http://rt.com/news/proton-m-rocket-takeoff-crash-514/At the bottom of this RT states "leaking nuclear fuel" Excuse me but unless that is some sort of typo that suggests that these GPS birds had some sort of nuclear cargo on board?Clarify for me if I am wrong but I thought GLONASS did not have nuclear propulsion of any nature. Heres the caption:"The emergency ministry of Kazakhstan is considering evacuating the surrounding areas as nuclear fuel leaked from the rocket could threaten the immediate vicinity."I do hope that is a typo and they meant "toxic" fuel. Because the alternative suggests that somehow a conventionally propelled Russian satellite has a nuclear cargo for some reason.
Quote from: robertross on 07/02/2013 02:44 amYeah, I kept waiting for for the destruct command, but it just kept going further and further down and then I realized it was going to hit big time.It has always been my impression that there is no destruct package on Baikonur launches, the early ascent abort procedure is to order engines off -- which did not seem to work here.
Yeah, I kept waiting for for the destruct command, but it just kept going further and further down and then I realized it was going to hit big time.
Quote from: FinalFrontier on 07/02/2013 03:56 amhttp://rt.com/news/proton-m-rocket-takeoff-crash-514/At the bottom of this RT states "leaking nuclear fuel" Excuse me but unless that is some sort of typo that suggests that these GPS birds had some sort of nuclear cargo on board?Clarify for me if I am wrong but I thought GLONASS did not have nuclear propulsion of any nature. Heres the caption:"The emergency ministry of Kazakhstan is considering evacuating the surrounding areas as nuclear fuel leaked from the rocket could threaten the immediate vicinity."I do hope that is a typo and they meant "toxic" fuel. Because the alternative suggests that somehow a conventionally propelled Russian satellite has a nuclear cargo for some reason. Could it be a language thing? These satellites would have atomic clocks on board, correct?
Quote from: Lee Jay on 07/02/2013 03:29 amOnce it was upside down a few frames showed a clean looking hexagonal pattern of six glowing exhaust nozzles.I saw that as well. There are six engines burning. If they are all producing expected thrust is unknown though. There are time when it looks like one of the exhaust streams is pointing away from the rest. As if the engine is gimbaling out of sync with the others. However its hard to tell if that is just an artifact of the dynamics and environment of a very off normal flight.
Once it was upside down a few frames showed a clean looking hexagonal pattern of six glowing exhaust nozzles.
Wouldn't the apparent guidance failure have eliminated any capability of such a system to work also?
http://ucsusa.org/assets/documents/nwgs/physics-space-security.pdf.Looks like Glonass M may have RTGs. That would be bad because the birds themselves disintegrated while the rocket was still airborne right after the nose dive occurred. If anyone can provide confirmation that would be great.If this is true then it means this is a tremendous disaster. The contamination could potentially be widespread.
Quote from: FinalFrontier on 07/02/2013 04:40 amhttp://ucsusa.org/assets/documents/nwgs/physics-space-security.pdf.Looks like Glonass M may have RTGs. That would be bad because the birds themselves disintegrated while the rocket was still airborne right after the nose dive occurred. If anyone can provide confirmation that would be great.If this is true then it means this is a tremendous disaster. The contamination could potentially be widespread. GLONASS are solar-powered.
Quote from: William Graham on 07/02/2013 04:42 amQuote from: FinalFrontier on 07/02/2013 04:40 amhttp://ucsusa.org/assets/documents/nwgs/physics-space-security.pdf.Looks like Glonass M may have RTGs. That would be bad because the birds themselves disintegrated while the rocket was still airborne right after the nose dive occurred. If anyone can provide confirmation that would be great.If this is true then it means this is a tremendous disaster. The contamination could potentially be widespread. GLONASS are solar-powered.Yes and document states it was for backup power
Quote from: FinalFrontier on 07/02/2013 04:43 amQuote from: William Graham on 07/02/2013 04:42 amQuote from: FinalFrontier on 07/02/2013 04:40 amhttp://ucsusa.org/assets/documents/nwgs/physics-space-security.pdf.Looks like Glonass M may have RTGs. That would be bad because the birds themselves disintegrated while the rocket was still airborne right after the nose dive occurred. If anyone can provide confirmation that would be great.If this is true then it means this is a tremendous disaster. The contamination could potentially be widespread. GLONASS are solar-powered.Yes and document states it was for backup powerCan you give me a page reference for that, from a casual search for terms such as "Glonass" and "RTG", I can't find anything that would link the two.For that matter, has Russia ever launched an RTG-powered spacecraft?
Just another failure during federal launch. Poor Proton, poor ILS.