I forgot to add the Soyuz flights from Kourou! Updated table.
Year Russia US
2011 4/0/35 1/0/15
2012 1/1/29 0/1/13
2013 2/0/35 0/0/19
2014 1/2/37 1/0/23
2015 2/0/10 0/0/ 9
Failures/Partial Failures/Total
That gives a slightly better failure rate of 7.9% for Russia. The US is still the same at 3.2%.
If my Google-Fu is certain, both 2011 and 2014 U.S. failures came from Taurus XL and Antares vehicles--both Orbital/Orbital ATK vehicles, but from different causes. ULA and its competitors have a sparkling record thus far.
If you look at companies rather than countries, the best probably is ULA and MHI, then SpaceX and Arianespace, I would give a special mention to NPO Energomash, too. RSC Progress, RSC Energyia, KbKhA, Orbital ATK and CASC are probably a second pack. And Yuzhnoye and Khrunichev are at the bottom.
Something that doesn't seems to be discussed yet is the history of this Proton rocket (#935-54) - to which Andrey found out using the long serial numbers in the NK forum.
It turns out that its long serial number - 5116907974 - did show that it was completed in 2015 ("69" being the year number and "974" the block serial number - here Stan Black et al. can elaborate), BUT interestingly it directly follows the ill-fated Proton launching Express-AM4R 365 days ago, with its # being 5114877973 (despite the "48" showing it to be completed in 2013)!
This, combined with the serial number of the 3rd stage RD-0212 engine under scrutiny (5354855312) as shown in a (now retracted) news report from the Russian newspaper Izvestia (which correctly reported that the engine was completed in 2013), seems to point to the engines from both failures being from the same batch! 
Could this be yet another of spaceflight failures that slipped past the investigators the first time? (won't be surprised since even Orbital did that.....) 
Looking at the serial numbers there is a 974 missing but it might well be a phase I Proton-M ordered under contract №ЕП/1/03/З/2360/2014; at least two Proton-M are under order for the Military for that contract. The long serial numbers include both 535-series and 935-series rockets. So far all 935 are in sequence.
Протон-М 5114589735 53525 AMC14 2007 14.03.2008
Протон-М ФIII 93501 Экспресс-АМ44, 11.02.2009
Экспресс-МД1
Протон-М 6302939752 93502 Inmarsat-4F3 2008 18.08.2008
УЭХ РД-275
Протон-М 5114999793 53533 Astra-1M 2008/2 05.11.2008
Протон-М 5114999794 53534 ГЛОНАСС 39 2008/2 25.12.2008
Протон-М УЭХ 93503 Ciel-2 10.12.2008
Протон-М УЭХ 93504 Eutelsat-W2A 03.04.2009
Протон-М УЭХ 6302249815 93505 Protostar-2 2009 16.05.2009
Протон-М УЭХ 93506 Sirius-FM5 30.06.2009
Протон-М УЭХ 93507 Asiasat-5 11.08.2009
Протон-М УЭХ 93508 Nimiq-5 17.09.2009
Протон-М УЭХ 93509 Eutelsat-W7 24.11.2009
Протон-М УЭХ 93510 DTV-12 29.12.2009
Протон-М УЭХ 4923436721 93511 SES-1 2010 24.04.2010
Протон-М УЭХ 5113436722 93512 Badr-5 (Arabsat-5B) 2010 03.06.2010
Протон-М УЭХ 4923436723 93513 MSV-1 2010 14.11.2010
Протон-М ФIII 3436724 ? 93514 Echostar-14 2010 20.03.2010
Протон-М ФIII 5113436725 93515 Echostar-15 2010 10.07.2010
Протон-М ФIII 6305436726 93516 XM-5 2010/2 14.10.2010
Протон-М ФIII 5436727 ? 93517 KA-SAT 2010/2 26.12.2010
Протон-М ФIII 6305436728 93518 SES-3, Kazsat-2 2010/2 15.07.2011
Протон-М ФIII 4925436729 93519 Telstar-14R 2010/2 20.05.2011
Протон-М ФIII 6730 93520 Viasat-1 19.10.2011
6731 ?
Протон-М ФIII 6303146732 93521 Экспресс-АМ4 2011 17.08.2011
Протон-М ФIII 4923146733 93522 Quetzsat-1 2011 29.09.2011
Протон-М ФIII 6303146734 93523 Луч-5А, Amos-5 2011 11.12.2011
Протон-М ФIII 4923146735 93524 SES-4 (NSS-14) 2011 14.02.2012
Протон-М ФIII 5113146736 93525 Asiasat-7 2011 25.11.2011
Протон-М ФIII 6305146737 93526 Intelsat-23 2011/2 14.10.2012
Протон-М ФIII 4925146738 93527 Yahsat-1B 2011/2 23.04.2012
6739 ?
Протон-М ФIII 5113656740 93528 Intelsat-22 2012 25.03.2012
Протон-М ФIII 6303656741 93529 Nimiq-6 2012 17.05.2012
Протон-М ФIII 4923656742 93530 SES-5 (Sirius-5) 2012 09.07.2012
Протон-М ФIII 5113656743 93531 Telkom-3, Экспресс-МД2 2012 06.08.2012
Протон-М ФIII 6303656744 93532 Ямал-300К, Луч-5Б 2012 02.11.2012
Протон-М ФIII 4923656745 93533 Echostar-16 2012 20.11.2012
Протон-М ФIII 5115656746 93534 Ямал-402 2012/2 08.12.2012
Протон-М ФIII 6305656747 93535 Sirius-FM6 2012/2 25.10.2013
Протон-М ФIII 4925656748 93536 Satmex-8 2012/2 26.03.2013
Протон-М ФIII 5115656749 93537 Anik-G1 2012/2 15.04.2013
Протон-М ФIII 6305656750 93538 Eutelsat-W3D 2012/2 14.05.2013
Протон-М ФIII 4925656751 93539 Astra-2E 2012/2 29.09.2013
Протон-М 4925106752 53541 Глобус-1М 2011/2 11.11.2013
Протон-М 6305106753 53542 Космос-2473 2011/2 20.09.2011
Протон-М 5115106754 53543 ГЛОНАСС 2011/2 02.07.2013
Протон-М ФIII 5118877968 93540 SES-6 2013 03.06.2013
Протон-М ФIII 6308877969 93541 Экспресс-АМ5 2013 26.12.2013
Протон-М ФIII 4928877970 93542 Экспресс-АТ1, Экспресс-АТ2 2013 15.03.2014
Протон-М ФIII 5118877971 93543 Türksat-4A 2013 14.02.2014
Протон-М ФIII 4924877972 93544 Inmarsat-5F1 2013/2 08.12.2013
Протон-М ФIII 5114877973 93545 Экспресс-АМ4Р 2013/2 15.05.2014
7974 ?
Протон-М ФIII 6304287975 93546 Луч-5В, Kazsat-3 2014 28.04.2014
Протон-М ФIII 4924287976 93547 Космос-2501 2014 27.09.2014
Протон-М ФIII 5114287977 93548 Экспресс-АМ6 2014 21.10.2014
Протон-М ФIII 6304287978 93549 Astra-2G 2014 27.12.2014
Протон-М ФIII 4924287979 93550 Ямал-401 2014 15.12.2014
Протон-М ФIII 5118287980 93551 Inmarsat-5F2 2014/2 01.02.2015
Протон-М ФIII 6308287981 93552 Экспресс-АМ7 2014/2 18.03.2015
Протон-М ФIII 93553 Экспресс-АМ8 2015 ?
Протон-М ФIII 5116907974 93554 Mexsat-1 2015 16.05.2015
Протон-М 93555
Протон-М 93556
Протон-М 93557
Протон-М 93558
Протон-М 93559
Протон-М 93560
Протон-М 93561
Протон-М 93562
Протон-М 93563
Протон-М 93564
Протон-М 93565
Протон-М 93566
Протон-М 93567
Протон-М 93568
Протон-М 93569
Протон-М 93570
Протон-М 93571
Протон-М 93572
Протон-М 93573
Протон-М 93574
Протон-М 93575
Протон-М 93576
4925146738 / 93527
739 /
5113656740 / 93528
6303656741 / 93529
4923656742 / 93530
5113656743 / 93531
6303656744 / 93532
4923656745 / 93533
5115656746 / 93534
6305656747 / 93535
4925656748 / 93536
5115656749 / 93537
6305656750 / 93538
4925656751 / 93539
/
4925106752 / 53541
6305106753 / 53542
5115106754 / 53543
/
5118877968 / 93540
6308877969 / 93541
4928877970 / 93542
5118877971 / 93543
/
4924877972 / 93544
5114877973 / 93545
7974 /
6304287975 / 93546
4924287976 / 93547
5114287977 / 93548
6304287978 / 93549
4924287979 / 93550
5118287980 / 93551
6308287981 / 93552
/
/ 93553
/
5116907974 / 93554
Where have you found this list?
Something that doesn't seems to be discussed yet is the history of this Proton rocket (#935-54) - to which Andrey found out using the long serial numbers in the NK forum.
It turns out that its long serial number - 5116907974 - did show that it was completed in 2015 ("69" being the year number and "974" the block serial number - here Stan Black et al. can elaborate), BUT interestingly it directly follows the ill-fated Proton launching Express-AM4R 365 days ago, with its # being 5114877973 (despite the "48" showing it to be completed in 2013)!
We need to know the long serial numbers for the unflown rockets to make that assumption. Anyone find out the long serial number for the Ekspress-AM8 launcher?
Is there any word on recovery of wreckage?
http://www.federalspace.ru/21506/"Materials carefully analyzed by employees of the Operator space means of remote sensing ROSCOSMOS - as a result of a detailed study of the images signs of falling elements "Proton-M" on the surface of the Earth is not revealed. "
So they are saying no debris on the ground was spotted? Interesting how they used assets to check, so that's interesting and thus I would like to write it up.
Anyone able to read this and not use the pigeon English translation my browser provided, would be very helpful for me!
Source says Russian rocket crash caused by human errorhttp://tass.ru/en/russia/796547The results of the work of the commission investigating the causes of the Proton-M carrier rocket crash that occurred on May 16 will be reported to the government on Friday, May 29, a Russian space and industry source told TASS on Monday.
"The commission will complete its work and report the results to the Russian government on May 29," the source said.
According to him, the emergencies commission working at the Khrunichev Centre (Proton manufacturer) has exposed a number of violations in the carrier rocket production. "This is, undoubtedly, a human error. The fault occurred in the rocket manufacturing process," he said.
http://www.federalspace.ru/21506/
So they are saying no debris on the ground was spotted? Interesting how they used assets to check, so that's interesting and thus I would like to write it up.
Для обнаружения возможных последствий от падения осколков РН «Протон-М» 16 мая 2015 года РОСКОСМОС организовал мониторинг предполагаемого района падения всеми имеющимися космическими средствами наблюдения. Космическая съемка района проводилась 17, 18, 19, и 20 мая высокодетальными космическими аппаратами Ресурс-П №№ 1 и 2 и Канопус –В № 1. К проведению съемки привлекался также белорусский КА ДЗЗ – «БКА».
В период 17.05.2015 – 20.05.2015 выполнена космическая съемка района в Забайкальском крае (центральная точка с координатами: 50-41-36 сш, 110-26-36 вд). Всего выполнено 5 маршрутов съемки.
Материалы тщательно проанализированы сотрудниками Оператора космических средств ДЗЗ РОСКОСМОСа – в результате детального изучения полученных снимков признаков падения элементов РН «Протон-М» на поверхность Земли не выявлено.
Roscosmos organized the monitoring of expected debris area by all available space assets to detect aftermath of possible debris hits. Imaging was performed on 17, 18, 19 20 May by high resolution spacecraft Resource-P 1 and 2, Canopus-B 1 and also belarussian spacecraft D33 "BKA".
During 17.05.2015-20.05.2015 the trans Baikal area (center 50-41-36 N, 110-26-36 W) was imaged in 5 passes/strips. The images were thoroughly analyzed by D33 payload operators in ROSCOSMOS. After the detailed analysis no Proton-M debris hits evidence were found.
http://www.federalspace.ru/21506/
So they are saying no debris on the ground was spotted? Interesting how they used assets to check, so that's interesting and thus I would like to write it up.
Для обнаружения возможных последствий от падения осколков РН «Протон-М» 16 мая 2015 года РОСКОСМОС организовал мониторинг предполагаемого района падения всеми имеющимися космическими средствами наблюдения. Космическая съемка района проводилась 17, 18, 19, и 20 мая высокодетальными космическими аппаратами Ресурс-П №№ 1 и 2 и Канопус –В № 1. К проведению съемки привлекался также белорусский КА ДЗЗ – «БКА».
В период 17.05.2015 – 20.05.2015 выполнена космическая съемка района в Забайкальском крае (центральная точка с координатами: 50-41-36 сш, 110-26-36 вд). Всего выполнено 5 маршрутов съемки.
Материалы тщательно проанализированы сотрудниками Оператора космических средств ДЗЗ РОСКОСМОСа – в результате детального изучения полученных снимков признаков падения элементов РН «Протон-М» на поверхность Земли не выявлено.
Roscosmos organized the monitoring of expected debris area by all available space assets to detect aftermath of possible debris hits. Imaging was performed on 17, 18, 19 20 May by high resolution spacecraft Resource-P 1 and 2, Canopus-B 1 and also belarussian spacecraft D33 "BKA".
During 17.05.2015-20.05.2015 the trans Baikal area (center 50-41-36 N, 110-26-36 W) was imaged in 5 passes/strips. The images were thoroughly analyzed by D33 payload operators in ROSCOSMOS. After the detailed analysis no Proton-M debris hits evidence were found.
Thanks! That clears it up.....they didn't see any debris on the ground. Good news (and probably means the hardware was almost all destroyed during entry) - with the interesting angle being the use of several spacecraft to check the potential impact regions.
Source says Russian rocket crash caused by human error
http://tass.ru/en/russia/796547
[...]
According to him, the emergencies commission working at the Khrunichev Centre (Proton manufacturer) has exposed a number of violations in the carrier rocket production. "This is, undoubtedly, a human error. The fault occurred in the rocket manufacturing process," he said.
The problem is that this isn't the first serious set of manufacturing defects identified at this factory in very recent history. It must raise uncomfortable questions in certain circles about the culture and discipline of the management and workforce.
I understand that this was not intentional human error, but if and only if it was on purpose, let's just say the culprit could get arrested for this matter.
Possibly significant: The head of a Khrunichev subcontractor has been arrested on accusations of misappropriation of the equivalent of $2B meant to be used for construction and maintenance at Khrunichev. Some sources are pointing to this scandal as a contributory factor to several recent Proton or BRIZ failures.
Link to discussion forum
The problem is that this isn't the first serious set of manufacturing defects identified at this factory in very recent history. It must raise uncomfortable questions in certain circles about the culture and discipline of the management and workforce.
That would be like arresting seismologists for not predicting an earthquake. The only reason you get arrested is because their overlord who controls the so called justice apparatus, doesn't like you. I expect alot of barking and other public show off, followed by no actual improvement. The guys running this show don't care about actual launches to space, they only care about fighting each other in the zero-sum game about other's money which is politics.
If the next Russian launch fails too, which I think is scheduled to be the already over two months delayed spy sat "Kvarts" on a Soyuz launch June 5th, it would look really bad. Much is at stake for the Russian space organizations now.
The problem is that this isn't the first serious set of manufacturing defects identified at this factory in very recent history. It must raise uncomfortable questions in certain circles about the culture and discipline of the management and workforce.
That would be like arresting seismologists for not predicting an earthquake. The only reason you get arrested is because their overlord who controls the so called justice apparatus, doesn't like you. I expect alot of barking and other public show off, followed by no actual improvement. The guys running this show don't care about actual launches to space, they only care about fighting each other in the zero-sum game about other's money which is politics.
If the next Russian launch fails too, which I think is scheduled to be the already over two months delayed spy sat "Kvarts" on a Soyuz launch June 5th, it would look really bad. Much is at stake for the Russian space organizations now.
This isn't in any way new in the former Soviet Union. I recall there was a major scandal, never resolved on the Russian side, when it was became known that much of the early investment the USA sent to Russia for initial ISS development went to the building of elaborate dachas for various officials at Roscosmos and at Star City. I don't recall anyone being fired or arrested over those allegations, either.
But, you're right -- the Soviet system (and before that, the old Russian system, I'm sure) basically set up laws which made illegal things that most people found themselves being forced to do on a regular basis. This made everyone in the society a technical lawbreaker, and as such your freedom of movement and action was solely dependent on whether or not someone wanted you arrested -- for whatever reasons. Usually, purely personal reasons. This doesn't create a vigorous belief in the concept of justice, at least as we in the West would understand it.
Peter B. de Selding @pbdes 2m2 minutes ago
Roscosmos: May 16 Proton failure caused by degradation at high temp of 3rd stage engine turbopump. Also ID'd: lack of quality control.
https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/604334599112671232
The original press release is here:
http://www.roscosmos.ru/21511/Sounds like the 3rd stage vernier engine turbopump has problems with the inside material coatings at high temperatures that caused it to vibrate beyond its capabilities and the system was unable to recover the imbalance.
I wonder if it's the same failure as the one last year (although they blamed the vernier connection to the thrust frame on that one, which could have been a down-stream failure?).....
Peter B. de Selding @pbdes 2m2 minutes ago
Roscosmos: May 16 Proton failure caused by degradation at high temp of 3rd stage engine turbopump. Also ID'd: lack of quality control.
https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/604334599112671232
The original press release is here: http://www.roscosmos.ru/21511/
Sounds like the 3rd stage vernier engine turbopump has problems with the inside material coatings at high temperatures that caused it to vibrate beyond its capabilities and the system was unable to recover the imbalance.
I wonder if it's the same failure as the one last year (although they blamed the vernier connection to the thrust frame on that one, which could have been a down-stream failure?).....
Also the hardware related suggestions from the investigation committee are (as far as I could understand):
- Replacing the coating material inside the turbopump rotor shaft
- Revision of the techniques of balancing the shaft
- Re-designing the connections of fixing the vernier engine turbopump to the main engine thrust frame
Given that the investigation took just 2 weeks to come to this conclusion that sounds like the repeat of the 2014 accident, the QA problems must be pretty bad since the verniers isn't the most complex engine out there (even on the Proton!).
Were there any similar accidents like this in the West or anywhere else?
