellites aren't!!

    Unless, of course, you count things like the Mars Pathfinder which landed inside a coccoon of airbags and the upcoming Mars Rover missions which will do the same.
    But those don't count, right?

  25. what the heck !!!!! by H3XA · · Score: 1

    Who let the trolls out !!!! BLAH, BLAH !!! ..... and repeat until you throw up.

    This most be the most trolled post I have ever seen. I wonder if the russian want any candidates for the next probe they launch? They can test the effectiveness of trolls as air brakes and landing cushions....

    - HeXa

  26. maybe the satellite was hijacked? by H3XA · · Score: 1

    the F@lun G0ng might of mistaken the Soviet spacecraft for a Chinese one and taken control of it.....

    seriously though - at least Russia is making use of the old ICBMs they have. As long as they remember to remove the warheads and keep the "lost" spacecraft from falling back to earth... practice makes perfect.

    - HeXa

  27. Re:"Pull cord to inflate" by stevew · · Score: 2

    Hey, if they had used Duct tape it would have worked. That stuff lasts forever!

    --
    Have you compiled your kernel today??
  28. Re:"Pull cord to inflate" by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 2
    So you weren't impressed with Russia actually launching tourists then? When NASA cannnot?

    Or the fact that ~70% of the ISS is of Russian construction and design?

    --

    -WolfWithoutAClause

    "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
  29. Oh come on by shed · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Who'd get turned on by an inflatable spacecraft? Just cleaning the thing when you're done could take all day.

    Now an inflatable penguin...

    --
    My cat can eat a whole watermelon
  30. Re:Inflatable? by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 2

    This makes me wonder, how would they have prevented it from blowing when it reached the vacuum in outer space?

    The same way you keep an ordinary balloon from exploding. Make sure that the balloon's materials can take the pressure difference.

    There's nothing magical about vacuum.

  31. Re:Inflatable? by Peyna · · Score: 2

    Yup, the same you keep the astronauts suit from exploding, and the same way you keep the space shuttle from exploding and the same way planes can fly at 30,000 feet and the people inside can still breath but the plane doesn't explode.

    --
    What?
  32. Space Junk by guttentag · · Score: 2

    I'd say it was probably struck by some of the space junk that's orbiting the earth at thousands of miles per hour. They should ask the folks on the ISS to keep an eye out for a deflated beach ball.

  33. Re:"Pull cord to inflate" by Planetes · · Score: 1

    > Russia should be commended for trying a cool idea. reusing ICBM's and creating cheap spacecraft seems like a good idea...Too bad

    I agree however I should point out that we do this too except with cruise missiles. Several smaller US satellites have been launched that way.

    --
    Planetes
    "One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promo Ad
    "Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer" - Adolf Hitl
  34. Bad geography by michalw · · Score: 2, Informative

    No wonder they can't find it, check the webpage of the GPS part makers GPS Tracking of the IRDT-2 Re-entry Capsule quote: "...The IRDT-2 capsule will be launched by a Volna rocket from a Kalmar type submarine in the Baltic sea north of Murmansk..."

    Murmansk is nowhere near the Baltics...

  35. Re:"Pull cord to inflate" by thales · · Score: 2
    " Russia should be commended for trying a cool idea. reusing ICBM's and creating cheap spacecraft seems like a good idea...Too bad"

    A Cool idea but not a new idea. The Apollo program's Saturn boosters were NASA's first man rated booster that wasn't a recycled ICBM. All the Mercury and Gemini astronaunts rode ICBMs into space.

    --
    Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est
  36. Somewhere on a primitive island.. by Frank+of+Earth · · Score: 2, Funny

    .. the natives are worshipping their newly discovered floating God.

    Rogue members have tried unsucessfully to rid their new God, but the rocks and sticks they throw at it magically bounce off and repel back.

    --
    Live web cams
  37. Please change your sig... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

    It has just become invalid. After you changed it, see if you can book a trip there and see for yourself.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    1. Re:Please change your sig... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Was that directed at me? If so, where's this trip I'm supposed to take a trip to? *needs your comment explained*

  38. Re:"Pull cord to inflate" by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

    Produced perhaps, yes... but the various military and civilan design bureaus in Russia can still out-engineer many western top outfits, especially in military and aerospace.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  39. truth in advertising by neewong · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Slashdot says they have the "scoop" on this, when in fact they're just reposting a story from CNN.

    Here's a real scoop for you, /.

    Reposting != scooping

    scooping == being the first to get a story, something that /. is never going to be known for...

  40. Re:Inflatable? by Afrosheen · · Score: 2

    Natalie Portman is so last year. Now it's all about Kirsten Dunst.

  41. How long till the space elevator? by mtec · · Score: 1

    Isn't that supposed to be theoretically possible?

    --
    Cake or Death? Cake Please!
  42. Not as bad as it sounds by jdoeii · · Score: 1

    It's not as bad as it sounds. The Russian media reports that the vehicle landed as expected, it's just can't be found so far. The search continues.

    The previous launches ware worse. In Summer 2000 tt did not inflate completely and hard-crashed. In Summer 2001 it did not separate from the first stage. So, this time it's half-way successful.

    Kamchatka peninsula is not the nicest place on Earth. Very thin population, a lot of mountains, forests.

    Here is the original in Russian:
    http://www.spacenews.ru/spacenews/src/sp acenews/fu ll_news.cfm?id=90403

  43. On the bright side... by Peter+T+Ermit · · Score: 1

    ... this means they might lose Lance Bass too.