Talk:Progress M-UM

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:23, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The Soyuz MS-18 crew ship is pictured docked to the Nauka multipurpose laboratory module.jpg

Progress version
one problem is there that will i go with the name of the progress spacecraft M-UM, that is a progress m variant or is it progress ms  variant. the roscosmos page on node says The instrument-and-assembly compartment by design corresponds to the instrument-assembly compartment of the base ship "Progress M" with modifications to increase its rigidity and strength in connection with the ship's mass increased to 8,180 kg. so what is better to follow progress m(modified) or progress ms(modified). problem is even on anatoly's page he once wrote m then ms then again m + prichal+progress m-um was maybe constructed in m era but delays may have made it ms. though it is just a problem to include s or not. the versons are too different. so please tell the correct naming Chinakpradhan (talk) 13:10, 8 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Please help and  in this Chinakpradhan (talk) 13:19, 8 November 2021 (UTC)


 * If you don't have sources please  ask others or raise this discussion bigger but please don't ignore this  Chinakpradhan (talk) 13:34, 8 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Many sources like next spaceflight say it as last flight of my but I have 100 % doubt that this is Progress ms Chinakpradhan (talk) 13:36, 8 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Progress M page says that The upgraded Progress MS spacecraft flew for the first time in December 2015 and fully replaced the Progress M series. Chinakpradhan (talk) 06:03, 9 November 2021 (UTC)


 * neither progress ms nor progress m11F615A60 or progress m11F615A55 nor progress m1 has the mention of progress m-um Chinakpradhan (talk) 06:43, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
 * mim2 and dc1 are shown like this Chinakpradhan (talk) 06:51, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
 * if i believe this it will be a chaos as it will lead to a major change of transitioning the page name from Progress M-UM to Progress MS-UM. i cannot imagine which to follow accroding to information over internet this much i got so please tell the correct naming Chinakpradhan (talk) 06:55, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
 * i need a solution to this problem as this page is on the basis of this Chinakpradhan (talk) 06:58, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
 * from anatoly zak this is the article Chinakpradhan (talk) 07:43, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
 * till now i had problem that whether i need to change from progress ms(modified) to progress m(modified) or now but now i have a problem that if the move in this line is not approved to be correct then i have to change maybe the page name to Progress M-UM to Progress MS-UM. please help anyone. Chinakpradhan (talk) 07:47, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
 * It should not be called MS-UM based on one article. Roscosmos still calls it M-UM. As a point of reference, the Poisk module was delivered on Progress M-MIM2. The "Progress M" being they type of progress and "MIM2" being the name of Poisk "Mini Research Module 2." This is following the same naming style, (Progress M being the type of Progress and UM being the module, Uzlovoy Module) Progress M-UM. The likely reasoning for using a Progress-M is that the Uzlovoy Module has been ready for quite a while, waiting for Nauka to launch and dock before it can. The module's been ready for flight for over 7 years, but has sat in storage (with the Progress M manufactured for it). To reiterate, it's a Progress M carrying UM (Uzlovoy Module) hence Progress M-UM. Whenever a Progress has been used to deliver station modules, the type of progress is always in the name. Same here. --Jrcraft Yt (talk) 04:39, 10 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Found our answer, it is a Progress-M. Progress M serial numbers are 200 and up. Progress MS serial numbers are 430 and up. Since this is Serian number 400m it's Progress M. The specific progress is listed on Anatoly Zak's page See the list of Progress missions to the ISS article for more. This confirms it's a Progress-M. --Jrcraft Yt (talk) 04:51, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Jrcraft Yt, then why the progress m lead section says that The upgraded Progress MS spacecraft flew for the first time in December 2015 and fully replaced the Progress M series. we must change that now. Chinakpradhan (talk) 04:15, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, we'll get that changed over.--Jrcraft Yt (talk) 04:18, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
 * thank you Jrcraft Yt Chinakpradhan (talk) 04:44, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Jrcraft Yt what will be the final production no 400 or 303 Chinakpradhan (talk) 04:51, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
 * again a problem is 11F615A55 or 11F615A60 or 11F615A70 Jrcraft Yt. anatoly didnt told the version Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:08, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Should be 11f615A60 --Jrcraft Yt (talk) 05:15, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
 * but Jrcraft Yt we dont have sources and was 60 in operational when even the last 55 variant was building? i see 70 was refueling and m1 so if roscosmos totally differentiates m1 from m then its out Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:36, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
 * ok those two were retired before mission planning and 60 is final thanks Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:55, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Jrcraft Yt remaining problem is with russian production no. Chinakpradhan (talk) 05:57, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Anatoly Zak's page says it's part of the 400 series. --Jrcraft Yt (talk) 20:20, 13 November 2021 (UTC)


 * So ,Since Anatoly Zak says it a Progress 11F615, Series 400 meaning a part of Progress 11F61560 and no. 400 as 401 to 429 is already used, 430 is scrapped and 431 starts MS variant, so its exactly 400. All seen from Anatoly Zak and Progress M list of 11f615A60 Chinakpradhan (talk) 13:10, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * As I feel 303 is now rejected Chinakpradhan (talk) 13:12, 14 November 2021 (UTC)