Author Topic: KSLV-1 launch  (Read 121129 times)

Offline pm1823

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 473
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #340 on: 08/31/2009 05:05 pm »

Do you have concrete data to back this up or are you just speculating?

About this URM? No, I don't have. You can think that i'm speculating.

Quote
Other aerodynamic breakup failures I've seen have suffered self-destructs because the strapons (and large fairings) were ripped off the stack, but at greater AoA than seen here. The first stage is the last to give in - see Delta II 1986, Ariane V 1996, Titan IV 1998. In case of Delta II the SRBs actually clinged on to the stage until RSO action.

Who said 'breakup'?! AVD/CBN system stops engines before any breakup will be possible.
Don't you ever hear on Atlas launch: "begin zero AOA flight"? And what do you think will be with Atlas if it failed to keep zero AOA? Breakup? No. :)

Quote
KSLV-1 doesn't have strapons, it's a small vehicle with a small fairing and Russians typically build overly rugged stages. I don't really find it surprising it *didn't* break up at that point. I am left wondering if something like that would be healthy for the fairing, but am *not* drawing conclusions that's the root cause of fairing failure.

Soyuz:
Over the past 20 years  - 5 formation and execution of commands AVD (emergency shutdown of the engine) in flight on the following criteria:
 premature separation of BB (in 3 cases),
exceeding the limits of angular deviations (in 2 cases).

Dnepr (ICBM) - not responding TVC in one engine very short, only 0.27 sec, lost roll control, then pitch and yaw, executed AVD near T+70 sec.
« Last Edit: 08/31/2009 05:07 pm by pm1823 »

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10292
  • Liked: 702
  • Likes Given: 727
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #341 on: 08/31/2009 05:14 pm »
IMO, optic trick.

That would be an... interesting optic trick.

FWIW, here's stabilized footage of the two different cameras.

Two factors make me believe that this alleged pitch maneuver is an artifact:

a) the camera logos move along with the rocket as it "pitches"

b) the plume does "bend", ie the exhaust follows the pitching perfectly. If the rocket were really pitching, some curve in the exhaust would be seen.

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8521
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3549
  • Likes Given: 760
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #342 on: 08/31/2009 05:26 pm »
Who said 'breakup'?! AVD/CBN system stops engines before any breakup will be possible.

Don't you think this would fall into the LV-specific behavior? Why do you think Soyuz behavior would map to KSLV-1 behavior, which is an unmanned rocket? Who made the avionics and its software?

Quote
Don't you ever hear on Atlas launch: "begin zero AOA flight"? And what do you think will be with Atlas if it failed to keep zero AOA? Breakup? No.

I have absolutely no clue what would happen to Atlas in case AoA deviated by a few degrees (and it does fly alpha-bias trajectories), but am willing to bet nothing catastrophic would happen, at least to the no-SRB versions and that the RD-180 engine would not get shutdown deliberately. Why would it? If there was an EDS a crew onboard, then yes, such a condition would be cause for abort. Otherwise, for an unmanned launch why kill your mission merely on grounds of AoA exceeding limits if there's a chance it'll recover with no ill effects?


Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8521
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3549
  • Likes Given: 760
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #343 on: 08/31/2009 05:28 pm »
Two factors make me believe that this alleged pitch maneuver is an artifact:

a) the camera logos move along with the rocket as it "pitches"

What are your thoughts on the fact two different, widely separated cameras (based on the look angle on the contrail) show the same thing at the same time, yet the rocket appears steady several seconds before and after that, even though the tracking was erratic even then?

Regarding your point b), I've considered it and agree you'd expect some bending, primarily in the fainter bluish plume extension. Unfortunately the resolution (combined with the bright plume camera flare) is not really good enough to pick that up clearly.
« Last Edit: 08/31/2009 05:53 pm by ugordan »

Offline pm1823

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 473
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #344 on: 08/31/2009 05:29 pm »
A "fairing" loss (actually two separable tapered guidance and nose cone sections that don't split)) can be seen on YouTube videos of Jupiter AM-23 9-16-1959 which shows the sections coming off during major pitch/yaw moves. Admittedly this was at a lower altitude - just after liftoff. Sorry I can't do linkings at this moment.

In nominal flight fairing can suffer damage on the any nominal quasi-static load peaks, which are - lift-off, pitchover, max-q, staging. We can remove staging from the list, coz on KSLV-1 fairing separates before. 
« Last Edit: 08/31/2009 05:30 pm by pm1823 »

Offline pm1823

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 473
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #345 on: 08/31/2009 06:11 pm »
Don't you think this would fall into the LV-specific behavior? Why do you think Soyuz behavior would map to KSLV-1 behavior, which is an unmanned rocket? Who made the avionics and its software?

I have absolutely no clue what would happen to Atlas in case AoA deviated by a few degrees (and it does fly alpha-bias trajectories), but am willing to bet nothing catastrophic would happen, at least to the no-SRB versions and that the RD-180 engine would not get shutdown deliberately. Why would it? If there was an EDS a crew onboard, then yes, such a condition would be cause for abort. Otherwise, for an unmanned launch why kill your mission merely on grounds of AoA exceeding limits if there's a chance it'll recover with no ill effects?

Here you right. But, it's not about behavior it's all about control. Critical values and rates are predefined for each LV. When one go red is no sense in continuing uncontrolled flight.

Quote
Who made the avionics and its software?

Khrunichev's guys. Proton will do the same AVD, if you asking this.
« Last Edit: 08/31/2009 06:21 pm by pm1823 »

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8521
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3549
  • Likes Given: 760
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #346 on: 08/31/2009 06:20 pm »
But, it's not about behavior it's all about control. Critical values and rates are predefined for each LV. When one go red is no sense in continuing uncontrolled flight.

And yet you're assuming the vehicle stops being controllable the moment it exceeds some arbitrary parameter threshold. Take the failure of Falcon 1 #2 during 2nd stage - it was a control failure that eventually exceeded engine gimbal limits and roll control authority, but the engine did not shutdown automatically on purpose, the avionics tried to fight it and keep going. That's the point I'm making; exceeding some conservative operational limits doesn't by itself mean the vehicle cannot stand more punishment than predicted and that it would have to terminate the flight immediately. The case would be different with manned launches where one of the abort limits would be AoA, another attitude rates, etc. It could also be specific to Russian launchers as they AFAIK don't have range safety officers ready to blow the vehicle if it gets out of hand. I was under the impression from one article KSLV-1 had range safety watching it.

It's obvious we don't see eye to eye here so I'd like to hear what experts in the know have to say about this. What would happen to Atlas/Delta if AoA constraints were for some reason violated shortly after max-Q?
« Last Edit: 08/31/2009 06:24 pm by ugordan »

Offline pm1823

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 473
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #347 on: 08/31/2009 06:40 pm »
Falcon 1 AUT(powered portion of flight) fires over unpopulated area. Ask Japanese, Filipino, Aussie, what they thinking about uncontrolled active flight of Korean missiles. Americans are so blessed by AUT over ocean, and often not understand others. ;)
« Last Edit: 08/31/2009 06:42 pm by pm1823 »

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8521
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3549
  • Likes Given: 760
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #348 on: 08/31/2009 06:45 pm »
Ask Japanese, Filipino, Aussie, what they thinking about uncontrolled power flight of Korean missiles.

http://www.space-travel.com/reports/First_Minute_After_Liftoff_To_Decide_KSLV_1_Success_Experts_999.html
"The director said if the Naro-1 fails to make the turn and takes an unauthorized trajectory, ground controllers will destroy it by remote control."

I think the other nations are relieved ground controllers decide when to push the big red button instead of relying on what the rocket thinks it should do...

Offline pm1823

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 473
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #349 on: 08/31/2009 07:56 pm »
If rocket thinks that uncontrolled, it is uncontrolled. If you talking about SBN(LV security system) 'false diagnosis' to execute AVD, then we have to teach it think better. Ground-controller can do nothing with wrong pitchovers. 'Red button' is just for customer fun, gives people false feeling of control. That's why I early offered to launch KSLV-1 in 15 august - S.Korean '4th July'. :)
« Last Edit: 08/31/2009 07:59 pm by pm1823 »

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8521
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3549
  • Likes Given: 760
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #350 on: 08/31/2009 07:59 pm »
'Red button' is just for customer fun, gives people false feeling of control.

I'm sure range safety officers would disagree with you on that one.

Offline pm1823

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 473
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #351 on: 08/31/2009 08:08 pm »
'Red button' is just for customer fun, gives people false feeling of control.

I'm sure range safety officers would disagree with you on that one.

They do objective trajectory control. If you give same data from objective source to SBN it will do the same.

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8521
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3549
  • Likes Given: 760
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #352 on: 08/31/2009 08:15 pm »
What is an "objective source" in that case and what is an SBN?

Offline pm1823

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 473
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #353 on: 08/31/2009 08:50 pm »
'Objective source'  for trajectory can be ground based radar or lidar that can follow all active leg of LV's trajectory. SBN it's russian - 'Systema Bezopastosti Nositelya' - system that decide what should be done in case of diagnosed anomaly in LV.
I'm not saying that RSO is useless(god forbid)! They do huge job for range and LV security and their main activity not to press 'red button', but prevent such case much before.
Their decision to destroy or stop engines is very formal, based on LV trajectory, probable impact point and size of footprint of decays, known forbidden zones, etc.
No problemo with delegating this to SBN.

Offline spacepark

  • Member
  • Posts: 4
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #354 on: 09/01/2009 08:56 am »
I have played back the video several times and I can see some thing dropped from KSLV at about 01:05.
Is there any possibility that a part of fairing has been damaged during highQ?
« Last Edit: 09/01/2009 08:59 am by spacepark »

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8521
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3549
  • Likes Given: 760
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #355 on: 09/01/2009 09:10 am »
I have played back the video several times and I can see some thing dropped from KSLV at about 01:05.
Is there any possibility that a part of fairing has been damaged during highQ?

That's a puff of condensation, a precursor to a much longer contrail to appear several seconds later.

Offline spacepark

  • Member
  • Posts: 4
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #356 on: 09/04/2009 08:47 am »
I have played back the video several times and I can see some thing dropped from KSLV at about 01:05.
Is there any possibility that a part of fairing has been damaged during highQ?

That's a puff of condensation, a precursor to a much longer contrail to appear several seconds later.

At some extent, I also suspect it as condensation effect. However please have a look the vide again. It movement looks like free-fall. It's behavior i far different from the contrail which is observed several seconds later.

Offline yoichi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1106
  • Liked: 678
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #357 on: 10/19/2009 05:04 am »
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/techscience/2009/10/19/0601000000AEN20091019002900320.HTML

2009/10/19 11:45 KST
S. Korea, Russia to determine cause of rocket launch mishap

SEOUL, Oct. 19 (Yonhap) -- South Korea and Russia will meet for a formal review to determine why a jointly developed space rocket failed to place a satellite into orbit, officials in Seoul said Monday.

The failure review meeting (FRB), to be held in Moscow on Oct. 29, is expected to shed light on why one of the two fairings did not separate from the top of the second stage rocket after launching from South Korea's Naro Space Center on Aug. 25, the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology said.

Offline osiossim

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 365
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: KSLV-1 launch
« Reply #358 on: 11/06/2009 06:57 am »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0