iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Russian Probe Phobos-Grunt To Crash Soon

Spacecraft

First Posted: 01/12/12 02:57 PM ET Updated: 01/13/12 02:22 PM ET

MOSCOW -- A Russian spacecraft designed to burnish the nation's faded space glory in a mission to one of Mars' moons has turned into one of the heaviest, most toxic pieces of space junk ever.

It will come crashing down to Earth in just a few days.

The Russian space agency Roscosmos' latest forecast has the unmanned Phobos-Ground probe falling out of Earth's orbit Sunday or Monday, with the median time placing it over the Indian Ocean just north of Madagascar. It said the precise time and place of its uncontrolled plunge can only be determined later, and unless someone actually spots fiery streaks in the sky, no one may ever know where any surviving pieces end up.

Space experts agree it's unlikely to pose big risks.

At 13.2 metric tons (14.6 tons), the Phobos-Ground is one of the heaviest spacecraft ever to plummet to Earth, considerably larger than the two defunct satellites that fell to Earth last fall and landed in the water. It's cylindrical and about the size of a van.

Roscosmos predicted that only between 20 and 30 fragments of the Phobos probe with a total weight of up to 200 kilograms (440 pounds) will survive the re-entry and plummet to Earth.

It's the third satellite to crash out of the sky in under five months: An old NASA 6-ton atmospheric research satellite came tumbling down in September, and a 3-ton German science satellite followed suit in October. But both were well past their prime.

Russia's Phobos-Ground probe is still a mere babe. It was launched in November, and a glitch left it stranded in orbit around Earth instead of bound for Mars to collect soil samples.

"What's different about this re-entry is that it's not a re-entry of an old, inert satellite that just was expected for years. It's something that is coming down because of an accident ... for me, that puts it in a different category," said Jonathan McDowell of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Mass.

Another striking difference is the 11 metric tons (12 tons) of highly toxic rocket fuel aboard Phobos-Ground, accounting for the bulk of its weight for the long journey to the Martian moon of Phobos. This makes it potentially the most toxic spacecraft to fall ever.

Roscosmos insists all the fuel will burn in the atmosphere and pose no danger, and some experts in Russia and the West share that forecast.

And if it's any consolation, both of the two previous uncontrolled satellites harmlessly showered fragments over water.

"The fuel indeed poses lethal danger in case of close contact, but I haven't heard of a single case of any civilians poisoned by rocket fuel from all the derelict satellites and failed rockets throughout the space era," said Igor Lissov, an independent Moscow-based space observer. "The objective reality is that it burns on re-entry. There is no reason to panic."

Some experts theorized, however, that part of the fuel might have frozen in the cold of space and could survive the fiery descent, posing a strong threat if it spills over populated areas. Such fears prompted the United States to shoot down its USA-193 spy satellite with a Navy missile in 2008.

Some botched Russian rocket launches in the past have showered fragments over populated areas in Siberia and neighboring Kazakhstan.

In the latest such mishap, fragments of a Russian satellite that failed to enter a designated orbit after its launch last month came down around Novosibirsk, the third-largest Russian city with a population of about 1.5 million, damaging some houses but hurting no one. The fragments of the Meridian satellite, however, fell from a lower altitude at a far slower speed than the Phobos-Ground debris will have on re-entry.

Engineers from the Moscow-based company NPO Lavochkin, which built the Mars probe, said in an article giving a detailed description of the design that its fuel tanks are made of aluminum alloy. That means they should melt early on re-entry, backing up official assurances that the fuel would burn up on its way down.

McDowell said the probability is low that a large lump of toxic stuff will prove hazardous.

He noted that some of the probe's equipment is dense and could survive re-entry, but added the odds are that any surviving pieces will wind up in the ocean.

"All the best rules in the world" put in place to prevent uncontrolled satellites from crashing down do little if any good in the event of a launch failure, McDowell said. "This is always going to be the risk that something breaks, and you end up with a situation like this. You can minimize it, but you can't prevent it entirely."

The $170-million Phobos-Ground mission was Russia's most expensive and the most ambitious space endeavor since Soviet times. The spacecraft was intended to land on the crater-dented, potato-shaped Martian moon, collect soil samples and fly them back to Earth, giving scientists precious materials that could shed more light on the genesis of the solar system.

The probe was successfully launched Nov. 9 and entered a preliminary orbit where its engines were supposed to fire to set it on its path to Mars. They never did, and attempts to fix the glitch by Russian and European Space Agency experts failed.

Russia's space chief has acknowledged the Phobos-Ground mission was ill-prepared and risks of its failure were high, but said that Roscosmos had to give it the go-ahead so as not to miss the limited Earth-to-Mars launch window.

Phobos-Ground marked Russia's first planned foray beyond Earth's orbit since a botched 1996 robotic mission to Mars. That probe, designed by the same Lavochkin company, crashed shortly after launch due to an engine failure. The firm also built two other Phobos-bound probes that failed in 1988.

The crash of Mars-96 generated strong international fears because of some 200 grams of plutonium onboard. The craft eventually showered its fragments over the Chile-Bolivia border in the Andes Mountains, and the pieces were never recovered.

Russian officials continue to insist the craft plunged into the Pacific, their way of deflecting criticism for not warning the inhabitants of the impact area and for failing to search for plutonium and other debris.

Fears of radiation also were sparked by the fall of a nuclear-powered Soviet spy satellite that crashed over northwestern Canada in January 1978. The Soviets claimed the craft completely burned on re-entry, but a massive recovery effort by Canadian authorities recovered a dozen fragments, most of which were radioactive.

The Phobos-Ground contains a tiny quantity of the radioactive metal Cobalt-57 in one of its instruments, but Roscosmos said it poses no threat of radioactive contamination.

___

AP Aerospace Writer Marcia Dunn contributed from Cape Canaveral, Fla.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST SCIENCE

MOSCOW -- A Russian spacecraft designed to burnish the nation's faded space glory in a mission to one of Mars' moons has turned into one of the heaviest, most toxic pieces of space junk ever. It wi...
MOSCOW -- A Russian spacecraft designed to burnish the nation's faded space glory in a mission to one of Mars' moons has turned into one of the heaviest, most toxic pieces of space junk ever. It wi...
Filed by Rebecca Searles  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 127
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
cosmicdart
paragon of paradigms
05:21 AM on 01/14/2012
I wonder if all of these failed Russian probes where just unlucky enough to hid a piece of orbital space junk on their way into orbit. I really do think that the international space community should build a robotic junk wagon, and catchers mitt to catch and safely store all of those nuts and bolts flying around up there. I wonder what Mitt Romney plans to do about this problem cuz he must know a lot about catchers mitts? I just heard that our space station needs to move over soon cuz of space junk in the way.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kevmi16
SEENITBEFORE
08:00 PM on 01/13/2012
Too bad it wasn't designed by the GM engineers who designed the Chevy VOLT then it would burn up before it hit the atmosphere.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bigbobh
06:19 PM on 01/13/2012
A space craft named GRUNT? No wonder it didn't work. You think the Ruski scientests were trying to tell us some thing?
photo
gerbersmail
One who doesn't laugh doesn't live
05:50 PM on 01/13/2012
There are literally thousands of satellite space junk cluttering our atmosphere. Some active and some not. What amazes me is what were these NASA and private sector organizations thinking when they launched these things? Did they think they would merely disappear at the end of their life span? This is like any other object orbiting our earth. They will all gradually fall to earth unless technology improves and propels them into inner galactic space once their life span ends. And that would take an enormous amount of energy to do that. NASA engineers need to think a little ahead of the game in order to prevent these things from endangering life on this planet.
05:39 PM on 01/13/2012
Seriously another one?
yurakraphed
the world is full of krap -jus like yur hed
05:01 PM on 01/13/2012
oh well - after 8 years of GWB bs - i'm used to gettin "probed"
07:32 PM on 01/13/2012
Yup! Gotta admit Obama did way more damage in 3 years than George did in 8.
yurakraphed
the world is full of krap -jus like yur hed
11:52 AM on 01/14/2012
yup gotta admit - your duhmer than a box of rox
photo
gwbsucs1
use your head for sumthin other than a hatrack
11:56 AM on 01/14/2012
sounds to me like you need more education
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lisa Tomlin
04:41 PM on 01/13/2012
So this is how the world will come to an end.
yurakraphed
the world is full of krap -jus like yur hed
05:01 PM on 01/13/2012
maybe there is some truth to the 2012 theory
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
azOutlawz44
Media is a Sham
04:07 PM on 01/13/2012
ya gotta keep in mind things are weightless outside our gravity right ?? so why they come crashing down and Comets keep fly by ? the way these probes keep crashing back..we should be getting hit constanly by space rocks etc..
steves1709
Your bicro-mio is empty
07:10 PM on 01/13/2012
We ARE getting hit w/ space rocks every day. Most are small enough to vaporize in the atmosphere.
07:16 PM on 01/13/2012
Thing are weightless, but they are not without mass. It takes just as much energy to move a 100 pound rock in 0 gravity as it does here on the ground. In other words, a hundred pound rock will hit you just as hard in 0 gravity as it will if you are standing on the ground. The energy of the rock is determined by it mass and velocity. Not gravity or the lack there of. Because the 100 pound rock still has mass it means that it is still effected by the earth’s gravity. The reason it stays up there is due to the speed it is traveling at. Like rock on a string, you swing it fast enough and it will remain at the end of the string, too slow and it falls to the ground, too fast and it breaks the string and goes flying off. The string in this case is earth’s gravity. Too slow and gravity pulls it back to earth, too fast and it goes flying off into space.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
azOutlawz44
Media is a Sham
04:04 PM on 01/13/2012
Strange why all these probes are now crashing..did they run out of Gas ?? and why are they not just sucked into Outer space like we are kinda tuaght ? so im to take if an Astronuat was to fly off a shuttle he should eventually crash down to earth like all this other stuff huh ? I kinda am getting the feeling we are being lied to about stuff Alot ! lol
06:55 PM on 01/13/2012
You didn't stay awake in high school science did you? If an astronaut were to be separated from his craft, he would float around the earth until his orbit finally decayed and then burn up as he fell through the atmosphere
04:00 PM on 01/13/2012
Good article. I agree that most of the craft, including the fuel, will probably burn up in the atmosphere. However, I am a little confused about one statement.
"The fragments of the Meridian satellite, however, fell from a lower altitude at a far slower speed than the Phobos-Ground debris will have on re-entry"
If the fragements of both satelites are approximately the same size (fragments), it makes no difference how much they weigh, or what altitude they fell from. They will all always fall at the same speed once traveling through our atmosphere.
steves1709
Your bicro-mio is empty
07:13 PM on 01/13/2012
If the pieces fall through LESS miles of atmosphere, they will have less heating, burning etc than those from higher altitude. The atmosphere at very high alt is so thin that even tiny particles achieve great speeds until the hit the more dense layers of air, then slow to their terminal velocity.
07:33 PM on 01/13/2012
Depends on the surface area and the rate of speed it falls. You are correct that two objects of different mass will fall at the same rate, but you have to take into account the physical design of an object. Which will fall faster, a 100 pound feather, or a 100 pound rock. They weigh the same, but the physical design of the object will effects its rate of decent. In a vacuum design and configuration means little, but once it hits the atmosphere then things change.
Topdown1
That's what she said!
03:52 PM on 01/13/2012
Sure hope it doesn't hit the US capital building. That would truly be a shame.
photo
jrb359
Big government is not your friend
03:14 PM on 01/13/2012
Get your umbrellas ready!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Leon Engelun
03:08 PM on 01/13/2012
no big deal. It ain't the US problem.
02:50 PM on 01/13/2012
DUCK and COVER.
01:58 PM on 01/13/2012
can we possibly find more ways to destroy the earth? the earth is a planet with limited resources.