-
#240 by seruriermarshal on 19 Jun, 2007 12:36
-
Quote
meiza - 19/6/2007 4:21 AM
Can you "pretend" a Centaur failure for secrecy reasons, it hurts LM/ULA business a lot. I don't buy it. (Or then DoD would have to compensate a lot for ULA taking the blame.)
Btw, don't take this as flamebait, but how many Atlas V launches have been done under ULA? And how has the manufacture and integration changed etc?
First , business not all , National security is importanter .
Second , DoD , NRO is better client , They can pay more for those Secret payloads than normal payloads .
:laugh: -
#241 by seruriermarshal on 19 Jun, 2007 12:38
-
Quote
MKremer - 19/6/2007 4:56 AM
I've heard those stories,
USA 53
-
#242 by yinzer on 19 Jun, 2007 20:25
-
It's not like there's much of a commercial Atlas/Delta business to protect, these days.
-
#243 by Danderman on 19 Jun, 2007 22:06
-
Quote
bombay - 18/6/2007 10:28 PM
QuoteMcDew - 15/6/2007 6:48 PM http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/nro06157.xml&headline=NRO%20Spacecraft%20In%20Wrong%20Orbit&channel=space Aviantion Week is reporting the Centaur malfunctioned and shut down prematurely resulting in the spacecraft placed in wrong orbit. The orbit parameters are classified.
Very ho-hum "launch failure" to say the least. I can't help but wonder if in fact a launch failure actually occured. Orbit parameters are classified, everything seemed fine through MECO-2 and SV separation, and then, whammo - wrong orbit. No mention of a detailed failure investigation, no mention of any cascading effect relative to RL-10 engines, no stand-downs, just some benign statements with no substance.OK, this RL-10 failure *should* cascade all through Delta and Atlas launch manifests, since both EELVs uses this engine.
-
#244 by edkyle99 on 19 Jun, 2007 23:46
-
Quote
Danderman - 19/6/2007 5:06 PM
Quotebombay - 18/6/2007 10:28 PM
QuoteMcDew - 15/6/2007 6:48 PM http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/nro06157.xml&headline=NRO%20Spacecraft%20In%20Wrong%20Orbit&channel=space Aviantion Week is reporting the Centaur malfunctioned and shut down prematurely resulting in the spacecraft placed in wrong orbit. The orbit parameters are classified.
Very ho-hum "launch failure" to say the least. I can't help but wonder if in fact a launch failure actually occured. Orbit parameters are classified, everything seemed fine through MECO-2 and SV separation, and then, whammo - wrong orbit. No mention of a detailed failure investigation, no mention of any cascading effect relative to RL-10 engines, no stand-downs, just some benign statements with no substance.OK, this RL-10 failure *should* cascade all through Delta and Atlas launch manifests, since both EELVs uses this engine.
Has it been reported as an "RL-10" failure anywhere? I've only seen references to this being a "Centaur malfunction", myself. There could have been a flight control error, or a pressurization problem, or a propellant depletion issue, or a stuck actuator, etc. and etc. Any number of things could have caused an early shutdown. (I haven't been able to put that action that looks like excessive "hunting" during the Centaur dog-leg maneuver out of my mind yet, for example.)
- Ed Kyle -
#245 by yinzer on 19 Jun, 2007 23:52
-
Hmm... wouldn't flying a suboptimal ascent trajectory lead to early shutdown due to propellant depletion and therefore no excess propellant to vent causing a very bright cloud to be visible over Iran?
-
#246 by bombay on 20 Jun, 2007 01:19
-
Quote
edkyle99 - 19/6/2007 6:46 PM
I don't think there's been any official word regarding the RL-10 or otherwise. Any mention on my part is based on pure speculation, which could be way off base.
Has it been reported as an "RL-10" failure anywhere? I've only seen references to this being a "Centaur malfunction", myself. There could have been a flight control error, or a pressurization problem, or a propellant depletion issue, or a stuck actuator, etc. and etc. Any number of things could have caused an early shutdown. (I haven't been able to put that action that looks like excessive "hunting" during the Centaur dog-leg maneuver out of my mind yet, for example.)
- Ed Kyle -
#247 by Propforce on 20 Jun, 2007 01:47
-
Quote
yinzer - 19/6/2007 4:52 PM
Hmm... wouldn't flying a suboptimal ascent trajectory lead to early shutdown due to propellant depletion and therefore no excess propellant to vent causing a very bright cloud to be visible over Iran?
First, you don't know it's a suboptimal trajectory.
Second, even if it is; there will still be enough propellant reserve to complete the mission. Atlas Prop guys would have make sure of that.
Third, I doubt Iran has that capability and, even if they have, do you think NRO gives a $hit?
Finally, did anyone report a "bright spark" during the engine 2nd burn? :laugh:
-
#248 by yinzer on 20 Jun, 2007 02:24
-
Sorry, I was unclear. Ed thinks that he saw excessive hunting during the second stage burn from the onboard video. This should certainly be noticeable to the launch vehicle, and one would expect the Centaur to burn longer to make up for it. In order for this to cause the payloads to end up in a lower orbit, the Centaur would have to run out of propellant.
We know the Centaur didn't run out of propellant, as it vented a bunch over Iran. Therefore this theory must be incorrect, or incomplete.
We know it did this because plenty of people saw the venting and took pictures of it, and then other people used those pictures to locate the NOSS birds over the next few days and figure out the magnitude of the underperformance. It looks like about a 30 m/s maneuver will be required to put the NOSS birds into their desired orbit, unless my math is horribly off. -
#249 by WHAP on 20 Jun, 2007 02:28
-
Quote
yinzer - 19/6/2007 8:24 PM
Has anyone seen these pictures? Any links?
We know it did this because plenty of people saw the venting and took pictures of it, and then other people used those pictures to locate the NOSS birds over the next few days and figure out the magnitude of the underperformance. It looks like about a 30 m/s maneuver will be required to put the NOSS birds into their desired orbit, unless my math is horribly off. -
#250 by yinzer on 20 Jun, 2007 02:32
-
Quote
WHAP - 19/6/2007 7:28 PM
Quoteyinzer - 19/6/2007 8:24 PM
Has anyone seen these pictures? Any links?
We know it did this because plenty of people saw the venting and took pictures of it, and then other people used those pictures to locate the NOSS birds over the next few days and figure out the magnitude of the underperformance. It looks like about a 30 m/s maneuver will be required to put the NOSS birds into their desired orbit, unless my math is horribly off.
There are on spaceweather.com.
Discussion is happening on SeeSat-L. -
#251 by Propforce on 20 Jun, 2007 02:46
-
Quote
yinzer - 19/6/2007 7:24 PM
Sorry, I was unclear. Ed thinks that he saw excessive hunting during the second stage burn from the onboard video. This should certainly be noticeable to the launch vehicle, and one would expect the Centaur to burn longer to make up for it. In order for this to cause the payloads to end up in a lower orbit, the Centaur would have to run out of propellant.
We know the Centaur didn't run out of propellant, as it vented a bunch over Iran. Therefore this theory must be incorrect, or incomplete.
We know it did this because plenty of people saw the venting and took pictures of it, and then other people used those pictures to locate the NOSS birds over the next few days and figure out the magnitude of the underperformance. It looks like about a 30 m/s maneuver will be required to put the NOSS birds into their desired orbit, unless my math is horribly off.
Thanks for the link. Those are nice pictures indeed.
On subsequent pictures, I saw a bright light after "venting", assuming it was engine continue firing after venting. So apparently these events occurred prior to engine shutdown. In this case, we don't know if Centaur run out of propellant or some sensor on the stage that caused engine to shutdown prematurely, or something went wrong with the engine itself.
The Atlas folks should be able to figure this out quickly from telemetry data. Whether they release this finding or not, is another question.
-
#252 by Antares on 20 Jun, 2007 03:21
-
LOL. New mission requirement: "Space vehicle shall not create noctilucent clouds over unfriendly territory."
-
#253 by kevin-rf on 20 Jun, 2007 03:50
-
Quote
Antares - 19/6/2007 11:21 PM
LOL. New mission requirement: "Space vehicle shall not create noctilucent clouds over unfriendly territory."
The russians where famous for doing that over south america during the 1980's leading to all sorts of bogus UFO sightings.
I remember a few years back watching a NRO centuar vent over the east coast. It was quite something to watch. I had forgotten about the launch and just happened to be outside when I noticed (you could not miss it if you looked south west) the cloud. The Centuar stage was also very visible as a seperate bright dot. For some reason I remember two clouds that moved across the sky. It was quite exciting to watch. My first reacton was to remember the launch and go check the net to see what had went wrong with the mission. Imagine my surprise when I looked at one of the other sites that tracks launches and they mentioned they had just vented the tanks. Go Centuar.
One interesting tidbit over in the ULA thread is Jim labeled it as a RL-10 issue :QuoteJim - 19/6/2007 11:03 AM
QuoteDexter - 18/6/2007 11:13 PM
This change over in talent seems to be having an effect on ULA wth all the problems to date
1. Cracked Delta 4 pad
2. Delta 2 pad crane breaks down - who is doing maintenance?
3. Damaged solar array on DAWN spacecraft.
4. Atlas V fails to put NRO satellites in correct orbit.
it is total BS to blame this on the formation of ULA.
1. The cracked pad is completely independent of this
2. A separate USAF contractor performs maintenance on the D-II pads
3. Not a Delta II tech but a spacecraft tech (even if it were, it is not due to ULA, since the same techs are there)
4. RL-10 problems are not ULA
Jim being a NASA ELV guy, I wonder if he has an inside leg on what went wrong... -
#254 by Propforce on 20 Jun, 2007 04:43
-
Quote
kevin-rf - 19/6/2007 8:50 PM
Jim being a NASA ELV guy, I wonder if he has an inside leg on what went wrong...
Why? You think NRO will tell NASA anything?
-
#255 by seruriermarshal on 20 Jun, 2007 05:05
-
Quote
Propforce - 19/6/2007 11:43 PM
Quotekevin-rf - 19/6/2007 8:50 PM
Jim being a NASA ELV guy, I wonder if he has an inside leg on what went wrong...
Why? You think NRO will tell NASA anything?
He must talk about ULA
:laugh: -
#256 by WHAP on 20 Jun, 2007 13:44
-
Quote
yinzer - 19/6/2007 8:32 PM
]
There are on spaceweather.com.
Discussion is happening on SeeSat-L.
Thanks for the links. Neat pictures. -
#257 by kevin-rf on 20 Jun, 2007 15:29
-
Quote
yinzer - 19/6/2007 9:24 PM
We know the Centaur didn't run out of propellant, as it vented a bunch over Iran. Therefore this theory must be incorrect, or incomplete.
Did it vent one tank or two? There is only one cloud in the pics from iran. I could swear I saw two vent events clouds when a centuar vented over the east coast a few years back.
Running out of LH or LOX does mean you still need to vent the residuals. One can run out before the other. Just odd, with no offical releases on what (if if) went wrong.
It could be like the Delta III failure (chamber breach), the Titan IV failure (mis programmed burn time), or the Delta IV Heavy success (just ran out of go juice).
If the birds end up in the typical orbit for such a bird I doubt a failure is a cover story to hide the birds. If the Birds do a Misty vanishing act... Well -
#258 by yinzer on 21 Jun, 2007 01:19
-
Quote
seruriermarshal - 20/6/2007 4:20 PM
Quotekevin-rf - 20/6/2007 10:29 AM
Did it vent one tank or two? There is only one cloud in the pics from iran. I could swear I saw two vent events clouds when a centuar vented over the east coast a few years back.
Running out of LH or LOX does mean you still need to vent the residuals. One can run out before the other. Just odd, with no offical releases on what (if if) went wrong.
It could be like the Delta III failure (chamber breach), the Titan IV failure (mis programmed burn time), or the Delta IV Heavy success (just ran out of go juice).
If the birds end up in the typical orbit for such a bird I doubt a failure is a cover story to hide the birds. If the Birds do a Misty vanishing act... Well
They said a Secret payload used to watch Iran and another used to watch China .
Not exactly. We're pretty sure this the latest NOSS flight. NOSS (Naval Ocean Surveillance System) uses satellite pairs in the same orbit to monitor the oceans, probably by listening for radio emissions, but no one really knows what else they might do. The "to watch Iran and China" bit is just because those are the countries currently in the news.
Amateur observers have already tracked these satellites and determined their orbit; it's a little lower than expected but not hugely so. If my back of the envelope math is correct, it looks like the Centaur shut down about three seconds early. This doesn't really narrow down what could have happened, but it indicates that nothing went too severely wrong. -
#259 by Chris Bergin on 21 Jun, 2007 20:15
-
Presser:
Launch Team Announces Initiation of Review Regarding Atlas V Centaur Upper Stage Event
LOS ANGELES AIR FORCE BASE, El Segundo, Calif. -- The Space and Missile Systems Center and the United Launch Alliance have initiated a post-launch review and assessment of the events leading up to and including the performance degradation in the Atlas V Centaur upper stage for mission NROL-30 on June 15. The performance degradation is measured against the preflight predicted values. This review process is standard procedure for any noted flight anomalies and is not intended to infer that the mission was a failure. The NRO is confident it can perform its mission as was stated in the joint media release of June 15.
Over the coming weeks the anomaly review team will study telemetry and other mission-related supporting data and will employ a systematic process to determine the cause or causes that led to the degraded performance of the rocket’s Centaur upper stage. We are confident that the team has the right resources and levels of experience that will lead to an identification of the root cause or causes and implementation of the appropriate corrective actions for future launches.
We will provide releasable updated information as it is received during the course of the review.
