-
#20
by
input~2
on 23 May, 2019 06:49
-
9ifly thread title has been changed to:遥感三十三号卫星由长征四号丙自太原发射失败，卫星未入轨
"YG33 satellite launch by CZ-4C from Taiyuan failed, satellite did not reach orbit"
-
#21
by
input~2
on 23 May, 2019 10:08
-
-
#22
by
tehwkd
on 23 May, 2019 10:14
-
-
#23
by
input~2
on 23 May, 2019 10:22
-
The same source makes reference to a failure during the second ignition of the 3rd stage
-
#24
by
input~2
on 23 May, 2019 10:44
-
Launch code was presumably "05-64"
-
#25
by
anik
on 23 May, 2019 11:11
-
The same source makes reference to a failure during the second ignition of the 3rd stage
So it is practically the same reason which was with CZ-4C in August 2016. That rocket had serial number Y22, and there are missed numbers Y23 and Y24. So there can be the similar reason of failure (engine of third stage).
-
#26
by
Chris Bergin
on 23 May, 2019 11:23
-
Still absolutely nothing from Chinese State media?
-
#27
by
tehwkd
on 23 May, 2019 11:34
-
Still absolutely nothing from Chinese State media?
Nope. Only action left is to wait up to 48h and see if any TLE's show up, which it likely wont.
-
#28
by
input~2
on 23 May, 2019 12:26
-
Words on Chinese forums about debris recovered in Laos (which was planned for 2nd stage debris
according to NOTAM) would support an issue with the 3rd stage
-
#29
by
input~2
on 23 May, 2019 13:11
-
-
#30
by
otter
on 23 May, 2019 14:22
-
-
#31
by
Chris Bergin
on 23 May, 2019 14:40
-
Updated Rui's article to reflect. Special thanks to tehwkd for his very good twitter feed and passing on here.
-
#32
by
Liss
on 23 May, 2019 16:36
-
If this is not an entirely new "make/model" of Yaogan satellite, then...
This could be a second satellite of the same type as YG-29, a "next-generation" SAR reconnaissance satellite.
It also launched on a CZ-4C from TSLC, LC9, to a SSO (~615 km circ., 97.8 deg.).
Another option is perhaps a sixth in the YG-8 optical reconnaissance satellites (numbers 8, 15, 19, 22, and 27). These satellites have an alternate internal classification, Jianbing-9, or JB-9. The previous five have launched on CZ-4C's, from TSLC, LC9, to a different SSO (~1200 km circ., 100 deg.)
YG-29 launch thread here
YG-27 launch thread here
YG-27 type used payload shroud of 3.35 meters in diameter.
YG-29 used 3.80 meters as well as the failed GF-10 which was supposed to be the second bird of the YG-29 type.
YG-33 seems to have used 3.80 meters too and may be of the same unhappy family.
-
#33
by
tehwkd
on 24 May, 2019 02:23
-
-
#34
by
Galactic Penguin SST
on 24 May, 2019 02:53
-
If this is not an entirely new "make/model" of Yaogan satellite, then...
This could be a second satellite of the same type as YG-29, a "next-generation" SAR reconnaissance satellite.
It also launched on a CZ-4C from TSLC, LC9, to a SSO (~615 km circ., 97.8 deg.).
Another option is perhaps a sixth in the YG-8 optical reconnaissance satellites (numbers 8, 15, 19, 22, and 27). These satellites have an alternate internal classification, Jianbing-9, or JB-9. The previous five have launched on CZ-4C's, from TSLC, LC9, to a different SSO (~1200 km circ., 100 deg.)
YG-29 launch thread here
YG-27 launch thread here
YG-27 type used payload shroud of 3.35 meters in diameter.
YG-29 used 3.80 meters as well as the failed GF-10 which was supposed to be the second bird of the YG-29 type.
YG-33 seems to have used 3.80 meters too and may be of the same unhappy family.
Latest early quick-look rumors points to structural resonance problems between the 3rd stage and the payload - which the source indicates that "these usually pops up with larger payloads where low frequency resonance is big". Not sure if that's a mechanical integrity or a propellant sloshing problem, but it's interesting to see that both GF-10 and YG-33 were rumored/predicted as SAR satellites and that both launch failures were rumored to be at 3rd stage engine re-ignition.
-
#35
by
tehwkd
on 24 May, 2019 05:32
-
-
#36
by
tehwkd
on 24 May, 2019 05:47
-
-
#37
by
Steven Pietrobon
on 24 May, 2019 07:47
-
-
#38
by
tehwkd
on 24 May, 2019 11:50
-
-
#39
by
tehwkd
on 24 May, 2019 12:15
-