Author Topic: FAILURE: CBERS-3 Long March-4B launch, Taiyuan - December 9, 2013 (0326UTC)  (Read 67486 times)

Offline luhai167

  • Member
  • Posts: 68
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 1
Since people do go to Taiyuan to watch rocket launch, I'll see if anyone posts in Chinese forums. But I doubt it, as it is considered bad luck to do so. Especially with CE-3 about to land soon.

There is pic of the rocket just before launch though.
http://www.shenkong.net/News/1312/CBERS-3WXLSFSTJ-BXGCJTGMFS08071146.htm

Interesting some of Chinese news sites are using 2011's Zhiyuan-16 lunch to substitute for lack of a launch picture...
http://www.baxue.com/wuqipingshuo/29081.html


« Last Edit: 12/14/2013 07:47 AM by luhai167 »

Offline Phillip Clark

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2043
  • Hastings, England
  • Liked: 272
  • Likes Given: 648
I note that the first link above gives the mass of CBERS 3 as being 1.98 t: I am assuming metric tonnes, not imperial tons.
I've always been crazy but it's kept me from going insane - WJ.

Offline input~2

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5300
  • Liked: 387
  • Likes Given: 180
For the record here is a picture posted December 9 at 0336UTC by a microblogger based in Taiyuan

Offline akula2

  • Member
  • Posts: 79
  • USA, Germany and India
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Very unfortunate loss.

Just wondering whether the Chinese insured the Satellite or Brazilians?

Offline input~2

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5300
  • Liked: 387
  • Likes Given: 180
Very unfortunate loss.

Just wondering whether the Chinese insured the Satellite or Brazilians?

Brazilian media said that the satellite was not insured.
Quote from:  O Globo
O governo brasileiro investiu R$ 160 milhões no projeto. O satélite não era resguardado por nenhum tipo de seguro.
« Last Edit: 12/16/2013 05:11 AM by input~2 »

Offline akula2

  • Member
  • Posts: 79
  • USA, Germany and India
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Thanks for the info, input~2

$160 million is like one medium-scale company with 500-600 'heads' so all that money went for a toss? Not to forget time delay costs + commercial/science losses (failure)  :o

I always get jittery about Satellite launches, but never once while conducting Clinical Trials!

« Last Edit: 12/16/2013 05:44 AM by akula2 »

Offline input~2

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5300
  • Liked: 387
  • Likes Given: 180


$160 million is like ....

That was 160 millions Brazilian Real equivalent to about 69 millions US Dollars
Corresponding to the Brazilian 50% share for the program
« Last Edit: 12/16/2013 06:26 AM by input~2 »

Offline anik

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7358
  • Liked: 340
  • Likes Given: 284
Peter B. de Selding ‏@pbdes
China Great Wall Industry Corp: Dec. 9 LM-4B failure caused by fuel-flow depletion to engine #2 of 3rd stage. Root cause still unclear.

http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/38689china%E2%80%99s-great-wall-cites-fuel-flow-issue-in-rocket-failure

"PARIS — China’s launch service provider on Dec. 16 said the Dec. 9 failure of its Long March 4B rocket was caused by the premature shutdown of the second of two third-stage engines because of reduced fuel flow.

In a statement, Beijing-based China Great Wall Industry Corp. said the failure investigation, headed by Wang Haoping of the Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology, was continuing to determine the reasons behind the reduction in fuel supplied to the engine"
« Last Edit: 12/16/2013 04:06 PM by anik »

Offline akula2

  • Member
  • Posts: 79
  • USA, Germany and India
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
That was 160 millions Brazilian Real equivalent to about 69 millions US Dollars
Corresponding to the Brazilian 50% share for the program
I got you. Still it's quite a good money. I think they ignored Insurance due to high Premium costs etc. 

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7436
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 1434
  • Likes Given: 4475
That was 160 millions Brazilian Real equivalent to about 69 millions US Dollars
Corresponding to the Brazilian 50% share for the program
I got you. Still it's quite a good money. I think they ignored Insurance due to high Premium costs etc.
One off projects are usually not insured, but self-insured. In particular, this mission was made by bartering parts, so determining an actual price, would be very difficult, and much of it would be research and not replacement cost.
But more in general, one off projects like these, where there's not a clear economic return, and specially since they have already developing a replacement (CBERS-4), there's no point in the extra cost of insurance. Besides, insurance goes to the general government budget and not to the space agency, so they wouldn't get it anyways.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8272
  • UK
  • Liked: 1340
  • Likes Given: 168
Peter B. de Selding ‏@pbdes
China Great Wall Industry Corp: Dec. 9 LM-4B failure caused by fuel-flow depletion to engine #2 of 3rd stage. Root cause still unclear.

http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/38689china%E2%80%99s-great-wall-cites-fuel-flow-issue-in-rocket-failure

"PARIS — China’s launch service provider on Dec. 16 said the Dec. 9 failure of its Long March 4B rocket was caused by the premature shutdown of the second of two third-stage engines because of reduced fuel flow.

In a statement, Beijing-based China Great Wall Industry Corp. said the failure investigation, headed by Wang Haoping of the Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology, was continuing to determine the reasons behind the reduction in fuel supplied to the engine"

Link is saying page doesn't exist.

This appears to be the working link.

http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/38689china’s-great-wall-cites-fuel-flow-issue-in-rocket-failure
« Last Edit: 12/16/2013 05:14 PM by Star One »

Offline input~2

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5300
  • Liked: 387
  • Likes Given: 180
Quote
As far as I know, the rocket had a problem in the mixture of the fuel with the oxidant that controls the level of performance of the rocket and that mixture was flawed. The rocket had its third engine off ten seconds before what was needed, so the satellite speed was not enough to keep it in orbit ", described the [Brazilian communications] minister, who was in China to accompany the launch
(source in Portuguese)

Online Galactic Penguin SST

Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Online Galactic Penguin SST

Whoops, looks like the problem is an old one in rocket manufacturing.......  ::)

Quote
Peter B. de Selding ‏@pbdes

China Great Wall Indstry: Dec LM-4B failure caused by debris from vehicle pressurization feed systm or assembly of the 3rd stge engine.

Peter B. de Selding ‏@pbdes

China Great Wall Indstry: Quality control re debris prevention in LM-4B 3rd stge AIT will be strengthened following review of Dec. failure.

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/440367502665601024

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/440368116212588544

http://www.spacenews.com/article/launch-report/39687china-great-wall-pins-december-long-march-launch-failure-on-fuel-line
« Last Edit: 03/04/2014 10:36 AM by Galactic Penguin SST »
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Offline Phillip Clark

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2043
  • Hastings, England
  • Liked: 272
  • Likes Given: 648
The CBERS 1, 2 and 2B satellites were classified as being the Ziyuan-1 programme.

Do we know if CBERS 3 was also Ziyuan-1 (in which case, what was its number? - 3??) or whether it was possibly Ziyuan-4 since we have already had flights in the Ziyuan-2 and -3 series?
I've always been crazy but it's kept me from going insane - WJ.

Offline William Graham

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4060
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 57
The CBERS 1, 2 and 2B satellites were classified as being the Ziyuan-1 programme.

Do we know if CBERS 3 was also Ziyuan-1 (in which case, what was its number? - 3??) or whether it was possibly Ziyuan-4 since we have already had flights in the Ziyuan-2 and -3 series?

I have it as Ziyuan I-03

Online Galactic Penguin SST

After today's successful launch of GF-2, a bit more information about this botched launch has come out:

- due to blockage in one of the 3rd stage engines, it did not provide enough thrust to reach the planned velocity of 7.9 km/s, instead CBERS-3 was released at only 7.1 km/s.
- after the botched launch SAST pulled back the rocket used today back to Shanghai for detailed inspection - every single engine to be used for future flights has been carefully tested and all pipelines has been inspected for foreign objects.
- new pipelines has been added (around the filters I guess?) to make it triple redundant

Source
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Offline northenarc

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 567
  • United States
  • Liked: 156
  • Likes Given: 279
 Not too dissimilar to some of the issues Russia had with the Proton 3rd stage over the years. I have no idea, but maybe hypergolic engines are more prone or sensitive to debris in the lines for some reason. Just speculating.

Tags: