Minotaur IV / HTV-2a - 22 April 2010

[8900]

any news on whether the test is success or not?

[edkyle99]

any news on whether the test is success or not?

http://www.santamariatimes.com/news/local/military/article_3a0e8f48-4ea6-11df-a282-001cc4c03286.html

"Minutes after Minotaur blasted off and quickly disappeared into clouds, ground controllers announced that the payload had separated from the rocket.

However, hours after the launch, officials with DARPA and the Air Force still hadn’t confirmed the outcome of the mission."

No news releases from DARPA or Orbital this morning, which is interesting.

 - Ed Kyle

[edkyle99]

any news on whether the test is success or not?

http://www.santamariatimes.com/news/local/military/article_3a0e8f48-4ea6-11df-a282-001cc4c03286.html

"Minutes after Minotaur blasted off and quickly disappeared into clouds, ground controllers announced that the payload had separated from the rocket.

However, hours after the launch, officials with DARPA and the Air Force still hadn’t confirmed the outcome of the mission."

No news releases from DARPA or Orbital this morning, which is interesting.

 - Ed Kyle

Several news reports have used the word "successful" when describing the Minotaur 4 launch, but no word has come on the fate of the Hypersonic Test Vehicle (HTV-2a) nearly 24 hours after the flight.  My guess - only a guess - is that the HTV-2a portion of the flight didn't go entirely "as planned". 

IMO

 - Ed Kyle

[marshal]

My guess -  Classified .

[jcm]

any news on whether the test is success or not?

http://www.santamariatimes.com/news/local/military/article_3a0e8f48-4ea6-11df-a282-001cc4c03286.html

"Minutes after Minotaur blasted off and quickly disappeared into clouds, ground controllers announced that the payload had separated from the rocket.

However, hours after the launch, officials with DARPA and the Air Force still hadn’t confirmed the outcome of the mission."

No news releases from DARPA or Orbital this morning, which is interesting.

 - Ed Kyle

Several news reports have used the word "successful" when describing the Minotaur 4 launch, but no word has come on the fate of the Hypersonic Test Vehicle (HTV-2a) nearly 24 hours after the flight.  My guess - only a guess - is that the HTV-2a portion of the flight didn't go entirely "as planned". 

IMO

 - Ed Kyle

DARPA PAO says the program team is out for the weekend! I don't blame them.
(probably they are on travel on the way home from the launch site).
I don't think this is a group that is set up for the spaceflight style of news releases. Let's see what they say next week before jumping to conclusions about success or failure.

In the meantime, I looked a little more carefully at the prelaunch statements to try and reconstruct the planned mission. The statement is that of the 4100 nautical miles between VAFB and KMR, the hypersonic glide would take up 3100 of them. For a Mach 15-20 entry after a 1000 nmi range ballistic flight I can get a reasonable fit with an apogee of about 100 km - making this a spaceflight and so legitimate topic for us :-) - I have a feeling that it must be hard to give the Minotaur such a shallow launch, those three chunky solid stages were designed to punch high out of the atmosphere to 1000 km apogee or so; does anyone with launch vehicle knowledge have a feel for the aerodynamic heating and control problems of shaping the trajectory that shallowly?

[Calphor]

I would caution you not to assume that the only way to get between two points is a straight line. From what I know of the program, the notional flight plan was to approximate a AMaRV-style trajectory. That doesn't give a really good answer as to what the trajectory of the launch vehicle looks like, but I wouldn't assume a depressed trajectory.

From what I've been able to gather from people associated with the program, the flight itself was planned to include about a 30 minute glide phase, but vehicle telemetry was lost approximately 10 minutes into the glide phase. I do not have first hand knowledge, so take it for what it is worth.

[jcm]

I would caution you not to assume that the only way to get between two points is a straight line. From what I know of the program, the notional flight plan was to approximate a AMaRV-style trajectory. That doesn't give a really good answer as to what the trajectory of the launch vehicle looks like, but I wouldn't assume a depressed trajectory.

From what I've been able to gather from people associated with the program, the flight itself was planned to include about a 30 minute glide phase, but vehicle telemetry was lost approximately 10 minutes into the glide phase. I do not have first hand knowledge, so take it for what it is worth.

Very interesting, thanks.
Although the AMaRV traj suggestion doesn't seem to be really consistent with the statement about the 3100-nautical-mile atmospheric glide phase, if I understand AMaRV correctly...
Not saying it's wrong!

[rdale]

SFN says they lost contact.

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n1004/23minotaur/index.html

[Calphor]

I would caution you not to assume that the only way to get between two points is a straight line. From what I know of the program, the notional flight plan was to approximate a AMaRV-style trajectory. That doesn't give a really good answer as to what the trajectory of the launch vehicle looks like, but I wouldn't assume a depressed trajectory.

From what I've been able to gather from people associated with the program, the flight itself was planned to include about a 30 minute glide phase, but vehicle telemetry was lost approximately 10 minutes into the glide phase. I do not have first hand knowledge, so take it for what it is worth.

Very interesting, thanks.
Although the AMaRV traj suggestion doesn't seem to be really consistent with the statement about the 3100-nautical-mile atmospheric glide phase, if I understand AMaRV correctly...
Not saying it's wrong!

I think the main thing to remember is that the HTV-2a vehicle is not a ballistic RV. It is/was intended to perform a series of maneuvers to approximate an AMaRV-style trajectory. There would potentially be a pull-out maneuver, a glide/cruise phase, some avoidance/energy management maneuvers and a pitch down dive to the target. Some of the conditions are quite severe, however, this test flight was supposed to be relatively benign, compared with an actual AMaRV flight. The glide phase would be the longest portion of the flight, but remember, flying at M5+, you can cover a great deal of distance in a relatively short time.

[edkyle99]

I would caution you not to assume that the only way to get between two points is a straight line. From what I know of the program, the notional flight plan was to approximate a AMaRV-style trajectory. That doesn't give a really good answer as to what the trajectory of the launch vehicle looks like, but I wouldn't assume a depressed trajectory.

From what I've been able to gather from people associated with the program, the flight itself was planned to include about a 30 minute glide phase, but vehicle telemetry was lost approximately 10 minutes into the glide phase. I do not have first hand knowledge, so take it for what it is worth.

Very interesting, thanks.
Although the AMaRV traj suggestion doesn't seem to be really consistent with the statement about the 3100-nautical-mile atmospheric glide phase, if I understand AMaRV correctly...
Not saying it's wrong!

Note that the press release mentions use of an unprecedented "energy management maneuver" during the Minotaur IV ascent.  Perhaps it "wasted" some delta-v by performing an off-axis deviation during third stage burn, etc.

 - Ed Kyle

[yinzer]

I would caution you not to assume that the only way to get between two points is a straight line. From what I know of the program, the notional flight plan was to approximate a AMaRV-style trajectory. That doesn't give a really good answer as to what the trajectory of the launch vehicle looks like, but I wouldn't assume a depressed trajectory.

From what I've been able to gather from people associated with the program, the flight itself was planned to include about a 30 minute glide phase, but vehicle telemetry was lost approximately 10 minutes into the glide phase. I do not have first hand knowledge, so take it for what it is worth.

Very interesting, thanks.
Although the AMaRV traj suggestion doesn't seem to be really consistent with the statement about the 3100-nautical-mile atmospheric glide phase, if I understand AMaRV correctly...
Not saying it's wrong!

Note that the press release mentions use of an unprecedented "energy management maneuver" during the Minotaur IV ascent.  Perhaps it "wasted" some delta-v by performing an off-axis deviation during third stage burn, etc.

I'm pretty sure SLBMs have done this for a while.  Since they can't offload propellant and don't want to carry a big liquid final stage, the third stage will deliberately fly less efficient trajectories (spirals, etc) to use up excess delta-v.

It's the same concept that the THAAD SAM used during early test flights to stay within range boundaries:

I wouldn't be surprised if this was the first time that a Peacekeeper had done such a maneuver, hence the "unprecedented."

[Calphor]

Aviation Week has a short article on the HTV-2 that includes a nice graphic on the planned trajectories of HTV-2a and -2b.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a70769585-4348-4701-889a-f02c58f38314&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

[Lewis007]

Orbital has published its press release on the launch, which includes a nice close-up picture of the launch
http://www.orbital.com/NewsInfo/release.asp?prid=732

[Jester]

According to DARPA's Johanna Spangenberg Jones:

    Preliminary review of data indicates the HTV-2 achieved controlled flight within the atmosphere at over Mach 20. Then contact with HTV-2 was lost. This was our first flight (all others were done in wind tunnels and simulations) so although of course we would like to have everything go perfectly, we still gathered data and can use findings for the next flight, scheduled currently for early 2011.


http://gizmodo.com/5526308/air-forces-falcon-hypersonic-glider-disappears-mysteriously

darpa release:
http://www.darpa.mil/Docs/DARPAFalcon%20HTV-2NewsRelease%20Final.pdf

[Ronsmytheiii]

Orbital has published its press release on the launch, which includes a nice close-up picture of the launch
http://www.orbital.com/NewsInfo/release.asp?prid=732

I wonder how this launch bodes for orbital, specifically COTS/CRS. The LV worked perfectly and they did not build the payload, but still having orbital and failed project together does not seem good.

[ugordan]

The LV worked perfectly and they did not build the payload, but still having orbital and failed project together does not seem good.

Why would it impact their COTS/CRS involvement in any way? They didn't build the payload as you say. Unless it was some non-advertised vehicle-induced environment that impacted the payload, they're off the hook IMO.

[Robotbeat]

Orbital has published its press release on the launch, which includes a nice close-up picture of the launch
http://www.orbital.com/NewsInfo/release.asp?prid=732

I wonder how this launch bodes for orbital, specifically COTS/CRS. The LV worked perfectly and they did not build the payload, but still having orbital and failed project together does not seem good.

I agree with ugordan. Another successful flight for Orbital, but a failed payload.

[ugordan]

Another successful flight for Orbital

Actually, it was another successful flight for subOrbital.



OK, OK, I'll go get my coat...

[Ben the Space Brit]

With respect to the HTV-2a - I'm presuming that as this was launched from VAFB, it was on a  southwards near-polar trajectory, so the HTV would have been lost over the Pacific.

How would have it been recovered after a nominal flight? If it was meant to be recovered from the sea, then it might be bobbing around out there somewhere, choc full of classified electronics and engineering.  What chances are there of recovering it?

[Robotbeat]

With respect to the HTV-2a - I'm presuming that as this was launched from VAFB, it was on a  southwards near-polar trajectory, so the HTV would have been lost over the Pacific.

How would have it been recovered after a nominal flight? If it was meant to be recovered from the sea, then it might be bobbing around out there somewhere, choc full of classified electronics and engineering.  What chances are there of recovering it?

I doubt they are going to recover it, since they haven't recovered other hypersonic test vehicles (i.e. like scramjets). You never know, though. After all, it is full of classified-ness, like you say.