-
#140
by
input~2
on 30 Sep, 2013 06:59
-
S/C separation was right on time
-
#141
by
owais.usmani
on 30 Sep, 2013 07:21
-
3rd & 4th burns completed
The burn durations are consistently running short; I calculate by around 1.9%.
EDIT: Looking at previous information logs, it looks like this is pretty consistent for Briz-M.
NROL-30 launch failed when the centaur engine shut down just 4 seconds early on final burn. Anybody explain to me how does Briz-M manages to successfully deploy its payloads despite running short on every burn?
-
#142
by
Stan Black
on 30 Sep, 2013 07:29
-
-
#143
by
Satori
on 30 Sep, 2013 08:42
-
-
#144
by
Satori
on 30 Sep, 2013 08:45
-
Exact launch time was 2138:09,969UTC.
Congratulations to ILS and Khrunichev, and welcome back Proton-M!!!
-
#145
by
Satori
on 30 Sep, 2013 08:46
-
-
#146
by
Satori
on 30 Sep, 2013 08:48
-
-
#147
by
woods170
on 30 Sep, 2013 09:43
-
3rd & 4th burns completed
The burn durations are consistently running short; I calculate by around 1.9%.
EDIT: Looking at previous information logs, it looks like this is pretty consistent for Briz-M.
NROL-30 launch failed when the centaur engine shut down just 4 seconds early on final burn. Anybody explain to me how does Briz-M manages to successfully deploy its payloads despite running short on every burn?
Perhaps because the Briz-M over-performs on every burn?
-
#148
by
Artyom.
on 30 Sep, 2013 10:28
-
My congratulations
!!!
-
#149
by
Artyom.
on 30 Sep, 2013 10:28
-
Roscosmos launch video
-
#150
by
DFSL
on 30 Sep, 2013 11:35
-
3rd & 4th burns completed
The burn durations are consistently running short; I calculate by around 1.9%.
EDIT: Looking at previous information logs, it looks like this is pretty consistent for Briz-M.
NROL-30 launch failed when the centaur engine shut down just 4 seconds early on final burn. Anybody explain to me how does Briz-M manages to successfully deploy its payloads despite running short on every burn?
Perhaps because the Briz-M over-performs on every burn?
I think it was Anik who said the upper stage recalculates the flight program as soon it separates from the rocket. Hence the slight differences. I can't find his relevant post using the forum's search engine...
-
#151
by
Stan Black
on 30 Sep, 2013 11:52
-
3rd & 4th burns completed
The burn durations are consistently running short; I calculate by around 1.9%.
EDIT: Looking at previous information logs, it looks like this is pretty consistent for Briz-M.
NROL-30 launch failed when the centaur engine shut down just 4 seconds early on final burn. Anybody explain to me how does Briz-M manages to successfully deploy its payloads despite running short on every burn?
Perhaps because the Briz-M over-performs on every burn?
I think it was Anik who said the upper stage recalculates the flight program as soon it separates from the rocket. Hence the slight differences. I can't find his relevant post using the forum's search engine...
More accurate data here
http://coopi.khrunichev.ru/download/2013/a2e/email/rus/a2e_e11.htm
-
#152
by
xm11
on 30 Sep, 2013 12:05
-
any know NORAD ID of astra 2e ?
-
#153
by
owais.usmani
on 30 Sep, 2013 12:11
-
3rd & 4th burns completed
The burn durations are consistently running short; I calculate by around 1.9%.
EDIT: Looking at previous information logs, it looks like this is pretty consistent for Briz-M.
NROL-30 launch failed when the centaur engine shut down just 4 seconds early on final burn. Anybody explain to me how does Briz-M manages to successfully deploy its payloads despite running short on every burn?
Perhaps because the Briz-M over-performs on every burn?
I think it was Anik who said the upper stage recalculates the flight program as soon it separates from the rocket. Hence the slight differences. I can't find his relevant post using the forum's search engine...
Yeah I know. He actually replied to my question in Anik-G1 thread:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31080.msg1039219#msg1039219I have no doubts on anik's authenticity. But why the Briz-M performance always turns out to be better than what Khrunichev guys anticipate on every mission?
I'm sure some people's heart would've missed a beat or two when they learn about a 21 second short burn!
-
#154
by
kevin-rf
on 30 Sep, 2013 12:19
-
I have no doubts on anik's authenticity. But why the Briz-M performance always turns out to be better than what Khrunichev guys anticipate on every mission?
Better to over perform, than plan a mission around this over performance and come up short on fuel.
-
#155
by
Adonis1
on 30 Sep, 2013 17:59
-
any know NORAD ID of astra 2e ?
2013-056A 39285 ASTRA 2E SES 2013-09-30
-
#156
by
input~2
on 30 Sep, 2013 19:06
-
Briz-M (2013-056B), after final burn, was in the following orbit:
3527 x 33961 km x 23.49° (epoch: Sept 30, 1229UTC)
-
#157
by
sdsds
on 30 Sep, 2013 20:01
-
More accurate data here
http://coopi.khrunichev.ru/download/2013/a2e/email/rus/a2e_e11.htm
This is GREAT -- thanks!
It seems to indicate the over-performance was not provided to the payload; its GTO ended up further from GEO than planned. In the attached screenshot, I think a better translation of the "Evaluation" column heading would be "Estimated" or "Measured", and a better translation of the "Rating" column header would be "Planned." Is that correct? In which case perigee was low by 50 km....
-
#158
by
Stan Black
on 30 Sep, 2013 20:07
-
-
#159
by
Danderman
on 30 Sep, 2013 20:11
-
We have no idea why the Briz-M stage could apparently not fire for the planned duration. Of course, it is also possible that the measurements of the engine firings were not that accurate.
Or, the Briz-M may have stopped firing for technical reasons.
!!!
