posted 07-01-2013 10:16 PM               

A Russian Proton rocket went out of control and slammed into the steppes of Kazakhstan mere moments after launching from the Baikonur Cosmodrome on Monday night. The booster was carrying three navigation satellites on the ill-fated mission. Live video showed the Proton gyrating left and right as it ascending off the pad before going into a nose dive and plummeting into a massive fireball.

posted 07-02-2013 07:30 AM               

"There was an accident during the Proton-M launch. The rocket fell and exploded on the territory of the launch site," a spokesman for Russia's Federal Space Agency Roscosmos said.

There were no reported casualties, but officials said a cloud of poisonous smoke was generated by the rocket's burning fuel and could spread across the local area. An emergency evacuation of personnel at the site was underway, according to Russian media reports.

The reasons for the crash were not immediately clear, but Kazakhstan's Emergencies Ministry said a near instantaneous failure of the rocket's first-stage engine was to blame.

posted 07-02-2013 09:31 AM               

Since the emergency cutoff of the first stage engines is blocked during the first 42 seconds of the flight to ensure that the rocket clears the launch complex, the vehicle continued flying with its propulsion system firing practically until the impact on the ground.

posted 07-02-2013 11:43 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
Based on what Jim Oberg and other Russian space experts have written, the Proton and other Russian launchers do not have a range safety system.

---

posted 07-02-2013 09:00 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by 328KF:
The string of failures continues, yet the issues remain unresolved.

---

posted 07-02-2013 10:29 PM               

Tuesday's rocket failure was "another setback for Moscow's space program," RIA-Novosti stated, recalling a 2010 Proton-M rocket crash that destroyed three other satellites intended for the Russian GLONASS system, a global-positioning network like the GPS that guides U.S. drivers, hikers, golfers and fliers.

Another Proton-M failed in August 2011, an incident blamed on a control-system malfunction, and complications with the Briz engine on the rocket scrapped a Proton mission last summer. In December, a booster failed to lift the Proton to its planned satellite deployment position, requiring a second mission to put the satellite into the correct orbit, the Russian space agency Roskosmos reported at the time.

In July 2006, a Russian Dnepr rocket carrying 18 satellites, mostly for foreign clients including the United States and Italy, crashed a minute and a half after launch, destroying its entire payload and setting back Russia's commercial launch agenda for months.

posted 07-03-2013 06:43 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by 328KF:
The string of failures continues, yet the issues remain unresolved.

---

posted 07-03-2013 07:32 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by SpaceAngel:
How does this effect with the MLM (to be launch on the Proton Rocket) to the ISS at the end of this year?

---

posted 07-03-2013 02:24 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
As Jim points out, the failures involved different systems.

---

The rest of the paragraph you quoted from the Spaceflightnow article is:

Three other GLONASS satellites were lost in a botched launch in late 2010 due to a fuel miscalculation that prevented the vehicle from reaching orbit.

Add to this the Phobos-Grunt failure. A myriad of technical problems contributed to that loss, some of which were known before launch and not corrected, others which were not even understood as failure modes until after launch. This again points to a very concerning situation within the Russian space program.

Once this investigation is complete, there will no doubt be a technical reason for the accident, say, a failure of a main engine turbopump or a control system. But the checks and balances which must exist to certify each of these individual components for a rocket has to be examined too.

Anatoly Perminov was "blamed" and fired in April 2011 as the head of the space agency, and yet we are seeing continued mishaps. This Space Daily article states

"It's quite clear what the cause is," leading defence analyst Alexander Goltz told Moscow Echo radio station, commenting on Perminov's departure.

"The most recent failures of Roskosmos like the failed Glonass launch and much else shows the clear worsening of technological discipline in its units."

posted 07-03-2013 02:32 PM               

The Russians also happen to provide the only access for our astronauts to the International Space Station. This is a situation you have extended by underfunding NASA’s commercial crew program. Your miserly attitude has delayed this program by years while saving little by sending hundreds of millions to the Russians for crew services.

So, please get your heads out of your asses and fully fund the commercial crew program before all this ineptitude ends up affecting a Soyuz mission. We could end up losing access to a station we’ve spent $100 billion on — or something much, much worse.

If much, much worse happens, the American people are going to be looking for someone to blame. And it’s going to be you.

posted 07-03-2013 02:40 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by 328KF:
The modern way of looking at aerospace accidents and incidents to look at the larger systemic, organizational, and cultural issues rather than to focus solely on the technical aspects.

---

Granted, that's not a perfect comparison; fortunately, the U.S. hasn't a yet met with the same difficulties as the Russians are now experiencing.

So yes, Russia does has larger problem managing its space program, but it is too early to suggest that this specific failure falls into this category.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 328KF:
Doug Messier over at Parabolicarc.com has posted an "open letter" to the U.S. Congress expressing his concern over these failures and their potential impact on ISS.

---

posted 07-03-2013 03:08 PM               

The accident effectively guts the nation`s space program. This is why:

• The most dependable launch vehicles, the Delta rockets, are now grounded indefinitely.
  
• The space shuttle system has been on hold since the Challenger loss.
  
• The Titan rockets are unusable, after similar accidents with each of the systems in the past three months.

Remaining in the nation's launch fleet are three expendable Delta rockets, six Titan rockets and three reusable space shuttles, but none are available until investigations are completed, crippling America's space effort for civilian and military uses.

NASA leadership changed, the culture of the organization changed, and went on to achieve great things. Unfortunately as often happens in complex organizations, NASA allowed what is known as a "drift toward failure" again leading up to the Columbia accident.

That is what I see happening here... Russia is having it's time "in the barrel" and can't seem to get out of it. The drift toward failure has not reversed toward success. The rate of failure seems to be trending in the wrong direction.

I agree that Doug's angle seems to be opportunistic cheerleading for commercial crew, but he is making a valid point that if we were to have American astronauts aboard a Soyuz when a failure occurs, there is going to be a lot of finger pointing and heads rolling.

posted 07-04-2013 08:31 AM               

"The investigative department of the Russian Investigative Committee at the Baikonur complex has opened a criminal case on this incident over evidence of a crime, put forward in the Russian Criminal Code Article 216 Part 1. The Baikonur prosecutor's office is overseeing the investigation," the statement said.

The Baikonur prosecutor's office is checking whether the law regulating preparations for launches and launches of rocket and space equipment was followed, at the order of the Russian Prosecutor General's Office, the statement said.

posted 07-04-2013 08:57 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by 328KF:
In the spring of 1986, NASA was having an eerily similar series of failures which essentially shut down U.S. access to space.

---

1. 1986 was not "NASA's" problem, they was separate incidents unrelated and there was no organizational issue that interlinked the accidents.
   
   "There was a lot of concern in those days over what was perceived to be "NASA's problem," not Delta's or Titan's or the shuttle's problem" That was only by clueless people who thought NASA launched everything.

2. Same go for now. These are unrelated issues. Totally different organizations involved with each incident. Different contractors and different oversight groups. The Roskosmos is not even equivalent to NASA, they just funnel money and don't have an engineering organization.

quote:

---

Now five failures in 2 1/2 years is indicative of a larger problem in the organization...

---

posted 07-04-2013 10:10 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jim Behling:
That was only by clueless people who thought NASA launched everything.

---

I get that different organizations within the Russian space program are responsible for the individual failures, but to me that is more troubling than if the problems were isolated to a specific segment of the program.

This is exactly why I am less concerned with the "nuts and bolts" of the losses than I am of the human failures which led to them. Not at all looking to blame anyone (that seems to be the Russian way... blame, fire, then move on). That does not work and has not worked for them. They tried that and we still have this happen.

posted 07-04-2013 10:48 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jasonelam:
Along the same lines, do the Chinese not put Range Safety devices in their rockets?

---

posted 07-04-2013 10:57 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by SpaceAholic:
A criteria for initiation includes a threat to populous areas but it is not the only reason.

---

posted 07-09-2013 08:22 AM               

Update on Russian Federal Proton GLONASS Mission Failure

The Proton Launch System carrying the Russian Federal GLONASS mission on July 2, 2013 from Launch Pad 24 failed, resulting in the integrated launch vehicle falling back to earth a short distance from the launch pad.

The following is a status update on several items:

Personnel:
Our number one priority at ILS is safety, and we are pleased to report that all personnel associated with the Astra 2E campaign were a safe distance away at the ILS safety area, and are all safe. Additionally, we have been told that there were no injuries or casualties to Russian or Kazakh personnel.

Astra 2E Campaign Status:
The Astra 2E spacecraft is safe and has been configured for short term storage. The spacecraft has not been fueled. The majority of the team is leaving Baikonur on 5 July 13 and will return after the Russian State Commission and ILS FROB complete their work on root cause and corrective actions.

Launch Pad facilities:
The impact area was a far enough distance from LP24 and LP39 and we understand that neither launch pads were damaged.

Russian Launch Investigation:
The Russian State Commission has been established and will be investigating the potential causes of the failure. Flight and Ground Telemetry was transferred to Moscow and is being reviewed by subject matter experts. As this mission failed very early in flight, the investigation is concentrating on the pre-launch sequence and early flight telemetry data. There are many rumors and much speculation on the internet and through other sources, and you may have your own thoughts and questions as well. The Russian State Commission will complete their work and release their findings in due time.

ILS FROB
Since the Russian State Commission is still in progress, we cannot reliably estimate the timing of the FROB, but based on experience, we estimate that it would not start until late July at the earliest.

Return to Flight and Proton Manifest:
The schedule for the return to flight and subsequent missions will be determined once the Russian State Commission and ILS FROB completes their efforts and the required corrective actions have been implemented.

ILS will provide regular updates as new information develops.

posted 07-10-2013 01:12 PM               

...investigators sifting through the wreckage of the doomed rocket had found critical angular velocity sensors, DUS, installed upside down. Each of those sensors had an arrow that was suppose to point toward the top of the vehicle, however multiple sensors on the failed rocket were pointing downward instead. As a result, the flight control system was receiving wrong information about the position of the rocket and tried to "correct" it, causing the vehicle to swing wildly and, ultimately, crash... It appeared that no visual control of the faulty installation had been conducted, while electrical checks had not detected the problem since all circuits had been working correctly.

posted 07-19-2013 04:47 PM               

The mistake affected three of six yaw angular velocity sensors on the unmanned rocket, said deputy head of Roscosmos, Alexander Lopatin, citing a state commission’s investigation of the crash.

The mistake could have been the fault of either the worker who installed the sensors or the engineer who drew up the construction blueprints, Lopatin said at a press conference.

“Installing these devices is complicated and awkward work,” Lopatin said.

The wrongly installed sensors bore the trace of being forced into place, he added.

There is no provision for spotting such a mistake in current pre-launch procedures, Lopatin said. The commission is drafting a set of measures to rectify the situation, including possible filming of sensor installation procedures for pre-launch review.

posted 08-07-2013 09:16 AM               

The inter-departmental commission confirmed that the failure of three angular rate sensors had provoked the crash of a Proton-M rocket, deputy head of the Russian Federal Space Agency Alexander Lopatin said on Monday.

The commission found out that the sensors had been installed wrong (with 180 degrees turn). "The testing proved this," he noted.

"No failure of process discipline has been reported," Lopatin stressed.

The commission instructed the maker to change the design of angular rate sensors for rockets in order to rule out a possibility of wrong installation. The commission also stressed to equip sites of the rocket assembly, photo- and video recording, Lopatin said.

Sensors' makers do not recognize their guilty, he said, adding, "No violations have been revealed when sensors are installed. The work is practically over. Totally, six rockets have been checked."

Till the yearend the Russian Federal Space Agency hopes to make four or five launches of a Proton rocket. The first launch with a foreign satellite is planning to be held in September.

posted 08-08-2013 02:09 AM               

The commission found out that the sensors had been installed wrong (with 180 degrees turn). "The testing proved this," he noted.

"No failure of process discipline has been reported," Lopatin stressed.

posted 08-08-2013 12:51 PM               

I'll give them the benefit of the translation maybe being a little off, but to suggest that this was an isolated incident and a simple case of faulty installation is oversimplistic.

What about their inspection and testing? If testing post-crash can prove this was the cause, then proper pre-flight testing should have prevented it. I'm also curious about the proposed camera installations and the assembly points. Is this going to be used for quality control prior to launch or for the blame game following an accident?