Talk:Soyuz TM-30/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Malleus Fatuorum 19:02, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, Malleus, for your review. Tyrol5 [Talk] 16:53, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Lead

• What does it mean to boost an orbit to 360 by 378 kilometers?

 Done, clarified to describe high point/low point of orbit.

• Surely the article omits one of the mission's important aims, to adjust Mir's orbital plane so as to avoid a collision with the ISS?

 Done, although collision wasn't a major concern, NASA did not want transit between the stations to be possible.

• "...were sent by the company MirCorp to reactivate and facilitate repairs to the station". That doesn't quite work: "to reactivate the station and to facilitate repairs"? Why "facilitate" anyway? Didn't they carry out the repairs?

 Done, fixed.

• "The crew of the mission, the crew of Mir EO-28 ...". Aren't these the same people? Why is Mir EO-28 emboldened?

 Done, copyedited. Mir EO-28 is an alternative name of the mission, and redirects to the article (yes, they're the same).

• "... the final expedition to Mir". We were just told this in the previous sentence.

 Done, removed redundant wording.

• "Additional commercially funded missions beyond Soyuz TM-30 were originally planned to continue the restoration efforts of the TM-30 crew to facilitate the commercialization of the then 14-year-old space station." Seems to be largely repeating what we were told in the previous sentence.

 Done, removed redundant wording.

Background

• "Soyuz TM-30 was intended by MirCorp to be the first in a series of missions to refurbish the 14-year-old Mir space station for privatization and commercial use." Privatization and commercial use? What's the difference between the two?

 Done, took "privatization" out.

• "The alternative, which eventually came to occur ...". Alternatives don't come to occur.

 Done, fixed wording.

Mission highlights

• "Although the Soyuz docking system is automated under nominal conditions ...". Is "nominal" really the right word? Shouldn't that be "normal"?

 Done, it could be either, but you're right in saying that "normal" sounds better.

• "At about 9:32 UT on the same day ...". The same day as what? The first day?

 Done, clarified that it occurred on the same day as docking.

• "... the crew began operations to open the hatches between the Soyuz spacecraft and the station". Seems a bit wordy. Can't we just say that the crew prepared to open the hatches?

 Done

• On April 26, the Progress M1-1 spacecraft, which had been docked since February and was used to boost the station to a higher orbit, undocked and de-orbited over the Pacific Ocean east of New Zealand." Used by whom to boost the station to a higher height? I thought that was something this crew did, but there's been no mention of it thus far except in the lead.

This was done with both the Progress M1-1 and Progress M1-2. As for the other concern "used by whom...", I clarified it.

• "The cosmonauts performed an inspection of a malfunctioning solar array on the Kvant-1 module of the station". Why "performed an inspection of" instead of the rather more straightforward "inspected"?

 Done

• "The primary purpose of the spacewalk was to repair damage to Mir's exterior and record panoramas of the exterior in order for experts on Earth to analyze the effects of space on the station itself." That's two purposes, not one. And can we avoid the rather jarring "exterior ... exterior" by replacing "Mir's exterior" with "Mir's hull", for instance?

 Done

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.