Ok, so he said that and let's say that he was making light of the matter.
My questio is, why would they opt for this "back-up landing plan"? Would the first one have been worse?
[Mr Perminov said the craft followed the back-up landing plan, a so-called "ballistic re-entry" - a plunge with an uncontrollable, steep trajectory.
He said the crew missed the target because they changed their landing plan at the last minute without telling mission control.
In October, a crew returning from the International Space Station had a similar experience, touching down in Kazakhstan 200km (120 miles) from its intended landing site, in temperatures of 6C ( 43F).]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7355912.stm
PB above mentioned that the 10G ballistic plan is used as a disposable Soyuz variant. Did they have a choice? Just asking as I'm sure those that are interested will be asking the same things.
Space/Science » in reply to re: Throwing Peggy under the bus
re: Throwing Peggy under the bus
The whole thread (32 posts)
- Peggy, Youri and Yi on their way back ro Earth
- 475 km west of landing site - ballistic entry (n/t)
- 16 minutes past expected landing and no com. with soyuz
- Recovered
- 20 minutes and still nothing (n/t)
- re: Peggy, Youri and Yi slowing down! (n/t)
