Disaster! Russia Soyuz Can't Dock ISS after Major antenna Glitch... SpaceX Dragon to REPLACE

This is so dangerous, Russia's Progress cargo spacecraft just ran into a major issue on its very first flight from a brand new launch pad, and it nearly turned into a disaster. So, what exactly went wrong? Let's take a closer look. Wow, Russia has just completed what they are calling a new launch pad, but it's actually still located at the same old Site 31, the only operational launch complex for Soyuz. And the reason it's considered new isn't just a surface level refurbishment. This was closer to a full-scale rebirth of the most critical infrastructure. Roscosmos treated and reapplied anti-corrosion coatings across more than 2,350 square meters of load-bearing steel structures. They completely replaced the anchoring mechanisms that secure the service tower. And just as importantly, they recalibrated the entire remote control electronic system to ensure precise attitude control during the countdown phase. But that's not all. One of the most complex operations involved assembling massive modules over 19 meters long, then carefully lowering them through a circular opening in the pad using specialized cranes, effectively reconstructing key operational systems beneath the launch platform itself. And because this was such a major overhaul, it obviously needed a real-world test. But instead of a simple trial, Russia went all-in. They launched the Progress MS-33 cargo spacecraft on March 22nd, not just to validate the new pad, but also to urgently deliver more than 2.5 tons of supplies, including food, fuel, oxygen, and essential equipment to the Expedition 74 crew aboard the ISS. And just as many had anticipated, something did go wrong. But interestingly, it had nothing to do with the launch pad. About 40 minutes after separating from the Soyuz, 2.1, a Rocket 1, of the two Kurs antennas, critical for automated docking, suddenly failed to deploy. Located at the very front of the spacecraft, this antenna is part of the radar system responsible for measuring distance relative velocity and approach angle to the Poisk module on the ISS. Without it, the spacecraft is essentially blind. This foldable antenna is a core component of the Kurs-NA autonomous rendezvous system, capable of detecting the station from up to 200 kilometers away, and guiding the approach with meter-level precision. But now, it appears to be completely stuck, likely due to a failure in the pyrotechnic deployment mechanism. The second antenna is still working normally, but it's not enough to sustain a fully automated docking sequence. The situation is serious enough that Roscosmos had to immediately activate a backup plan. If the issue can't be resolved, ISS Commander Sergey Kud-Sverchkov will take position inside the Zvezda module and manually guide the spacecraft using the TORU system with docking still scheduled for March 24th at 9.34 a.m. EDT. This isn't the first time they've had to rely on Back in 2013, TORU helped save the Progress-M-19M mission even after a minor collision damaged the ONA antenna on Zvezda. The spacecraft can still dock, just not automatically. With TORU, all the precise ranging data from the Kurs system is gone. The astronaut has to rely purely on visual judgment from about 100 meters out. And at that distance, even a tiny error of just one centimeter per second can be enough to ruin the entire mission, pushing the risk of collision at orbital speeds of 28,000 kilometers per hour up by as much as four times. Right now, it's still too early to say exactly how this will play out. Progress is set to dock in just a few hours as you're watching this video, so don't forget to hit subscribe to stay updated on what happens next, and just how intense this docking sequence is going to get. The Kurs antenna issue on Progress MS-33 today has once again reignited a long-standing debate about the growing gap between Russian and Western space technology. The Progress cargo spacecraft dates all the way back to 1978. It has served for more than 45 years, completing hundreds of resupply missions to space stations from Salyut to Mir, and now the ISS. It's a reliable workhorse, simple, tough, and proven. But at the same time, it clearly carries the DNA of an older analog era design, and that aging core has been showing signs of strain. Back in 2021, a similar antenna problem occurred after it was damaged during launch, likely from contact with the Soyuz payload fairing. That incident led to a serious deviation in trajectory, forcing cosmonaut Sergei Rizhikov to perform a fully manual docking. Now compare that to the other side. SpaceX's Cargo Dragon 2 represents an entirely different generation. It has never faced antenna-related failures because it doesn't rely on that kind of hardware in the first place. Instead, it uses a fully automated docking system built on modern technologies like LiDAR long-range cameras, thermal sensors, and advanced computer vision software. Rather than depending on mechanical radar antennas like Russia's Ki-ORS system, Dragon essentially sees its way to the station. It calculates distance velocity and approach angle in real time with multiple layers of redundancy built in. And if something does go wrong, it's usually not what you'd expect. Back in 2021, during the Inspiration 4 mission, a urine tube came loose or wasn't properly sealed. Instead of flowing into the storage tank, waste leaked beneath the floor of the spacecraft. The crew, including Jared Isaacman, had to deal with it mid-flight. Of course, Progress and Soyuz never run into that kind of issue because, well, they don't have a bathroom to begin with. Progress, often described as a loyal workhorse, has completed hundreds of reliable missions from the Salyut era all the way to the ISS. But it comes with one major limitation. It is not reusable. A typical vehicle like Progress MS-94 is about 7.2 meters long with a diameter of 2.72 meters and a dry mass of around 7,150 kilograms. In terms of size, you can think of it as something close to a small delivery truck. And yet, it can only carry about 2,230 kilograms of pressurized cargo inside a volume of 7.6 cubic meters, roughly equivalent to the cargo space of three large SUVs. And once the mission is done, it brings nothing back. The spacecraft burns up during re-entry. It launches on a Soyuz 2.1, a rocket used just once, and operates with a power output of around 700 watts, just enough for basic onboard systems. Structurally, Progress MS uses a simple cylindrical design, about 6 meters long, divided into a pressurized cargo section, where food and propellant tanks like N2, O4, NUD, MH are stored, and a service module equipped with RCS thrusters. There is no separate trunk section, like you would find on Dragon. Now compare that to Cargo Dragon 2. It is clearly in a different league. The spacecraft is about 8.1 meters long, 4 meters in diameter, and has a mass of around 6,400 kilograms. It can carry 3,307 kilograms of pressurized cargo, plus another 2,507 kilograms of unpressurized payload in its large trunk section. The pressurized volume is 9.3 cubic meters, while the trunk offers up to 37 cubic meters of additional space, enough for satellites or oversized cargo. Dragon can also bring back up to 3,000 kilograms of cargo to Earth, and it docks automatically using a CBM-compatible system. Even more importantly, it flies on the Falcon 9, a rocket that can be reused over 30 times. That turns each mission into something closer to a space taxi cutting costs by roughly 50%, compared to a single Progress launch, which is estimated to reach up to $300 million. And that's exactly why NASA relies on it so heavily. In 2025, when Elon Musk publicly threatened to stop using Dragon during a dispute with Donald Trump, it immediately raised concerns. NASA had very limited backup options. They could be forced to depend almost entirely on Russia, whose systems are not only more expensive, but also aging. And not long ago, even their launch pad ran into issues. At the same time, Dragon itself is a limited fleet. SpaceX currently operates five spacecraft Endeavour Resilience, Endurance, Freedom, and the newest one, Grace. Initially, each capsule was certified for five flights. After that, it would be retired. But now, SpaceX and NASA are working to extend that certification to between 10 and 15 missions per vehicle. At a rate of about two flights per year per capsule, this means Dragon could remain in service until at least 2030 to 2032, aligning with the planned retirement of the ISS around 2030 or 2031. After that, Dragon is expected to transition to commercial space stations like Axiom Vast or Starlab, and could continue flying for years if the higher flight limits are approved. As for Russia, the plan is to separate the Russian orbital segment from the ISS around 2032 and use it as the foundation for a new Russian orbital station or ROS. Progress in Soyuz may be aging systems, but they will likely continue to play a key role supporting scientific missions until a new generation of spacecraft is ready. And that next generation is already in development. Russia is working on a new spacecraft called Orel, designed to gradually replace Soyuz and push their capabilities forward. Compared to Soyuz Orel is a much more modern design. It can carry up to four astronauts instead of three, and it's built to operate independently in orbit for up to 30 days. On paper, that puts it in the same league as Orion. It could even support lunar missions similar to Artemis 2. Whether that's a true technological leap or partly a way to showcase capability is still up for debate, especially since the program has been moving slower than originally planned. To get a clearer picture, let's put it side by side with Orion. In terms of crew capacity, Orel is designed to carry four astronauts with some variants aiming for up to six, while Orion also carries four. The habitable volume inside Orel is around 18 cubic meters. Orion offers slightly more pressurized volume, about 690 cubic feet overall, with living space roughly 30 percent more comfortable than Apollo. When it comes to mass and launch systems, Orel weighs between 17,000 and 21,000 kilograms, depending on the mission profile, whether low Earth orbit or lunar. It will launch on the Angara A-5 from Vostokny. Orion is significantly heavier, around 35,000 kilograms, at launch with the Space Launch System, and it is specifically designed for Enn's super-heavy lift rocket, giving it stronger capability for deep space missions. When it comes to technology and reusability, Orel is moving toward partial reuse, especially with a future cargo variant intended to replace Progress. It's designed to use the APAS or IDS docking system for international compatibility, and it's expected to feature a heat shield capable of handling lunar return speeds of around 11.2 kilometers per second. Orion, however, still stands out with more advanced systems. It comes equipped with a modern life support system, dual redundant onboard computers, a small galley for food preparation, and a fully functional toilet. Its heat shield has already been proven during the Artemis 1 mission. As of March 2026, Orel is still in the manufacturing and ground testing phase. Both its first uncrewed and crewed flights are currently targeted for 2028, while uncrewed missions around the Moon could happen in the early 2030s. At the end of the day, both spacecraft represent the deep space ambitions of two major powers. But right now, Orion is clearly ahead. It has greater maturity real flight experience and is ready to fly as soon as this year. Orel, on the other hand, is still working to catch up with a promising design that has yet to be proven.