another russian launch failure
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013...-russian-launch-from-pacific/?test=latestnews
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013...-russian-launch-from-pacific/?test=latestnews
Is it me or,does there seem to be a lot more failures these days?Maybe it's just the fact we are able to get the information so easily?One would think with technology being much more advanced that failures wouldn't be so numerous though.
North Korea or Iran?
The way you state it here it sounds like Sea Launch was at fault. It wasn't there problem the rocket malfunctioned and came down. Sea Launch's part was flawless.Not Dish related per se, but of interest. Feel free to move.
Looks like Dish will be sticking with ILS for some time. Sea Launch had a failure with the Intelsat 27 launch. Seems the main engine cut off 20 seconds after liftoff, leading the the whole unit crashing into the pacific. The current claim is that an automatic cutoff was sent due to following the wrong trajectory. Either way, looks like until Falcon 9 gets going more, ILS and the less-used-by-Dish ESA Ariane-5 and the practically-government-only American ULA Atlas/Delta will be the only games in town.
http://rt.com/news/satellite-rocket-pacific-ocean-222/
Youtube of the launch broadcast (up until it was terminated, no audio)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVCWokch2oQ
For that, there are videos of the Russian N1 moon rocket. There were four launches and four explosions. One of which destroyed the launch pad. They claim that it was the largest man-made non-nuclear explosion ever.What? No BIG fireball and burning debris?
Is it me or,does there seem to be a lot more failures these days?Maybe it's just the fact we are able to get the information so easily?One would think with technology being much more advanced that failures wouldn't be so numerous though.
There have been a fair amount of launch failures over the yeares because as the old saying ("it aint rocket science, ya know") infers that launching large rockets is an extremely difficult thing to do WITHOUT a failure, even here in the 21st Century. It is so difficult, there really should be MORE failures. Essentially the rocket engines are great big BOMBS and we ignite them, and we have to prevent the huge bomb from blowing up the payload. That aint easy. In fact, it is beyond the most difficult thing to do. There are other factors that make rocket launches very dicey, such as winds aloft, and more. That's why so many Shuttle launches were delayed or "scrubbed" not to mention several such delays to launch of communications satellites because conditions have to be JUST SO nearly perfect for a successful launch. This is why NASA and the private sector believe rocket technology just can't do the job of getting people into space for the future, both because of cost and how utterly a roll of the dice a rocket launch is. The problem is that it is still "rocket science" and not "a walk in the park," which has it own dangers .
The Russians lost many of their knowledgeable and experienced people to other industries and even other countries when it became hard or impossible to make a living. The Russian space program isn't what it used to be, and with the political meddling it ain't gonna get better any time soon.
Limited time offer