Russian Proton-M rocket crashes on takeoff (PHOTOS, VIDEO)

[ayevee8toryear 0]

http://rt.com/news/proton-m-rocket-takeoff-crash-514/

Quote

A Russian Proton-M rocket carrying three navigation satellites crashed soon after takeoff from Kazakhstan’s Baikonur Cosmodrome Tuesday morning.

Immediately after takeoff, the rocket swerved to one side, tried to correct itself, but instead veered in the opposite direction.

The rocket flew horizontally before plummeting back to the launch site, with its engines in full thrust.

The mid-air fire was followed by a ground explosion that was broadcast live across the country. Immediately after the crash fears of a possible toxic fuel leak surfaced. The outflow has not been confirmed yet, but the rocket carried over 600 tons of toxic propellants.

Ouch!

[airdvr 210]

At least they have a space program.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[BigBUG 0]

airdvr

At least they have a space program.

we HAD it.
now it is going to the end quite quickly.
9 failures in last 1.5 years.

before 2010 our space launch success rating was nearly equal to American one (difference was that we did not have human casualties for a long time, so it actually was better).
since then, it is going down like this Proton-M.

as a Ph.D and Univercity docent, I feel grief and anger seeing how our science and technology become replaced by middle-age religion and stupidity.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Actually, the funding has been diverted to the Corporate take-over of our defense program and left-wing social engineering spending. It's kind of hard to have money left over for things like science.

[billvon 3,070]

>Actually, the funding has been diverted to the Corporate take-over of our defense program

Isn't that the conservative holy grail? Private industry instead of government bureaucracies running things? You got your wish.

[Channman 2]

billvon

>Actually, the funding has been diverted to the Corporate take-over of our defense program

Isn't that the conservative holy grail? Private industry instead of government bureaucracies running things? You got your wish.

Well, there is SpaceX.

[billvon 3,070]

>Well, there is SpaceX.

And Armadillo, and Bigelow, and Scaled Composites. SpaceX and Scaled Composites are probably the two most likely contenders.

[jakee 1,563]

Gravitymaster

Actually, the funding has been diverted to the Corporate take-over of our defense program and left-wing social engineering spending. It's kind of hard to have money left over for things like science.

Our?

You know he's Russian, right?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[champu 1]

Yipes!

Sounds like they have an interesting set of range safety protocols allowing the vehicle to impact like that. Glad no one was hurt.

[DanG 1]

NASA will be launching the EFT-1 flight mission of the Orion vehicle next September. US government sponsored space exploration isn't dead, it's just way scaled back.

- Dan G

[turtlespeed 226]

ayevee8toryear

http://rt.com/news/proton-m-rocket-takeoff-crash-514/

Quote

A Russian Proton-M rocket carrying three navigation satellites crashed soon after takeoff from Kazakhstan’s Baikonur Cosmodrome Tuesday morning.

Immediately after takeoff, the rocket swerved to one side, tried to correct itself, but instead veered in the opposite direction.

The rocket flew horizontally before plummeting back to the launch site, with its engines in full thrust.

The mid-air fire was followed by a ground explosion that was broadcast live across the country. Immediately after the crash fears of a possible toxic fuel leak surfaced. The outflow has not been confirmed yet, but the rocket carried over 600 tons of toxic propellants.

Ouch!

Now if only N. Korea and Iran could do that when they test their Nukes.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[BigBUG 0]

As far I know, main thrusters technically could not be stopped for a 40 seconds after lift-off, to ensure that even unstable rocket go as far from launch pad as possible.

Maybe this is wrong information, but I remember it like this from some article.

[champu 1]

Watching the YouTube video, the vehicle had violated control law by about T+4 or T+5. That's a really difficult situation to be in, and it's a tough call to make. I suppose, though, Baikonur is in the middle of nowhere so you can write the pad off in your head and then think, "Well, it's only gonna get better from here."

[jakee 1,563]

champu

Sounds like they have an interesting set of range safety protocols allowing the vehicle to impact like that.

What can you really do about it?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[champu 1]

jakee

***Sounds like they have an interesting set of range safety protocols allowing the vehicle to impact like that.

What can you really do about it?

You can shut the main engines down and let it impact with less kenetic energy or you can send a self-destruct command. As I said a couple posts ago when the rocket wigs out 4-5 seconds off the pad it's a tough call because you're not going to get high enough for at least most of the fuel to burn up if you send a self-destruct command. I just thought it was strange to see the engines going all the way to when the vehicle started breaking up.

[jakee 1,563]

champu

******Sounds like they have an interesting set of range safety protocols allowing the vehicle to impact like that.

What can you really do about it?

You can shut the main engines down and let it impact with less kenetic energy or you can send a self-destruct command. As I said a couple posts ago when the rocket wigs out 4-5 seconds off the pad it's a tough call because you're not going to get high enough for at least most of the fuel to burn up if you send a self-destruct command. I just thought it was strange to see the engines going all the way to when the vehicle started breaking up.

In this case I wouldn't have thought the impact speed would make too much of a difference given the inevitable explosion, and any sort of self destruct might just rain debris and burning fuel over a wider area. Maybe.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[champu 1]

jakee

*********Sounds like they have an interesting set of range safety protocols allowing the vehicle to impact like that.

What can you really do about it?

You can shut the main engines down and let it impact with less kenetic energy or you can send a self-destruct command. As I said a couple posts ago when the rocket wigs out 4-5 seconds off the pad it's a tough call because you're not going to get high enough for at least most of the fuel to burn up if you send a self-destruct command. I just thought it was strange to see the engines going all the way to when the vehicle started breaking up.

In this case I wouldn't have thought the impact speed would make too much of a difference given the inevitable explosion, and any sort of self destruct might just rain debris and burning fuel over a wider area. Maybe.

Yeah, in the states we launch over water so a destruct command dumps the flaming debris into an ocean. In Baikonur I'm guessing that would just start that many more brush fires this time of year.

Once the rocket was clear of the pad, though, and it appeared it was going to land somewhere reasonably safe I would quit while I'm ahead and shut the engines down. Letting them continue to run after they are above the pointy end evokes images of the aftermath of Intelsat 708 for me.

This is all stupid Monday morning quarterbacking on my part, I'm glad no one got hurt, and I feel bad for the satellite engineers.