-
<p>Two new reconnaisance satellites to spy the Chinese and Iranians are being readied to be launched aboard an Atlas V 401:</p><p>http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1208 (http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1208)</p>
-
monitor is the appropriate word vs spy.
-
I didn't realise they where previously to be launched by a boeing (delta 4 medium?)
Thanks for the link. :)
-
How far in advance will we have an indication of the launch window? I definitely plan to go see this one :)
-
ShuttleDiscovery - 30/4/2007 8:24 PM
I didn't realise they where previously to be launched by a boeing (delta 4 medium?)
Thanks for the link. :)
They were never launched by Deltas. The third generation "NOSS" satellites were launched by Atlas-2AS (two times) from Vandenberg and by an Atlas-3B from Cape Canaveral.
-
But were these two originally scheduled to fly on Delta IV and then moved because of the lawsuit/PIA issue? I didn't see any discussion of this in the article, though.
-
Skyrocket - 30/4/2007 1:38 PM
...and by an Atlas-3B from Cape Canaveral.
Which was quite visible on the east coast when the centuar vented at the end of the mission :)
Interesting they are stating the a NRO bird failed shortly after launch last year. I do not remember seeing any news articles on it... if it did fail.
-
There was discussion about the failed NRO bird a few months ago. Something about a computer failure. Noteworthy as it's the latest in a long string of setbacks for the FIA program, which was another Boeing failure starting around the same time period as the EELV stuff.
-
kevin-rf - 30/4/2007 8:48 PM
Interesting they are stating the a NRO bird failed shortly after launch last year. I do not remember seeing any news articles on it... if it did fail.
Some info in this thread:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=5688&start=1
-
WHAP - 30/4/2007 8:43 PM
But were these two originally scheduled to fly on Delta IV and then moved because of the lawsuit/PIA issue? I didn't see any discussion of this in the article, though.
No, the NROL-30 mission was from the beginning on Atlas-V
On my EELV mission list you can see, which missions have been moved
http://space.skyrocket.de/doc/eelv.htm
-
Is it a 401 or a 551? This thread says 401, as do a few others, but the majority of articles that I have seen list it as a 551.
-
It is a 401. The Payload is expected to be a duo of third generation NOSS satellites, which do not require a larger version.
-
According to ULA's webcast page,
Atlas V/NROL-30 Launch
Date: June 14, 2007
Launch Period: 9:00 A.M. - 12:00 P.M. EDT
Is that the final launch window, or should we expect something more precise as launch day approaches ?
http://www.ulalaunch.com/index_webcast.html
-
That is the launch period, the launch window falls somewhere in it
-
From http://www.patrick.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123056802
Media Advisory: ATLAS V/NRO launch set Thursday, June 14
Release Number: 010607
6/12/2007 - CAPE CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION, Fla. -- A National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) payload is scheduled for launch aboard an Atlas V Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) from here at Space Launch Complex 41 June 14, 2007. The planned launch time is 11:18 a.m. (EDT). This is the first Atlas V launch of an NRO payload.
.....
Contact: 45th Space Wing Public Affairs Office (321) 494-5933 or (321) 508-2071.
-
The first use of Russian engines for an NRO launch?
-
Danderman - 12/6/2007 6:38 PM
The first use of Russian engines for an NRO launch?
No, there was an Atlas III a couple of years ago.
-
quark - 13/6/2007 2:54 AM
Danderman - 12/6/2007 6:38 PM
The first use of Russian engines for an NRO launch?
No, there was an Atlas III a couple of years ago.
which also launched a NOSS-3-type payload like the payload expected for this flight now.
-
Some images from the roll-out.
http://spaceflightnow.com/atlas/av009/rollout/
BTW: It is the first Atlas-V (401) with the stretched payload fairing.
-
Skyrocket - 14/6/2007 1:09 PM
Some images from the roll-out.
http://spaceflightnow.com/atlas/av009/rollout/
BTW: It is the first Atlas-V (401) with the stretched payload fairing.
Are you sure about this? To me it looks like a standad 4m fairing. The white cylinder below it is the Centaur stage which is an "extended duration" version.
This tells me that the Centaur will go through some long coast phases in direct sunlight.
-
The cylindrical part of the fairing looks a little longer than the one in
these (http://www.spaceflightnow.com/atlas/av013/070307rollout/02.html) prictures. But it is hard to tell. I don't have the payload planners guide here but the difference is less than 1m I believe.
Analyst
-
It is the slightly longer version, as it has veen used on the previous NOSS-3 launches on Atlas-2AS and Atlas-3B.
-
So is this all secret, or is there a webcast?
-
British NASA - 14/6/2007 2:59 PM So is this all secret, or is there a webcast?
I was asking myself the same... In ULA's page (in the webcast section) there's note about this launch, so I presume it's going to be some kind of webcast... How long it will be (not much, probably just liftoff and early ascent), when the link will be provided and other details, I have no idea.
ULA webcasts: http://www.ulalaunch.com/index_webcast.html
-
I think that webcast page is just a static page and they aren't showing this live. Not a bad time to have a non-starter on the webcast, as 117 is dominating.
-
British NASA - 14/6/2007 2:59 PM
So is this all secret, or is there a webcast?
There should be ULA's webcast, but there's still no link to the webcast stream on their page.
-
Meanwhile, waiting for the webcast link, maybe some one could say something about logo for NROL-30?
-
Thanks to a ULA guy:
The webcast on ULA's site will begin approximately 20 minutes before launch, currently 11:18 EDT. So webcast at roughly 11:00 EDT, maybe a little sooner.
-
NH2501 - 14/6/2007 8:41 AM
Meanwhile, waiting for the webcast link, maybe some one could say something about logo for NROL-30?
Hummm, lets try...
The two blue stars are represent the two NOSS satellites aboard. Is this is the PYXIS mission, does the constelation there represents Pyxis in the sky? According to http://home.xtra.co.nz/hosts/Wingmakers/Pyxis.html "Pyxis was introduced by Abbé de la Caille, and associated with the giant 'superconstellation' of Argo Navis. In naming the constellation, though, de la Caille encountered a problem: there is no Latin word for 'compass', because the Romans did not have them. To solve this, he chose the word pyxis, which literally means 'little box'. The full name of the constellation, not now used, was Pyxis Nautica, meaning 'The Mariner's Box' or 'The Mariner's Compass'."
An the boat? Humm, ...Argo Navis?
-
-
Some roll pictures (thanks to David - you know who you are) :)
-
-
-
Satori - 14/6/2007 3:50 PM
Hummm, lets try...
The two blue stars are represent the two NOSS satellites aboard. Is this is the PYXIS mission, does the constelation there represents Pyxis in the sky? According to http://home.xtra.co.nz/hosts/Wingmakers/Pyxis.html "Pyxis was introduced by Abbé de la Caille, and associated with the giant 'superconstellation' of Argo Navis. In naming the constellation, though, de la Caille encountered a problem: there is no Latin word for 'compass', because the Romans did not have them. To solve this, he chose the word pyxis, which literally means 'little box'. The full name of the constellation, not now used, was Pyxis Nautica, meaning 'The Mariner's Box' or 'The Mariner's Compass'."
An the boat? Humm, ...Argo Navis?
Thanks for that.
And the Latin quote in logo is "There is no easy way from the earth to the stars" (Seneca).
-
Less than one hour from launch. There is a problem with a range safety system that can prevent the launch but the countdown proceeds...
-
L-45 minutes.
-
Links for the webcast are now available at ULA's page...
...but at this time only the links! :bleh:
-
I hear they have a range issue which needs to be fixed or it's a scrub.
-
Delta Manager - 14/6/2007 9:35 AM
I hear they have a range issue which needs to be fixed or it's a scrub.
Yes, at this time there is some kind of problem that needs to be fixed for the launch to proceed or else it's a scrub.
-
Maybe I'm missing it, but there is absolutely no media resources for this launch of the Atlas.
-
Chris Bergin - 14/6/2007 10:41 AM
Maybe I'm missing it, but there is absolutely no media resources for this launch of the Atlas.
http://www.ulalaunch.com/index_webcast.html has changed...
we have a video test
-
Chris Bergin - 14/6/2007 4:41 PM
Maybe I'm missing it, but there is absolutely no media resources for this launch of the Atlas.
It's after all a classified launch for the NRO. I doubt that they want give away anything on this launch. They're usually very quiet when it comes to spy sat launches.
-
There's clock counting down to the begining of the webcast now.
-
8 mins to coverage I guess
-
L-30 minutes.
-
Avron - 14/6/2007 4:46 PM
http://www.ulalaunch.com/index_webcast.html has changed...
Launch coverage usually doesn't until 20-30 minutes before the launch.
-
Satori - 14/6/2007 9:36 AM
Delta Manager - 14/6/2007 9:35 AM
I hear they have a range issue which needs to be fixed or it's a scrub.
Yes, at this time there is some kind of problem that needs to be fixed for the launch to proceed or else it's a scrub.
The problem is related to a malfunctioning range safety station...
-
We'll simply give coverage to this via the forum, no point bumping down our exclusive on the 117 latest for the sake of repeating what was covered in Av week.
Anyone good to take screenshots from the webcast?
-
Is anyone doing a video?
-
-
They are going to do a test with the range safety station to see if the launch can proceed. Test is schedule for 1500UTC...
1510UTC now...
-
-
-
-
T-4 minutes!
-
Range is go for launch!
-
GW_Simulations - 14/6/2007 3:55 PM
Is anyone doing a video?
Yep.
-
Problem resolved. Two minutes to polling.
-
Chris Bergin - 14/6/2007 4:52 PM Anyone good to take screenshots from the webcast?
I can do some :)
-
New launch time 1522UTC...
-
eeergo - 14/6/2007 4:09 PM
Chris Bergin - 14/6/2007 4:52 PM Anyone good to take screenshots from the webcast?
I can do some :)
Thank you sir :) I'm up to my eyeballs in Shuttle ;)
-
Horror, I see no link to video webcast on the ULA webcast page... Does anyone have a direct link to the video feed ?
-
http://boss.streamos.com/wmedia-live/ula/22447/56_ula-061407roccketlaunch_070612.asx
-
I can contribute a couple of pics too....I'm watching the webcast now. If I'd stayed in FLA 3 extra days instead of flying back home to Utah, I might have gotten to see 2 launches. Oh well.
-
Or, for the higher quality stream:
http://boss.streamos.com/wmedia-live/ula/22447/300_ula-061407roccketlaunch_070612.asx
-
-
New launch time: 11:44 am EDT.
They just said range is RED.
-
What's with the delays?
-
New launch time 1544:30UTC...
...launch window closes at 1600UTC.
-
-
GW_Simulations - 14/6/2007 5:14 PM
AnimatorRob - 14/6/2007 4:12 PM
http://boss.streamos.com/wmedia-live/ula/22447/56_ula-061407roccketlaunch_070612.asx
Or, for the higher quality stream:
http://boss.streamos.com/wmedia-live/ula/22447/300_ula-061407roccketlaunch_070612.asx
Thanks a lot... Although the root of the problem is deeper, network security issue. I'll have to rely on NSF coverage.
-
Range red :(
-
Range has gone red again...
-
-
Informed by ===== at the launch that this will be the last attempt of the window (XX:44).
-
-
-
-
-
Notice that the lower stage is white right now when it usually has that orange insulation color... Is that just ice? Seems like a lot of it.....
But it is Florida..... They need ice cubes after launch...
-
Seems we have rocket-cam on this mission!
-
-
First Atlas launch with rocketcam after long time...
-
-
Green!
Go Atlas! Go Centaur! Go me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
About 1 minute to polling.
-
Range green... and yes, the white colour is ice. I've always seen it in Atlas V...
-
...damn!
-
Scrub due to range.
-
No go and recycle 24 hours!
-
24h scrub turnaround!
-
We'll come back to this tomorrow on the same thread.
-
Intelsat G25C wishes us "Good Night" now on the webcast ;) But it's afternoon in Poland and morning in Florida!
-
That dang mission director spoiling all our fun... Don't they know they're counter programming with EVA-3? :-)
Seeya in 24 hours..... We now return you to your regularly scheduled shuttle flight day thread.
-
L-3 hours.
-
Hold-fire checks are underway.
-
Returned back to as Live thread for today's attempt. We'll have an article for this with about an hour to go in the count.
-
L-2 hours.
Why the launch is not scheduled for the begining of the launch window (10:30 AM EDT)?
-
shuttlepilot - 15/6/2007 9:04 AM
L-2 hours.
Why the launch is not scheduled for the begining of the launch window (10:30 AM EDT)?
I think because this is an NRO mission, they aren't telling us the exact window open and close, only that the launch will occur sometime between 10:30AM EDT and 12:00PM EDT, and that the launch should occur at 11:04AM. They didn't release the launch time until later on, after the launch period (10:30 to 12:00) was released.
-
Centaur LOX is being loaded.
-
"The range safety system is, once again, not functioning properly and not ready to support today's launch. This is similar to yesterday's problem, which prompted a late scrub of the attempt to launch an Atlas V rocket and two spy satellites."
http://www.floridatoday.com/floridatoday/blogs/spaceteam/2007/06/atlas-team-counts-down-to-2nd-launch.html
-
Felix - 15/6/2007 9:38 AM
"The range safety system is, once again, not functioning properly and not ready to support today's launch. This is similar to yesterday's problem, which prompted a late scrub of the attempt to launch an Atlas V rocket and two spy satellites."
http://www.floridatoday.com/floridatoday/blogs/spaceteam/2007/06/atlas-team-counts-down-to-2nd-launch.html
Here's hoping they get the problem fixed this time.
-
Think someone might be jamming the range saftey system so these sats don't get launched?
-
Repairs have been made to the Range equipment and they're testing it right now. Fingers crossed.
Meanwhile, Centaur liquid hydrogen loading has begun.
-
TrueBlueWitt - 15/6/2007 3:45 PM
Think someone might be jamming the range saftey system so these sats don't get launched?
Unlikely - external interference would be pretty easy detectable.
-
TrueBlueWitt - 15/6/2007 9:45 AM
Think someone might be jamming the range saftey system so these sats don't get launched?
Sure, Al Qeada has a crack comando team randomly unplugging black boxxes on the range ;-)
Fingers crossed... Though if she doesn't fly today I'll get a chance to see her fly when I'm in town over the weekend. Be better if she flys today.
-
Just a Random thought..
I know they've had Radio interference problems with range saftey before that have forced postponement of other launch attempts. Hadn't heard details on what the Range issue was this time.
-
T-60 minutes. Still no updates on the range issue, but they are pressing on with fueling.
-
Range is GO!
-
All tanks are in top-off mode, and range safety checks are underway. There also appears to be a guidance issue.
-
T-38 minutes.
-
Guidance issue appears to be resolved.
-
L minus 30 minutes.
Weather looks not bad on the KSC video streams.
-
Webcast will begin in 4 minutes.
-
-
-
-
Preview: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5136
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Holding at T-4 min
-
T-4 minutes and holding.
-
Can anyone say if it will be launching in a northerly or southernly direction? It effects which window in my building I need to look out to watch it.
-
-
Centaur fill/drain valve possible issue being discussed.
-
New launch time: 11:12 AM EDT.
-
New T-0 is 15:12 GMT.
-
-
Someone's not turned his mic off. Anyone make out what she's saying?
Something about a slip of 8 minutes?
-
-
AnimatorRob - 15/6/2007 4:53 PM
Can anyone say if it will be launching in a northerly or southernly direction? It effects which window in my building I need to look out to watch it.
north
-
-
Probably northeast - ULA animation shows vehicle will be passing Wallops, BOSS tracking station - although probably far off from the US northeast coast.
-
Issue resolved!
-
Fill/drain valve issue cleared, ready to launch at 11:12 AM EDT.
-
-
KOOL...on board TV
-
-
L-9 mins, launch team poll will start in about 2 minutes.
-
Polling...everybody is go!
-
-
T-3:45 and counting!
-
T-2min and counting
-
-
Vehicle internal.
-
-
T-60 seconds. Go Atlas, Go Centaur!
-
With it on internal power and the flight termination system successfully armed, I can breath a sigh of relief!
-
-
T-10 seconds. Go Atlas Go Centaur.
-
Lift off!!
-
LIFTOFF! GO ATLAS GO!
-
LIFTOFF!
-
Go Atlas Go Centaur
-
LIFTOFF!
-
T+30 seconds.
Pitch program in and nominal.
-
-
T+60 seconds 95 percent throttle for Max Q.
-
Now supersonic. Nice contrail!
-
Vehicle now supersonic...into Max Q and passing through. First stage flight nominal.
-
-
Waiting for 1-2 sep. Throttling down to 92 percent.
-
Someone get the phone (phone ring heard in live stream)
-
-
Poll for Centaur is go.
Burnout and 1-2 sep.
-
1/2 sep.
Did you hear those strange sounds at T-10 s.? ;)
-
Stage 1-2 sep, Centaur MES-1!
-
-
-
OMG, what a beautiful shots from rocket-cam!
-
Nominal in the first of two burns from Centaur.
-
WOW... that gets my vote for best RocketCam stage separation ever....
-
-
-
-
I hope they'll show a replay of just the RocketCam footage (or perhaps Chris will :-) )
-
-
-
Around 9 minutes left in the first Centaur burn.
-
Can you imagine being on this ride if the Atlas 5 is used for Bigelow transportation?
-
-
-
That was a real pretty launch. I love the Atlas V.
-
-
-
-
Hmm, do you think that's what the NRO sat really looks like?
-
No, that is Mars Reconnaisance Orbiter MRO
-
Skyrocket - 15/6/2007 11:28 AM
No, that is Mars Reconnaisance Orbiter MRO
Oh! Couldn't recognize it with the solar panels folded up like that. :o
-
Centaur MECO-1!
-
MECO!
-
-
-
-
Now we're in coast phase. They're showing some replays - always better than that stupid music ;)
-
Back in 60 minutes!
-
-
Launch video: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=8410&start=1
-
Nick L. - 15/6/2007 5:29 PM
Skyrocket - 15/6/2007 11:28 AM
No, that is Mars Reconnaisance Orbiter MRO
Oh! Couldn't recognize it with the solar panels folded up like that. :o
Although MRO had folded its large dish antenna in a different was than shown here, i think MRO inspired the "payload" shown here. Very unlikely, that it has got somethint to do with the real payload.
-
Did anyone hear those strange sounds (like pig) at about T-10 seconds? :) Strange sounds on webcast, commentator's excitement and some other things always makes me laugh.
-
shuttlepilot - 15/6/2007 5:42 PM Did anyone hear those strange sounds (like pig) at about T-10 seconds? :) Strange sounds on webcast, commentator's excitement and some other things always makes me laugh.
Yes, it was quite ridicuolous to hear such a sound just before launch :) I'd like to know what device could possibly make that sound (assuming no pigs are strolling around Atlas Mission Control)
-
Skyrocket - 15/6/2007 11:36 AM
Although MRO had folded its large dish antenna in a different was than shown here, i think MRO inspired the "payload" shown here. Very unlikely, that it has got somethint to do with the real payload.
I thought NRO payloads inspired the MRO ;)
Of course a good strike against the model is everyone was predicting two payloads.
-
MECO-2
-
Spacecraft separation!
-
spacecraft separation
-
There will be speech in few moments.
-
There will be no speech... End of the webcast.
-
...and Intelsat G25C once again wishes us good night ;)
-
Just an absolutly beautiful launch..... Save for the shuttle, best RocketCam I can remember....
-
ApolloLee - 15/6/2007 11:21 AM
Can you imagine being on this ride if the Atlas 5 is used for Bigelow transportation?
Every day of the week and twice on Sundays, to quote a Waterton worker who might be known as Radar.
Is that 81 now or 82?
-
Antares - 15/6/2007 1:04 PM
Is that 81 now or 82?
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/nro06157.xml&headline=NRO%20Spacecraft%20In%20Wrong%20Orbit&channel=space
Aviantion Week is reporting the Centaur malfunctioned and shut down prematurely resulting in the spacecraft placed in wrong orbit. The orbit parameters are classified.
-
Due to a post made by one user (just a question), I want to make this clear now.
What we know about the payload is what has been published. No more information (even if we knew - which we don't) will be forthcoming, so there's no need to ask.
We can follow the launch, we can follow Atlas, we can follow up the problem, but the payload is US military and thus classified. We will respect that, no questions asked.
-
The good news is that they can get into the right orbit with their thrusters, so they haven't been lost at least.
-
So, when was the last centaur malfunction?
-
Titan 4B with Milstar 2-1 in 1999.
Analyst
-
Analyst - 16/6/2007 7:37 AM
Titan 4B with Milstar 2-1 in 1999.
Analyst
That really doesn't qualify as a "centaur" wrt to this launch
-
I notice in Chris's posted video from the on-board Centaur camera that the stage seems to go loosey-goosey from about 1 to 2 minutes into the video. The event began with a video dropout. This was during the first burn. This seems to me to perhaps be more action than one would expect for a dogleg maneuver, etc. The stage even appeared to be flying a bit sideways for a short time. I wonder if Centaur got "lost" (suffered some type of momentary failure) for a moment and had to use extra propellant to make the parking orbit, then ran out of propellant during the second burn.
Now both EELV's have a failure.
- Ed Kyle
-
Jim - 16/6/2007 3:36 PM
Analyst - 16/6/2007 7:37 AM
Titan 4B with Milstar 2-1 in 1999.
Analyst
That really doesn't qualify as a "centaur" wrt to this launch
I think the last "classic" Centaur (i.e. not a Titan Centaur) failure was AC-71 on August 23, 1992 launching Galaxy 1R, according to this:
http://geocities.com/launchreport/atlfail.txt
-
Nice amateur video on youtube. I was surprised by how much noise this rocket makes.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=KCmPM16lKLM
-
Does anyone has the launch time in format 1512:XX.XXXUTC?
Thanks!
-
Here is a video I did from 3.9 miles. These personal videos tend to be well received :-)
http://www.launchphotography.com/Atlas_NRO_L-30_press_site_video.html
-
I got some dreaded quciktime error message Ben. Is it only in this format? I don't have an Apple Mac.
-
I couldn't see it either.
-
Do you have Quicktime installed? It's free, www.quicktime.com. No problems reported from anyone else :-\
-
oscar71 - 17/6/2007 7:34 PM
I couldn't see it either.
Hate quicktime players, had same problem. Would really like to see it!
-
It plays using VLC just fine.
-
Played fine for me (Opera v9.01, Quicktime v7.1, Windows XP Tablet), Thanks Ben
-
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06/18/us_spy_sat_cockup/
I love the quote.
"Aviation Week and Space Technology quotes an unnamed official as saying that "the Atlas V people have a lot of explaining to do"."
You're not wrong...
-
McDew - 15/6/2007 6:48 PM
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/nro06157.xml&headline=NRO%20Spacecraft%20In%20Wrong%20Orbit&channel=space
Aviantion Week is reporting the Centaur malfunctioned and shut down prematurely resulting in the spacecraft placed in wrong orbit. The orbit parameters are classified.
Very ho-hum "launch failure" to say the least. I can't help but wonder if in fact a launch failure actually occured. Orbit parameters are classified, everything seemed fine through MECO-2 and SV separation, and then, whammo - wrong orbit.
No mention of a detailed failure investigation, no mention of any cascading effect relative to RL-10 engines, no stand-downs, just some benign statements with no substance.
-
Unfortunately, it doesn't matter (regardless of the ho-hum details) - failure to inject the payload into the designated orbit/transfer orbit will still be classed overall as a failure, regardless of the circumstances.
A shame, too, since Atlas-V/Centaur as had a pretty much flawless record so far.
-
bombay - 18/6/2007 10:28 PM
McDew - 15/6/2007 6:48 PM
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/nro06157.xml&headline=NRO%20Spacecraft%20In%20Wrong%20Orbit&channel=space
Aviantion Week is reporting the Centaur malfunctioned and shut down prematurely resulting in the spacecraft placed in wrong orbit. The orbit parameters are classified.
Very ho-hum "launch failure" to say the least. I can't help but wonder if in fact a launch failure actually occured. Orbit parameters are classified, everything seemed fine through MECO-2 and SV separation, and then, whammo - wrong orbit.
No mention of a detailed failure investigation, no mention of any cascading effect relative to RL-10 engines, no stand-downs, just some benign statements with no substance.
People on the SeeSat list are reporting an orbit of 776x1246km vs. a expected 1000x1200km. Not a small difference, but not fatal by any means. The US also has a history of pretending that there was a failure in order to hide something sneaky. One obvious possibility is a secret third payload that had issues resulting in the NOSS birds ending up in it's orbit rather than their own.
-
Can you "pretend" a Centaur failure for secrecy reasons, it hurts LM/ULA business a lot. I don't buy it. (Or then DoD would have to compensate a lot for ULA taking the blame.)
Btw, don't take this as flamebait, but how many Atlas V launches have been done under ULA? And how has the manufacture and integration changed etc?
-
yinzer - 19/6/2007 3:09 AM
The US also has a history of pretending that there was a failure in order to hide something sneaky. One obvious possibility is a secret third payload that had issues resulting in the NOSS birds ending up in it's orbit rather than their own.
I've heard those stories, but then again, it was easier to do back when DoD services 'owned' their own birds. Now that everything is private industry and *any* launch failure can impact future commercial business with the same company, I'm not sure stories/excuses like that will work as well.
-
meiza - 19/6/2007 3:21 AM
Btw, don't take this as flamebait, but how many Atlas V launches have been done under ULA? And how has the manufacture and integration changed etc?
Two. And not much has changed yet. Things will change as the Delta and Atlas engineering are integrated in Denver and (most) manufacturing in Decatur. The former should be done this year, the latter in a couple of years.
-
meiza - 19/6/2007 4:21 AM
Can you "pretend" a Centaur failure for secrecy reasons, it hurts LM/ULA business a lot. I don't buy it. (Or then DoD would have to compensate a lot for ULA taking the blame.)
Btw, don't take this as flamebait, but how many Atlas V launches have been done under ULA? And how has the manufacture and integration changed etc?
First , business not all , National security is importanter .
Second , DoD , NRO is better client , They can pay more for those Secret payloads than normal payloads .
:laugh:
-
MKremer - 19/6/2007 4:56 AM
I've heard those stories,
USA 53
;)
-
It's not like there's much of a commercial Atlas/Delta business to protect, these days.
-
bombay - 18/6/2007 10:28 PM McDew - 15/6/2007 6:48 PM http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/nro06157.xml&headline=NRO%20Spacecraft%20In%20Wrong%20Orbit&channel=space Aviantion Week is reporting the Centaur malfunctioned and shut down prematurely resulting in the spacecraft placed in wrong orbit. The orbit parameters are classified.
Very ho-hum "launch failure" to say the least. I can't help but wonder if in fact a launch failure actually occured. Orbit parameters are classified, everything seemed fine through MECO-2 and SV separation, and then, whammo - wrong orbit. No mention of a detailed failure investigation, no mention of any cascading effect relative to RL-10 engines, no stand-downs, just some benign statements with no substance.
OK, this RL-10 failure *should* cascade all through Delta and Atlas launch manifests, since both EELVs uses this engine.
-
Danderman - 19/6/2007 5:06 PM
bombay - 18/6/2007 10:28 PM McDew - 15/6/2007 6:48 PM http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/nro06157.xml&headline=NRO%20Spacecraft%20In%20Wrong%20Orbit&channel=space Aviantion Week is reporting the Centaur malfunctioned and shut down prematurely resulting in the spacecraft placed in wrong orbit. The orbit parameters are classified.
Very ho-hum "launch failure" to say the least. I can't help but wonder if in fact a launch failure actually occured. Orbit parameters are classified, everything seemed fine through MECO-2 and SV separation, and then, whammo - wrong orbit. No mention of a detailed failure investigation, no mention of any cascading effect relative to RL-10 engines, no stand-downs, just some benign statements with no substance.
OK, this RL-10 failure *should* cascade all through Delta and Atlas launch manifests, since both EELVs uses this engine.
Has it been reported as an "RL-10" failure anywhere? I've only seen references to this being a "Centaur malfunction", myself. There could have been a flight control error, or a pressurization problem, or a propellant depletion issue, or a stuck actuator, etc. and etc. Any number of things could have caused an early shutdown. (I haven't been able to put that action that looks like excessive "hunting" during the Centaur dog-leg maneuver out of my mind yet, for example.)
- Ed Kyle
-
Hmm... wouldn't flying a suboptimal ascent trajectory lead to early shutdown due to propellant depletion and therefore no excess propellant to vent causing a very bright cloud to be visible over Iran?
-
edkyle99 - 19/6/2007 6:46 PM
Has it been reported as an "RL-10" failure anywhere? I've only seen references to this being a "Centaur malfunction", myself. There could have been a flight control error, or a pressurization problem, or a propellant depletion issue, or a stuck actuator, etc. and etc. Any number of things could have caused an early shutdown. (I haven't been able to put that action that looks like excessive "hunting" during the Centaur dog-leg maneuver out of my mind yet, for example.)
- Ed Kyle
I don't think there's been any official word regarding the RL-10 or otherwise. Any mention on my part is based on pure speculation, which could be way off base.
-
yinzer - 19/6/2007 4:52 PM
Hmm... wouldn't flying a suboptimal ascent trajectory lead to early shutdown due to propellant depletion and therefore no excess propellant to vent causing a very bright cloud to be visible over Iran?
First, you don't know it's a suboptimal trajectory.
Second, even if it is; there will still be enough propellant reserve to complete the mission. Atlas Prop guys would have make sure of that.
Third, I doubt Iran has that capability and, even if they have, do you think NRO gives a $hit?
Finally, did anyone report a "bright spark" during the engine 2nd burn? :laugh:
-
Sorry, I was unclear. Ed thinks that he saw excessive hunting during the second stage burn from the onboard video. This should certainly be noticeable to the launch vehicle, and one would expect the Centaur to burn longer to make up for it. In order for this to cause the payloads to end up in a lower orbit, the Centaur would have to run out of propellant.
We know the Centaur didn't run out of propellant, as it vented a bunch over Iran. Therefore this theory must be incorrect, or incomplete.
We know it did this because plenty of people saw the venting and took pictures of it, and then other people used those pictures to locate the NOSS birds over the next few days and figure out the magnitude of the underperformance. It looks like about a 30 m/s maneuver will be required to put the NOSS birds into their desired orbit, unless my math is horribly off.
-
yinzer - 19/6/2007 8:24 PM
We know it did this because plenty of people saw the venting and took pictures of it, and then other people used those pictures to locate the NOSS birds over the next few days and figure out the magnitude of the underperformance. It looks like about a 30 m/s maneuver will be required to put the NOSS birds into their desired orbit, unless my math is horribly off.
Has anyone seen these pictures? Any links?
-
WHAP - 19/6/2007 7:28 PM
yinzer - 19/6/2007 8:24 PM
We know it did this because plenty of people saw the venting and took pictures of it, and then other people used those pictures to locate the NOSS birds over the next few days and figure out the magnitude of the underperformance. It looks like about a 30 m/s maneuver will be required to put the NOSS birds into their desired orbit, unless my math is horribly off.
Has anyone seen these pictures? Any links?
There are on spaceweather.com.
Discussion is happening on SeeSat-L.
-
yinzer - 19/6/2007 7:24 PM
Sorry, I was unclear. Ed thinks that he saw excessive hunting during the second stage burn from the onboard video. This should certainly be noticeable to the launch vehicle, and one would expect the Centaur to burn longer to make up for it. In order for this to cause the payloads to end up in a lower orbit, the Centaur would have to run out of propellant.
We know the Centaur didn't run out of propellant, as it vented a bunch over Iran. Therefore this theory must be incorrect, or incomplete.
We know it did this because plenty of people saw the venting and took pictures of it, and then other people used those pictures to locate the NOSS birds over the next few days and figure out the magnitude of the underperformance. It looks like about a 30 m/s maneuver will be required to put the NOSS birds into their desired orbit, unless my math is horribly off.
Thanks for the link. Those are nice pictures indeed.
On subsequent pictures, I saw a bright light after "venting", assuming it was engine continue firing after venting. So apparently these events occurred prior to engine shutdown. In this case, we don't know if Centaur run out of propellant or some sensor on the stage that caused engine to shutdown prematurely, or something went wrong with the engine itself.
The Atlas folks should be able to figure this out quickly from telemetry data. Whether they release this finding or not, is another question.
-
LOL. New mission requirement: "Space vehicle shall not create noctilucent clouds over unfriendly territory."
-
Antares - 19/6/2007 11:21 PM
LOL. New mission requirement: "Space vehicle shall not create noctilucent clouds over unfriendly territory."
The russians where famous for doing that over south america during the 1980's leading to all sorts of bogus UFO sightings.
I remember a few years back watching a NRO centuar vent over the east coast. It was quite something to watch. I had forgotten about the launch and just happened to be outside when I noticed (you could not miss it if you looked south west) the cloud. The Centuar stage was also very visible as a seperate bright dot. For some reason I remember two clouds that moved across the sky. It was quite exciting to watch. My first reacton was to remember the launch and go check the net to see what had went wrong with the mission. Imagine my surprise when I looked at one of the other sites that tracks launches and they mentioned they had just vented the tanks. Go Centuar.
One interesting tidbit over in the ULA thread is Jim labeled it as a RL-10 issue :
Jim - 19/6/2007 11:03 AM
Dexter - 18/6/2007 11:13 PM
This change over in talent seems to be having an effect on ULA wth all the problems to date
1. Cracked Delta 4 pad
2. Delta 2 pad crane breaks down - who is doing maintenance????
3. Damaged solar array on DAWN spacecraft.
4. Atlas V fails to put NRO satellites in correct orbit.
it is total BS to blame this on the formation of ULA.
1. The cracked pad is completely independent of this
2. A separate USAF contractor performs maintenance on the D-II pads
3. Not a Delta II tech but a spacecraft tech (even if it were, it is not due to ULA, since the same techs are there)
4. RL-10 problems are not ULA
Jim being a NASA ELV guy, I wonder if he has an inside leg on what went wrong...
-
kevin-rf - 19/6/2007 8:50 PM
Jim being a NASA ELV guy, I wonder if he has an inside leg on what went wrong...
Why? You think NRO will tell NASA anything?
-
Propforce - 19/6/2007 11:43 PM
kevin-rf - 19/6/2007 8:50 PM
Jim being a NASA ELV guy, I wonder if he has an inside leg on what went wrong...
Why? You think NRO will tell NASA anything?
He must talk about ULA
:laugh:
-
yinzer - 19/6/2007 8:32 PM
]
There are on spaceweather.com.
Discussion is happening on SeeSat-L.
Thanks for the links. Neat pictures.
-
yinzer - 19/6/2007 9:24 PM
We know the Centaur didn't run out of propellant, as it vented a bunch over Iran. Therefore this theory must be incorrect, or incomplete.
Did it vent one tank or two? There is only one cloud in the pics from iran. I could swear I saw two vent events clouds when a centuar vented over the east coast a few years back.
Running out of LH or LOX does mean you still need to vent the residuals. One can run out before the other. Just odd, with no offical releases on what (if if) went wrong.
It could be like the Delta III failure (chamber breach), the Titan IV failure (mis programmed burn time), or the Delta IV Heavy success (just ran out of go juice).
If the birds end up in the typical orbit for such a bird I doubt a failure is a cover story to hide the birds. If the Birds do a Misty vanishing act... Well
-
seruriermarshal - 20/6/2007 4:20 PM
kevin-rf - 20/6/2007 10:29 AM
Did it vent one tank or two? There is only one cloud in the pics from iran. I could swear I saw two vent events clouds when a centuar vented over the east coast a few years back.
Running out of LH or LOX does mean you still need to vent the residuals. One can run out before the other. Just odd, with no offical releases on what (if if) went wrong.
It could be like the Delta III failure (chamber breach), the Titan IV failure (mis programmed burn time), or the Delta IV Heavy success (just ran out of go juice).
If the birds end up in the typical orbit for such a bird I doubt a failure is a cover story to hide the birds. If the Birds do a Misty vanishing act... Well
They said a Secret payload used to watch Iran and another used to watch China .
Not exactly. We're pretty sure this the latest NOSS flight. NOSS (Naval Ocean Surveillance System) uses satellite pairs in the same orbit to monitor the oceans, probably by listening for radio emissions, but no one really knows what else they might do. The "to watch Iran and China" bit is just because those are the countries currently in the news.
Amateur observers have already tracked these satellites and determined their orbit; it's a little lower than expected but not hugely so. If my back of the envelope math is correct, it looks like the Centaur shut down about three seconds early. This doesn't really narrow down what could have happened, but it indicates that nothing went too severely wrong.
-
Presser:
Launch Team Announces Initiation of Review Regarding Atlas V Centaur Upper Stage Event
LOS ANGELES AIR FORCE BASE, El Segundo, Calif. -- The Space and Missile Systems Center and the United Launch Alliance have initiated a post-launch review and assessment of the events leading up to and including the performance degradation in the Atlas V Centaur upper stage for mission NROL-30 on June 15. The performance degradation is measured against the preflight predicted values. This review process is standard procedure for any noted flight anomalies and is not intended to infer that the mission was a failure. The NRO is confident it can perform its mission as was stated in the joint media release of June 15.
Over the coming weeks the anomaly review team will study telemetry and other mission-related supporting data and will employ a systematic process to determine the cause or causes that led to the degraded performance of the rocket’s Centaur upper stage. We are confident that the team has the right resources and levels of experience that will lead to an identification of the root cause or causes and implementation of the appropriate corrective actions for future launches.
We will provide releasable updated information as it is received during the course of the review.
-
Would someone be kind enough to please explain to me what constitutes a launch failure.
Between the Delta IV heavy that successfully placed 3 satellites into the wrong orbit and the AV009 that successfully came up short of the desired orbit, the AF and Space & Missile Systems Center, with the support of Boeing (Delta IV launch) and ULA (AV009), appear to be on a quest to redefine what a launch failure is.
It's as if there all in some sort of EELV protection mode.
-
bombay - 21/6/2007 7:57 PM
the Delta IV heavy that successfully placed 3 satellites into the wrong orbit
The two small ride-along sats did not enter orbit; they burned up after a suborbital trajectory.
-
bombay - 21/6/2007 7:57 PM
Would someone be kind enough to please explain to me what constitutes a launch failure.
Between the Delta IV heavy that successfully placed 3 satellites into the wrong orbit and the AV009 that successfully came up short of the desired orbit, the AF and Space & Missile Systems Center, with the support of Boeing (Delta IV launch) and ULA (AV009), appear to be on a quest to redefine what a launch failure is.
It's as if there all in some sort of EELV protection mode.
Failure: when it goes BOOM!
But seriously, a failure is when the satellite doesn't get into the right orbit. I don't think anyone, ULA or AF or otherwise, is claiming that either the Delta IV Heavy demo or AV-009 is an unqualified success.
-
Note that they said "not intended to infer that the mission was a failure". It's quite possible for the launcher to underperform and the Satellites mission be achieved.
It then becomes a moot point as how large an 'underperformance' is a failure - 10 secs short? 3 secs? 1 sec? 0.1 sec? 0.001 sec? There is a grey area where pre-planned margins are invoked, systems fail over to redundant spares, planned alternative mission profiles used etc.
In the end I think I would class this as a LV failure as recovery from the shortfall depended on the design of the spacecraft being launched. Unless there is a minimum corrective manoeuvre capability specified for all payloads on the LV type this could have resulted in a mission failure for a spacecraft of arbitrary design.
Personal opinion only BTW and I expect to be corrected by the professionals on this.
Rick
-
There's no solid answer. Some possible definitions might be "payload lit on fire and dropped into the pacific", or "higher delta-V to final orbit than specified in the launch contract paperwork", or "whatever makes the insurance company have to pay out."
That said, something clearly went wrong on AV-009, and any potential customer will want to know what that was and how Lockheed intends to fix it. But I'd imagine that until more information comes out most potential customers will be less concerned by NROL-30 than they are by NSS-8, for instance.
-
The solid generically-accurate answer is 3 standard deviations below nominal, unless as in the case of Falcon 1.2 the prepublished mission objectives were something other than a target orbit. I never saw prepublished objectives for Heavy Demo that would get it out of being a failure. Yinzer is right in that contracts are usually written to define a success as a maximum amount of delta-V to make the mission orbit, and for commercial sats insurance policies are redeemed when a certain amount of lifetime is lost as a result of launch vehicle performance (or, on orbit, premature solar panel degradation or XIPS malfs, etc.).
The payload contract for the AC-70 launch granted mission success at liftoff. Too bad the second stage couldn't start because it was iced up.
-
First word on the AC-009 failure investigation. Florida Today says that it was a valve that leaked "fuel" slightly during the coast phase, causing propellant depletion four seconds short of the desired shutdown.
http://www.floridatoday.com/floridatoday/blogs/spaceteam/2007/06/progress-made-in-atlas-centaur.html
The valve type is not specified. Does anyone have a Centaur/RL-10 propellant flow schematic diagram?
- Ed Kyle
-
They issued a press release on this two or three days ago, which is where they got that information. I had it but I did not save it; not sure where online it is. It also indicated the next launch would not be delayed as a result or that they would at least press on assuming it would be cleared.
-
AvWeek also has something:
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/space/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=04ce340e-4b63-4d23-9695-d49ab661f385&plckPostId=Blog%3a04ce340e-4b63-4d23-9695-d49ab661f385Post%3a8cd22855-739b-4335-b4a2-2af4e9a34ac6&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest
-
My first guess would be that a problem occurred with a (or the) liquid hydrogen vent valve during the coast phase. That valve would not "pop" open until the latter portion of the coast, which would be consistent with the apparent small fuel loss. Otherwise, the only other valves that I could think might be on the stage would be the engine inlet valve, the fuel inlet shutoff valve, a fill and drain valve, and maybe a propellant utilization valve. If any of those valves failed to close, the fuel loss would be substantial.
- Ed Kyle
-
The Air Force now says it was a leaky hydrogen propellant valve in the Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne RL10 Centaur upper stage engine that caused the AV-009 Atlas failure on June 15, 2007. Craig Covault of Aviation Week reported this on July 20.
An ongoing investigation to determine the cause of the failure will delay one Atlas launch by one week at least. RL10 engines power both Atlas V and Delta IV upper stages, and both EELVs are scheduled to fly during the final days of August, so additional delays are possible IMO.
RL-10 engines are equipped with several valves in the liquid hydrogen chain. These include a main fuel pump inlet shutoff valve, a pair of cooldown bleed and pressure relief valves, a thrust controller valve, and a main fuel shutoff valve positioned downstream from the fuel pump. I'm told that the main fuel pump inlet shutoff valve is the most likely mechanism involved in the AV-009 incident, which occurred during the Centaur coast phase prior to the second burn.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/space/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a04ce340e-4b63-4d23-9695-d49ab661f385Post%3aaab64601-729e-43a2-874c-8579bd530aa9
- Ed Kyle
-
edkyle99 - 21/7/2007 10:41 AM
The Air Force now says it was a leaky hydrogen propellant valve in the Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne RL10 Centaur upper stage engine that caused the AV-009 Atlas failure on June 15, 2007. Craig Covault of Aviation Week reported this on July 20.
An ongoing investigation to determine the cause of the failure will delay one Atlas launch by one week at least. RL10 engines power both Atlas V and Delta IV upper stages, and both EELVs are scheduled to fly during the final days of August, so additional delays are possible IMO.
RL-10 engines are equipped with several valves in the liquid hydrogen chain. These include a main fuel pump inlet shutoff valve, a pair of cooldown bleed and pressure relief valves, a thrust controller valve, and a main fuel shutoff valve positioned downstream from the fuel pump. I'm told that the main fuel pump inlet shutoff valve is the most likely mechanism involved in the AV-009 incident, which occurred during the Centaur coast phase prior to the second burn.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/space/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a04ce340e-4b63-4d23-9695-d49ab661f385Post%3aaab64601-729e-43a2-874c-8579bd530aa9
- Ed Kyle
Do you know if these valves are the same on the Delta IV RL10B-2 as on the Atlas RL10A-4? This could really throw a wrench in the works. :(
-
They know it and both Delta and Atlas are working it
-
According to the following story, the Atlas V program appears to be taking a six week schedule hit for the AV-009 failure investigation.
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070806006008&newsLang=en
I wonder if the recent Delta IV Heavy delay is also related to AV-009.
- Ed Kyle
-
The D-IVH delays are not due to AV-009
-
I wonder what the secrets are. Is it to much for Boeing or LM to say they are working a problem with the payload, with second stage engine etc. Heck, they (want to) offer these vehicles commercially. Even the Russians are more open. And what do you lose with being a little more open? Now people guess and come the false conclusions, then they will know. The first is better for reputation, something not bad in this business.
Analyst
-
Analyst - 7/8/2007 11:00 AM
I wonder what the secrets are. Is it to much for Boeing or LM to say
Analyst
Yes, because they aren't anymore. It is ULA. But also the USAF does the PR for their own flights
-
Jim - 7/8/2007 5:19 PM
Analyst - 7/8/2007 11:00 AM
I wonder what the secrets are. Is it to much for Boeing or LM to say
Analyst
Yes, because they aren't anymore. It is ULA. But also the USAF does the PR for their own flights
So I replace Boeing or LM by ULA and USAF.
Analyst
-
What little info the USAF provides is more than in the past, which was none. The USAF doesn't need nor wants the extra PR.
-
Jim - 7/8/2007 10:19 AM
Analyst - 7/8/2007 11:00 AM
I wonder what the secrets are. Is it to much for Boeing or LM to say
Analyst
Yes, because they aren't anymore. It is ULA. But also the USAF does the PR for their own flights
So why does the article mention "Lockheed Martin Commercial Launch Services (LMCLS)" and not ULA?
-
Lockheed Martin Commercial Launch Services (LMCLS) does the commercial contracts. ULA does the gov't contracts. LMCLS and BLS contract ULA for their rockets
-
Analyst - 7/8/2007 5:00 PM
I wonder what the secrets are. Is it to much for Boeing or LM to say they are working a problem with the payload, with second stage engine etc. Heck, they (want to) offer these vehicles commercially. Even the Russians are more open. And what do you lose with being a little more open? Now people guess and come the false conclusions, then they will know. The first is better for reputation, something not bad in this business.
Analyst
Do they offer them commercially? When is the next commercial launch?
-
pippin - 7/8/2007 1:13 PM
Analyst - 7/8/2007 5:00 PM
I wonder what the secrets are. Is it to much for Boeing or LM to say they are working a problem with the payload, with second stage engine etc. Heck, they (want to) offer these vehicles commercially. Even the Russians are more open. And what do you lose with being a little more open? Now people guess and come the false conclusions, then they will know. The first is better for reputation, something not bad in this business.
Analyst
Do they offer them commercially? When is the next commercial launch?
The next commercial Atlas V launch is probably going to occur early next year (possibly January). It is the ICO G1 commercial communication satellite mentioned in the link a few messages up this thread. The next launch after that would be an Inmarsat 4 on another Atlas, also sometime next year.
I am not aware of any Delta IV commercial contracts at present.
- Ed Kyle
-
There are commercial Delta II's
-
Thanks for the answer. I still have to ask what would they lose by being more open? If the clients are in the loop anyway, they would not be "the problem".
Analyst
-
edkyle99 - 7/8/2007 9:19 PM
The next launch after that would be an Inmarsat 4 on another Atlas, also sometime next year.
The Inmarsat-4 has been moved to an ILS Proton launch
http://www.ilslaunch.com/zmedia/newsarchives/newsreleases/rec82/
-
The next Atlas launch is in early September. The first WGS satellite for the AF.
-
We finally got a mission overview video of the launch after 6 years..... ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXa8Ks776Sk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXa8Ks776Sk)