Launch News (FAILURE) Proton-M/Block-DM-03 launch with triple GLONASS-M, July 2, 2013

[Artlav]

But the comments on that video turned out to be mostly Russian with no KSP references.

Most of the comments are cursing the government (stolen all the money), the Putin (olympic games sucked everything), the church (rocket hit the celestial sphere), american jews (world government wants us to fail), the gays (... wtf?), and so on...

That was certainly the first failure of such sort for decades - such an off-the-pad carousel is usually the fate of new rockets and pioneering days.
And worst thing is - it's not some new block-D, it's the proton itself.

My guess is - someone on the assembly line tossed a piece of trash into the engine's plumbing.

My uncle, who worked on Baikonur until retirement a few year ago says that these days the people working there are "educationless order-following dumbbell-heads, who have no clue about the big idea".
So the extra fuel on that one launch, so the trash in the plumbing on the other launch, so the whatever on this launch.

 

[Cosmic Penguin]

Urgh, that's already quite far away from the pad, yet I still would not like to be there! :huh:

 

[boogabooga]

On TV Roskosmos website here:
http://tvroscosmos.ru/frm/kosmostv/vesti/2013/vesti020713.php

Contains the following when translated:

July 2, 2013 at the Baikonur Cosmodrome in missile launch vehicle (LV) "Proton-M" originated emergency.

On the ascent rocket by 17 seconds of its flight was an emergency engine shut off and the fall in the pH of the cosmodrome at about 2.5 km from the launch site.

Launch facility and run the calculation is not affected. According to preliminary data on the site of the crash victims and destructions.

Created and started to work the emergency committee headed by the Deputy Head of Roscosmos A.P.Lopatina.

Press Service of the Russian Federal Space Agency

Indeed it appears as if there was an engine problem.

 

[malisle]

How come it didn't self-destruct when the deviation was detected?

 

[DaveS]

How come it didn't self-destruct when the deviation was detected?

Russian launch vehicles do not use Range Safety Systems. Only method of flight termination is thrust termination. In the case of the Proton, FTS is inhibited for the first 45 seconds of flight so that the vehicle doesn't impact the pad.

 

[Cosmic Penguin]

How come it didn't self-destruct when the deviation was detected?

Russian rockets don't have self-destruct systems - they just shut down the engines. And in the case even that didn't happen - this is deliberate (during the first 40 seconds) in order for the rocket to clear the pad. Imagine toxic propellant raining down the pad after self-destructing this thing versus letting it fly away and contain the blast damage to a hundred meter diameter crater in the desert.

 

[Urwumpe]

Yes, the initial tilt in the wrong direction is pretty obviously a sudden loss of thrust.

 

[Spacethingy]

Urgh, that's already quite far away from the pad, yet I still would not like to be there! :huh:

Авария Протон 2 июля 2013

That was one hell of a big bang, even from 11 seconds / 3.6 kilometres-ish away. Roughly how much cash just became a fiery toxic crater there?

 

[garyw]

Yes, the initial tilt in the wrong direction is pretty obviously a sudden loss of thrust.

maybe... all engines are firing when it goes inverted through.

Could it be wind shear followed by overcompensation from the flight management system?

 

[boogabooga]

Was the payload not radioactive with atomic clocks?

:huh:

 

[Urwumpe]

maybe... all engines are firing when it goes inverted through.

Hard to tell by that, how much thrust every engine produces. Even when it has a stuck valve, it would still appear from outside as if it is running healthy. Only strong thrust oscillations can be seen by a flickering exhaust.

Could it be wind shear followed by overcompensation from the flight management system?

Would have been one hell of a wind shear in VERY low altitude. It made a rocket tilt quickly, and according to the law of the wall, you would then also have had hurricane strength winds at the surface at this point (and the smoke at the launch pad shows that there had been only minimal winds at the surface)

The rocket had been barely a kilometer high, when it failed.

The reaction of the control system was very strange, though - the rocket had been rolling rather quickly, as if it was in a roll program, but at the wrong pitch angle.

 

[Artlav]

Was the payload not radioactive with atomic clocks?

Nope, the word "atomic" only means that it works on nuclear level, not that there is radioactivity involved.

 

[MattBaker]

The reaction of the control system was very strange, though - the rocket had been rolling rather quickly, as if it was in a roll program, but at the wrong pitch angle.

Which would point to some weirdness in center of thrust&mass, wouldn't it?

 

[Urwumpe]

Which would point to some weirdness in center of thrust&mass, wouldn't it?

Not automatically, but yes, that is one possible option in the failure path.

 

[boogabooga]

Nope, the word "atomic" only means that it works on nuclear level, not that there is radioactivity involved.

Yes, but I thought some types used radioactive isotopes.

 

[N_Molson]

By the Probe, what's happened there ?!? That's a real disaster ! :blink:

Gimbal problem ? Guidance bug ? That almost remembers me the first flight of Ariane 5. :idk: Or worse, because it seems that the rocket is out of control on the 3 axis, we can even see it rolling at an insane rate at the top of the trajectory.

Roscosmos really didn't needed that one. I guess we are not going to see Proton flying for a long of time. That failure could be an argument to speed up Angara.

 

[Urwumpe]

Yes, but I thought some types used radioactive isotopes.

No, decay isn't a reliable clock. you use a special isotope, yes, but atomic clocks work by EM resonance. the clock ticks by producing an oscillating magnetic field near the resonance frequency and measure the signal that the atoms emit in reaction to it, which is then almost perfect.

There is also a relation between atomic clock and GPS frequencies, AFAIR.

 

[Scorpius]

Well, that was very "spectacular" launch... Seriously, that's a shame! :facepalm:

Another video with good view angle "Apocalypse in HD"

 

[n122vu]

Looking at the video linked on page 1. I realize the red exhaust is normal, but right from the start, as soon as it appears (0:33), it looks to be thrusting at an odd angle, as if something was shoved in the wrong direction. Looks as though it's possibly inducing unexpected roll that the FMS actually appears to be able to suppress for a few seconds. At around 0:36, the roll subsides but the rocket begins to pitch or yaw in the opposite direction of flight, suggesting whatever was causing the roll is still producing unexpected force but in a different direction.

That's how it appears to me. Am I seeing this wrong?

 

[Urwumpe]

Well, there is one important detail: The Proton rocket has only single gimbal TVC for its first stage engines. A missing or malfunctioning engine could easily result in an uncontrollable rocket.

Some German reading about the Proton:

http://www.bernd-leitenberger.de/proton.shtml


Interesting is also his own explanation of the brown smoke during normal launch: One engine is throttled down by a mixture ratio shift resulting in unburned N2O4 getting released, maybe for a faster initial pitch over. It is ALWAYS the same engine involved in all launches.