-
#160
by
Chris Bergin
on 16 May, 2015 07:45
-
Still no word from ILS.
But they have stopped updating....
-
#161
by
Appable
on 16 May, 2015 07:48
-
-
#162
by
Liss
on 16 May, 2015 07:56
-
Third stage propulsion system emergency shutdown at either 493 or 498 sec into flight.
Too early to made it to China as this day one year earlier.
-
#163
by
Galactic Penguin SST
on 16 May, 2015 08:21
-
Helicopter dispatched to investigate reports of debris falling south-east of Ulan-Ude close to the Mongolian border:
http://tass.ru/kosmos/1973065This one's a gonner I'm afraid....
-
#164
by
Chris Bergin
on 16 May, 2015 10:06
-
Here's the ILS Statement:
ILS DECLARES PROTON LAUNCH ANOMALY
BAIKONUR COSMODROME, Kazakhstan, May 16, 2015– Khrunichev and International Launch Services (ILS) regret to announce an anomaly during today's Proton mission with the Centenario satellite. The satellite was built for Mexican government’s Ministry of Communications and Transportation, the Secretaria de Comunicaciones y Transportes (SCT) by Boeing Satellite Systems International.
The Proton Breeze M rocket lifted off at 11:47 local time from the Baikonur Cosmodrome, carrying the Centenario satellite. Preliminary flight information indicates that the anomaly occurred during the operation of the third stage, approximately 490 seconds after liftoff.
A Russian State Commission has begun the process of determining the reasons for the anomaly. ILS will release details when data becomes available. In parallel with the State Commission, ILS will form its own Failure Review Oversight Board (FROB). The FROB will review the commission’s final report and corrective action plan, in accord with U.S. and Russian government export control regulations.
ILS remains committed to providing reliable, timely launch services for all its customers. To this end, ILS will work diligently with its partner Khrunichev to return Proton to flight as soon as possible
-
#165
by
deruch
on 16 May, 2015 10:36
-
Kind of ridiculous that the official ILS statement doesn't explicitly mention that the "anomaly" resulted in the loss of the vehicle+payload.
-
#166
by
Galactic Penguin SST
on 16 May, 2015 10:37
-
So 3rd stage eh? In the wake of finding metal debris in the 3rd stage that was to launch Express AM8 last month, anyone wanna bet on this causing this accident?
(as Antares shows, additional checks on debris does not always guarantee that any debris on the other rockets can be cleared off)
-
#167
by
Semmel
on 16 May, 2015 10:39
-
These last months seems to be especially unhappy for launches
Hope that does not continue.
-
#168
by
FinalFrontier
on 16 May, 2015 10:53
-
Yet another vehicle failure for Roscosmos/ILS and yet another failure originating in a third stage (and in BRIZ-M).
Not a good sign at all of the internal state of affairs. I hope with all my heart that they get this under control, figure out why there seem to be such lapses of quality control, and rectify them. If there is to be any chance of ongoing or future international cooperation for either LEO or BEO, there needs to be greater mission assurance than there currently seems to be.
No doubt these latest failures are going to have some in Congress asking serious questions again, but for me its clear:
Congress should seriously be considering any and all methods necessary to accelerate the return of US crew launch capability to US soil, as should the next POTUS
If that was not clear after the last 10 months of geopolitical nightmares it should be abundantly so now. One can only hope.
That being said, will be very interested to see what the failure investigation finds. Going to be interested to see if this failure has any commonalities with the third stage failure on progress 59, particularly regarding instrumentation units.
-
#169
by
Galactic Penguin SST
on 16 May, 2015 11:05
-
-
#170
by
FinalFrontier
on 16 May, 2015 11:06
-
So 3rd stage eh? In the wake of finding metal debris in the 3rd stage that was to launch Express AM8 last month, anyone wanna bet on this causing this accident?
(as Antares shows, additional checks on debris does not always guarantee that any debris on the other rockets can be cleared off)
Was it ever verified to any degree that FOD in the vehicle caused the turbo failure on the AJ26? Just curious because I am not sure they ever said (or that they will ever know/bother to know in that case)
-
#171
by
TrevorMonty
on 16 May, 2015 11:56
-
-
#172
by
Satori
on 16 May, 2015 12:36
-
Launch photos from Roscosmos facebook page...
-
#173
by
MarekCyzio
on 16 May, 2015 12:53
-
-
#174
by
input~2
on 16 May, 2015 13:00
-
This failure occurred 55 seconds earlier than last year's (490s vs 545s after T0), 160s after 3rd stage engine ignition
-
#175
by
Poole Amateur
on 16 May, 2015 13:06
-
First I would like to thank Steven and Chris for their pre launch coverage earlier today. Things first looked that all was not going to plan when they lost telemetry, even the first stage cutoff was not confirmed. It could just be a coincidence that telemetry failed as well, but one major malfunction is often the result of several smaller failures...
-
#176
by
alk3997
on 16 May, 2015 14:00
-
Here's a rhetorical question...If the telemetry failed 1 minute before the third stage problem, as suggested by the Sputnik News report and others, how would anyone know that a vernier (steering) engine failed?
All tracking would provide is that the booster's attitude, and therefore steering, started changing. There are lots of potential causes for the third stage steering to malfunction that don't involve a vernier engine failure. Without telemetry this is going to be a very difficult investigation.
Andy
-
#177
by
kevin-rf
on 16 May, 2015 14:41
-
Maybe the telemetry data indicated it was falling or failed. Also it would take time for the tracking data to show a deviation.
Heart goes out to them. This must be a devastating blow.
-
#178
by
alk3997
on 16 May, 2015 15:10
-
There will be lots of speculation and very little data to go by. It will be easy to blame a manufacturing defect or debris in a line (workmanship) problem without telemetry...
-
#179
by
edkyle99
on 16 May, 2015 15:34
-
There will be lots of speculation and very little data to go by. It will be easy to blame a manufacturing defect or debris in a line (workmanship) problem without telemetry...
Or the satellite, since this was the first flight of this type of satellite on this launch vehicle. The failure occurred 143 or more seconds after payload fairing jettison was supposed to occur.
Or it could be that the reported telemetry loss time and stage loss time are being misreport this early after the flight.
- Ed Kyle
Hope that does not continue.