Author Topic: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013  (Read 102498 times)

Offline Antares

  • ABO
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5039
  • Liked: 190
  • Done arguing with amateurs
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #165 on: 07/02/2013 04:07 AM »
Once 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.

Interesting that they were all still burning since there was that brown (BFRC) cloud shortly after the second camera view came on.  With hypers, though, a chamber could be lost and then relight with sustained flow; but getting the turbo spinning again would be a trick.... unless the preburner didn't go out.  NEI.
USAF's approach to buying rocket launches is like moving to the Canadian border and buying a $300K house because the $100K house doesn't have an air conditioner.

Offline Antares

  • ABO
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5039
  • Liked: 190
  • Done arguing with amateurs
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #166 on: 07/02/2013 04:13 AM »
Wouldn't the apparent guidance failure have eliminated any capability of such a system to work also?

Doesn't look like a guidance failure to me.  That dark cloud is suspect.  Could be a control side failure.


For reference (in general, not on the above)
http://lpre.de/energomash/RD-253/index.htm
USAF's approach to buying rocket launches is like moving to the Canadian border and buying a $300K house because the $100K house doesn't have an air conditioner.

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3423
  • Liked: 38
  • Space Watcher
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #167 on: 07/02/2013 04:15 AM »
Reviewed the footage there is definitely some sort of cloud that originates out of view from the reverse side (of the side facing the camera) of the booster just after liftoff.

Looks to me like that may be the origin of this but I couldn't tell you what would have produced it. There are any number of failures that could have created that cloud.

My gut tells me partial engine failure or pressurization system failure in that area and that started the chain.
STS:1981-2011
Onward to Commercial Crew
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3423
  • Liked: 38
  • Space Watcher
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #168 on: 07/02/2013 04:40 AM »
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.
« Last Edit: 07/02/2013 04:41 AM by FinalFrontier »
STS:1981-2011
Onward to Commercial Crew
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline William Graham

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3835
  • Liked: 2
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #169 on: 07/02/2013 04:42 AM »
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.

GLONASS are solar-powered.
« Last Edit: 07/02/2013 04:44 AM by William Graham »

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3423
  • Liked: 38
  • Space Watcher
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #170 on: 07/02/2013 04:43 AM »
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.

GLONASS are solar-powered.

Yes and document states it was for backup power
STS:1981-2011
Onward to Commercial Crew
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3423
  • Liked: 38
  • Space Watcher
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #171 on: 07/02/2013 04:49 AM »
Correct:

OKAY established that this was a typo.

CURRENT Glonass design does not have any RTGs, documents refer to something else.

RT has also corrected the story and updated it. Update includes information stating that RS has said it may have been engine failure

http://rt.com/news/proton-m-rocket-takeoff-crash-514/

STS:1981-2011
Onward to Commercial Crew
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline William Graham

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3835
  • Liked: 2
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #172 on: 07/02/2013 04:50 AM »
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.

GLONASS are solar-powered.

Yes and document states it was for backup power

Can 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?
« Last Edit: 07/02/2013 04:51 AM by William Graham »

Offline jcm

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2243
  • Liked: 51
  • Jonathan McDowell
  • Somerville, Massachusetts, USA
    • Jonathan's Space Report
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #173 on: 07/02/2013 04:50 AM »
http://www.federalspace.ru/main.php?id=2&nid=20191

Roskosmos statement. The rocket fell on the cosmodrome property.
The failure comission will be headed by A. P. Lopatin of Roskosmos.
-----------------------------

Jonathan McDowell
http://planet4589.org

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3423
  • Liked: 38
  • Space Watcher
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #174 on: 07/02/2013 04:54 AM »
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.

GLONASS are solar-powered.

Yes and document states it was for backup power

Can 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?

See my previous post.

Second, yes they have. Third, if you were to google does glonass have rtgs? you will get an excerpted quote (by google) underneath the link I posted.) that says they do or did.  However I think it was either a misquote or refers to something else or merely a design consideration because the updated news stories point to this as having been a typo.
STS:1981-2011
Onward to Commercial Crew
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline jcm

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2243
  • Liked: 51
  • Jonathan McDowell
  • Somerville, Massachusetts, USA
    • Jonathan's Space Report
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #175 on: 07/02/2013 04:54 AM »
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.

GLONASS are solar-powered.

Yes and document states it was for backup power

Can 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?

Russia tested the Orion-1 RTG, using Po-210, on Kosmos-84 and Kosmos-90 in 1965. They also had 4 Pu-238 RTGs on Mars-96, which
crashed in Bolivia in 1996. Small radioactive heating units were
used on Lunokhod.

I am not aware of RTGs on Glonass, and I also can't find the reference you mention in Laura and Greg's book.  [Edit: yes, the dangers of Google: the words Glonass and RTG both appear in the book, but not in the same chapter.]
« Last Edit: 07/02/2013 04:56 AM by jcm »
-----------------------------

Jonathan McDowell
http://planet4589.org

Offline owais.usmani

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 293
  • Liked: 4
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #176 on: 07/02/2013 04:55 AM »
Just another failure during federal launch. Poor Proton, poor ILS. :(

And why am I not surprised  ::)

I'm having serious trouble believing that they do any sort of testing/QA of the LV on federal missions.

Which btw, reminds me of two more potential failures this year: Globus-1M & Ekspress-AM5 (of-course if they still launch this year)

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3423
  • Liked: 38
  • Space Watcher
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #177 on: 07/02/2013 04:58 AM »
Next question is launch schedule.

Plethora of problems here.
STS:1981-2011
Onward to Commercial Crew
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3423
  • Liked: 38
  • Space Watcher
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #178 on: 07/02/2013 05:12 AM »
Live update by RT news
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyuiShSePS4


Interesting. In this update they still were using the term "radioactive" and the reporter mentions the satellite had radioactive materials onboard.

So they went ahead and did a live update with a typo insofar as their scripts too.  ::)  ::) Gotta get better editorial checking on these live stories.
« Last Edit: 07/02/2013 05:15 AM by FinalFrontier »
STS:1981-2011
Onward to Commercial Crew
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline jcm

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2243
  • Liked: 51
  • Jonathan McDowell
  • Somerville, Massachusetts, USA
    • Jonathan's Space Report
Re: FAILURE: Proton-M/DM-03 with 3xGlonass-M - July 2, 2013
« Reply #179 on: 07/02/2013 05:32 AM »
http://interfax.ru/world/news.asp?id=315986

Google translation modified by me

Carrier rocket "Proton-M" fell to 1.5 km from the launch site command post, "Interfax-AVN" on Tuesday at the launch site.
"According to the telemetry at the fourth second the  missile began deviations in pitch. At the 12 second mark, they  intensified.  At 17 seconds the engines underwent abnormal shutdown.  Thereafter, the rocket began to fall apart in the air, on the 32-second mark she fell and exploded "- said the agency source.
He noted that the rocket fell into the "1.5-2 km from the ground control center."
"The wind was blowing in the opposite direction, so the cloud (fuel) did not threaten the command post, and professionals who were there ," he added.
-----------------------------

Jonathan McDowell
http://planet4589.org

Tags: