<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"  UPDATE: This week Russia&amp;#039;s Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) said it found the cause of the Progress rocket failure: a malfunction in a gas generator in the rocket&amp;#039;s third stage engine. Russia is still investigating the crash and searching for debris, but isolating the cause of the launch failure could help get Soyuz launches back on track, and lower the risk that the International Space Station would have to abandoned. It&amp;#039;s been a hard year for the US manned space program. First the space shuttle retired in July, leaving NASA with no native capacity for reaching the International Space Station. Then, just yesterday, a Russian Soyuz rocket carrying a Progress cargo ship with supplies for the ISS shut down prematurely five minutes after launch and fell back to Earth, crashing in the forests of Russia&amp;#039;s Altai Republic. Although the Progress spacecraft is unmanned, it uses a variant of the same launch vehicle as Russian&amp;#039;s manned spacecraft, also called Soyuz. That&amp;#039;s worrisome, because with the shuttle retired and commercial alternatives years from being ready, hitching a ride on the Soyuz spacecraft is currently NASA&amp;#039;s only option for sending crews to and from the space station. The two versions of the Soyuz rocket differ only slightly. That means both versions of the rocket will have to be grounded until an investigation discovers the cause of the failure and fixes it. It&amp;#039;s anyone&amp;#039;s guess how long that will take, but it will have to happen within the next few months; otherwise, the space station&amp;#039;s current crew of six will be forced to abandon ship. As NASA&amp;#039;s ISS chief noted yesterday, the station has plenty of supplies on board, and Japanese and European cargo ships can bring more if necessary. The problem is that the two 3-seat Soyuz &amp;quot;lifeboats&amp;quot; currently docked to the station have an on-orbit shelf life of about six months, and must return to Earth before that time is up. (It&amp;#039;s not that Russia expects anything in particular to go wrong, but that the Soyuz&amp;#039;s components are rated for 210 days, and stretching out that time could produce unexpected results.) Space analyst Jeff Foust of the Futron Corporation says it&amp;#039;s unlikely astronauts would need to abandon the station. &amp;quot;There&amp;#039;s certainly reason for caution, but there&amp;#039;s not reason to panic because past experience and other variables suggest that this might be something that can be resolved relatively quickly, and have effectively no impact on space station operations.&amp;quot; Crews that leave the ISS always take one of the lifeboats, since the Soyuz can&amp;#039;t stay in space past six months. At worst, Foust says, the three crew members scheduled to leave next month or not long after would do so, but with no one coming up right away to replace them. That would negatively impact the station&amp;#039;s science mission, Foust says, but &amp;quot;it&amp;#039;s certainly not impending doom for the space station.&amp;quot; The launch failure may prove more detrimental to the head of the Russian space agency, Vladimir Popovkin, who&amp;#039;s been in office less than six months. He has now presided over two launch failures in as many weeks (an unmanned Proton rocket was lost after launch on August 18). Foust says that Popovkin&amp;#039;s predecessor may have been forced out because of a launch failure on his own watch, and that the new guy could have the same fate in store. &amp;quot;You&amp;#039;ve got to wonder, maybe you should be getting some boxes to box up your office just in case you get retired as well,&amp;quot; Foust says. Finally, all of this highlights NASA&amp;#039;s vulnerability with no manned ship of its own to reach the space station. The agency&amp;#039;s continued investment in private space continued in April, when it awarded $269.3 million to four private companies to help develop ships that NASA will be able to charter for its astronauts. Those new vehicles plus the one government manned craft in development could lead to an unprecedented variety of orbital spacecraft available to the U.S. and other space agencies, greatly reducing the risks posed by reliance on any one of them. The bad news is that none of them will be available to carry crew until at least 2014.  As a refresher, here are the projects currently under way: NASA Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) NASA has committed some $10 billion to its next-gen manned spacecraft and its launchers. But because of uncertainly and changes of mind in Washington, the plan continues to change. When the Constellation program was cancelled, NASA kept the Orion spacecraft around (but now calls it MPCV). Now the agency is under Congressional order to build a new heavy lift rocket, and to do so with as many space shuttle\u2013derived pieces as possible. Unsurprisingly, only slow progress is being made toward a functional vehicle. SpaceX Dragon The leader of the pack, the Dragon, demonstrated the first launch and recovery from orbit of a commercial vehicle last December. If all goes according to plan, another unmanned Dragon, also riding a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket, will dock with the International Space Station this December. A strong commitment from SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and independent funding from the company&amp;#039;s satellite launch business puts Dragon on the fast track to manned flight within three years. Blue Origin space capsule Led by Amazon.com CEO Jeff Bezos, Blue Origin will use the NASA seed money to aid development of a capsule that will ride atop a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket. Not much is known about the company&amp;#039;s plans, but, as with SpaceX, commitment by a visionary leader with deep pockets greatly increases its chances for success. Sierra Nevada Corporation Dream Chaser The Dream Chaser is a lifting body craft that started life as a design for a space station lifeboat. It will launch vertically from an Atlas V rocket and return to a runway landing. It&amp;#039;s the only winged vehicle in the group. Sierra Nevada CEO Mark Sirangelo says his company is committed to manned spaceflight and is pitching in a significant amount of internal funds to make it happen. Boeing CTS-100 Boeing has a capsule design inspired by Orion in development. Among the potential commercial providers for a manned orbital ship, Boeing has the greatest space flight experience, but perhaps the weakest internal commitment. Company officials have indicated that they won&amp;#039;t proceed with the new vehicle without guaranteed NASA funding. "^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/a11884/what-the-russian-cargo-ship-crash-means-for-manned-space-flight-analysis/>