-
#40
by
William Graham
on 15 Apr, 2010 11:15
-
Failure confirmed
-
#41
by
Satori
on 15 Apr, 2010 11:16
-
Official: launch failure. Rocket did'nt got into orbit...
-
#42
by
Spiff
on 15 Apr, 2010 11:18
-
statement by ISRO
Cryo engine confirmed as ignited
Stage was tumbling and out of control
Detailed analysis to follow
(Indian english is hard to follow...)
-
#43
by
Satori
on 15 Apr, 2010 11:18
-
Looks like the problem was related with the no ignition of the verniers on the India's Crio Stage?
-
#44
by
Spiff
on 15 Apr, 2010 11:19
-
And then some statements about thorough investigation and making sure next launches won't fail as well. The usual stuff really....
-
#45
by
sanman
on 15 Apr, 2010 11:31
-
They suspect that the 2 verniers which provide stability control didn't function properly, and this caused the upper stage to tumble out of control.
It's a little early to know, though.
-
#46
by
Satori
on 15 Apr, 2010 11:39
-
Next launch of GSLV with a Indian third stage will take place in one year.
-
#47
by
Zipi
on 15 Apr, 2010 11:50
-
-
#48
by
Zipi
on 15 Apr, 2010 13:20
-
Better launch video:
-
#49
by
WHAP
on 15 Apr, 2010 14:55
-
In the second video Zipi posted, did the director say "non ignition of the cryo" or was it just clipped? Do other upper stages use verniers for control? SpaceX, Atlas, Delta all seem to do fine with a single main engine.
-
#50
by
spacex
on 15 Apr, 2010 15:13
-
Developing a cryo engine is not an easy task. Hopefully they will identify the problems and the next launch will be successful.
-
#51
by
just-nick
on 15 Apr, 2010 15:44
-
Frustrating day for everyone in the Indian space program. I really admired their pluck to methodically develop these indigenous solutions.
Good luck...
Anyway, got a question. From what I know, the GSLV "stage 0" boosters burn longer than the "stage 1" core. How's that handled? Is it not a parallel-burn (like the Titan III/IV, not the Delta/Atlas)?
--Nick
-
#52
by
ugordan
on 15 Apr, 2010 15:57
-
From what I know, the GSLV "stage 0" boosters burn longer than the "stage 1" core. How's that handled? Is it not a parallel-burn (like the Titan III/IV, not the Delta/Atlas)?
Why would that pose a problem if the liquids have control authority?
-
#53
by
Dmitry_V_home
on 15 Apr, 2010 17:39
-
All it is very sad. But, I hope, Indians can quickly define and eliminate causes of accident.
-
#54
by
just-nick
on 15 Apr, 2010 18:01
-
From what I know, the GSLV "stage 0" boosters burn longer than the "stage 1" core. How's that handled? Is it not a parallel-burn (like the Titan III/IV, not the Delta/Atlas)?
Why would that pose a problem if the liquids have control authority?
It just is an unusual way of doing things, I guess.
You'd be pushing the big burned out husk of the solid stage 1 for a good extra minute and paying the mass/drag penalties for that.
--Nick
-
#55
by
tonthomas
on 15 Apr, 2010 19:32
-
-
#56
by
sanman
on 16 Apr, 2010 00:55
-
In watching the velocity numbers from the video, I didn't see the expected velocity increase that should have occurred following cryo engine ignition. So in my own humble opinion, I don't think that the cryo engine ignited.
Anyway, just my personal opinion.
-
#57
by
Art LeBrun
on 16 Apr, 2010 02:14
-
In watching the velocity numbers from the video, I didn't see the expected velocity increase that should have occurred following cryo engine ignition. So in my own humble opinion, I don't think that the cryo engine ignited.
Anyway, just my personal opinion.
Makes sense. Why would a failure of two verniers cause anything but a roll issue? I assume the engine gimbals in pitch and yaw. Anyway a shocking development for modern spaceflight.
-
#58
by
edkyle99
on 16 Apr, 2010 04:31
-
In watching the velocity numbers from the video, I didn't see the expected velocity increase that should have occurred following cryo engine ignition. So in my own humble opinion, I don't think that the cryo engine ignited.
Anyway, just my personal opinion.
Makes sense. Why would a failure of two verniers cause anything but a roll issue? I assume the engine gimbals in pitch and yaw. Anyway a shocking development for modern spaceflight.
I agree about the vernier control, etc. Seems likely a main propulsion failure at, or shortly after, the planned ignition time.
A rough start for India, but ISRO might find solace in the fact that five of the first seven Atlas/Centaur flights failed, that Europe's Ariane cryo stage suffered its fair share of failures (five I think) during the early days, that RL10 and Centaur and Long March and H-II(A) have continued to give occasional heartache even in recent years, and so on.
This stuff isn't easy.
- Ed Kyle
-
#59
by
avollhar
on 16 Apr, 2010 05:01
-
Verniers: could it be that the verniers also provide settling of cryo liquids for stage ignition? I think they were called ullage motors on the Saturn V.. if these fail to ignite, the turbopumps potentially run dry -> no stage ignition.
Just a wild thought..