Author Topic: Tianlian-1 (4) - CZ-3C, XSLC - November 22, 2016 (15:24 UTC)  (Read 23305 times)

Online Alter Sachse

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2423
  • Near Heidelberg
  • Liked: 1480
  • Likes Given: 1784
Launch success has been officially confirmed with T-0 at 15:24:04 UTC.
Tianlian 1(1) 15:35:08
            1(2) 15:41:04
            1(3) 15:43:04
            1(4) 15:24:04
One day you're a hero  next day you're a clown  there's nothing that is in between
        Jeff Lynne - "21century man"

Offline input~2

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6810
  • Liked: 1540
  • Likes Given: 567
A first object has been cataloged by USSTRATCOM:

2016-072A/41869 in 202 x 41777 km x 17.4°
and now a second object:
2016-072B/41870 in 136 x 40164 km x 17.7°

Offline linxiaoyi

  • Member
  • Posts: 84
  • China
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 93
VIP badge that claims this launch as the 100th out of Xichang. I assume that they counted the infamous LM-2E "abort" with Optus-B1 in March 1992 to get that.  ;)

More likely, cancelled Fengyun-2 launch in April 1994.

This is March 1992 Optus B1 not included in the forum, so only 99 Times
Welcome to my website:http://www.spaceflightfans.cn/

Offline anik

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7776
  • Liked: 955
  • Likes Given: 368
This is March 1992 Optus B1 not included in the forum, so only 99 Times

Is it your assumption or information from people who counted launches in Xichang?
My assumption was based on launch codes. Both - launch attempt in March 1992 and then actual launch of Optus B1 - had practically identical launch code. Fengyun-2 launch attempt had separate launch code, which had not been used in future.
I wonder why did they count March 1992 as the launch? Due to engines ignition? Strange decision. There were so many cases in Russian space history when R-7 family rocket's engines have ignited and cut-offed before liftoff. But we do not count these cases as the launch.

Offline Lewis007

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1661
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 549
  • Likes Given: 122
Two launch clips





Offline Satori

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14425
  • Campo do Geręs - Portugal
  • Liked: 1968
  • Likes Given: 1156
Is that an exact launch time of 15:23:03.769UTC?

Offline anik

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7776
  • Liked: 955
  • Likes Given: 368
Is that an exact launch time of 15:23:03.769UTC?

The date is 2012-07-25, so it is the third Tianlian-1 launch.

Offline Satori

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14425
  • Campo do Geręs - Portugal
  • Liked: 1968
  • Likes Given: 1156
Is that an exact launch time of 15:23:03.769UTC?

The date is 2012-07-25, so it is the third Tianlian-1 launch.

Damn! Didn't noticed that! Thank you, Andrey!

Offline Satori

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14425
  • Campo do Geręs - Portugal
  • Liked: 1968
  • Likes Given: 1156
Chinaspaceflight.com just published this image taken from a news video about Tianlian-1 (4). The information on the top of the panel was deliberately blured on the video to hide the information about the launch.

Offline anik

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7776
  • Liked: 955
  • Likes Given: 368
CCTV forgot to hide an actual liftoff time - 15:24:04.194 UTC.

Offline anik

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7776
  • Liked: 955
  • Likes Given: 368
This is March 1992 Optus B1 not included in the forum, so only 99 Times

Is it your assumption or information from people who counted launches in Xichang?
My assumption was based on launch codes. Both - launch attempt in March 1992 and then actual launch of Optus B1 - had practically identical launch code. Fengyun-2 launch attempt had separate launch code, which had not been used in future.
I wonder why did they count March 1992 as the launch? Due to engines ignition? Strange decision. There were so many cases in Russian space history when R-7 family rocket's engines have ignited and cut-offed before liftoff. But we do not count these cases as the launch.

Another variant of missed launch is an opinion on 9ifly forum: Kunpeng-7 launch in May 2013. I doubt and that is why. There was news report from Xinhua where one man has said about 100th launch the following information: there were 78 consecutive "successful" launches from Xichang since 1997. So the last launch in 1996 from Xichang was 22nd. We know that it was actually 21st. So the missed launch was before 1997.

Offline limen4

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 444
  • Liked: 227
  • Likes Given: 63
For the statistics: the launcher was Y13

Offline Phillip Clark

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
  • Hastings, England
  • Liked: 557
  • Likes Given: 1078
The current locations of the four Tianlian satellites are:-

Tianlian-1 1         79.4 deg E

Tianlian-1 2         176.2 deg E

Tianlian-1 3         10.1 deg E

Tianlian-1 4                      76.1 deg E

Maybe #4 is a replacement for #1?
I've always been crazy but it's kept me from going insane - WJ.

Offline input~2

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6810
  • Liked: 1540
  • Likes Given: 567
The current locations of the four Tianlian satellites are:-

Tianlian-1 1         79.4 deg E

Tianlian-1 2         176.2 deg E

Tianlian-1 3         10.1 deg E

Tianlian-1 4                      76.1 deg E

Maybe #4 is a replacement for #1?

I have slightly different positions:

TL-1 1 nominal: 80.0°E    actual: 80.1°E
TL-1 2 nominal: 176.8°E  actual: 176.7°E
TL-1 3 nominal: 10.6°E   actual: 10.6°E
TL-1 4 nominal: 77.0°E   actual: 76.9°E

Offline Phillip Clark

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
  • Hastings, England
  • Liked: 557
  • Likes Given: 1078
The current locations of the four Tianlian satellites are:-
Tianlian-1 1         79.4 deg E
Tianlian-1 2         176.2 deg E
Tianlian-1 3         10.1 deg E
Tianlian-1 4                      76.1 deg E
Maybe #4 is a replacement for #1?
I have slightly different positions:
TL-1 1 nominal: 80.0°E    actual: 80.1°E
TL-1 2 nominal: 176.8°E  actual: 176.7°E
TL-1 3 nominal: 10.6°E   actual: 10.6°E
TL-1 4 nominal: 77.0°E   actual: 76.9°E

Given the inherent errors in the TLE data, our figures are a good match.
I've always been crazy but it's kept me from going insane - WJ.

Offline Liss

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1882
  • Moscow, Russia
  • Liked: 1084
  • Likes Given: 88
Given the inherent errors in the TLE data, our figures are a good match.
And given all the excursions made by the first three sats since 2008...

« Last Edit: 12/19/2016 01:31 pm by Liss »
This message reflects my personal opinion based on open sources of information.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1