Official NASA Thread

[Siam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yep!

One article said the rocket was 33 feet long - pretty tiny when compared with most of ours!

But hey, they have to start somewhere!

JAXA (the Japanese Space Program) has rockets as large as 186 ft with a payload of 18-34K lbs depending on which orbit to put the payload. The rocket that exploded was with a start up private company.

[Lionround]

I have heard that everything is smaller in Japan.

[Kilowatt3]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

JAXA (the Japanese Space Program) has rockets as large as 186 ft with a payload of 18-34K lbs depending on which orbit to put the payload. The rocket that exploded was with a start up private company.

Agreed.

My point was that the start-ups have to start somewhere.

[msgt/ret]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

An interesting video to watch. It almost looks like it stalled out and restarted too late. It was not a very big explosion compared to some I have seen, but if you look at the launch pad, it is very small so the rocket could not have packed that much fuel.

Saw that on the news last night, just after liftoff there is a small puff of flame just below the stabilizer fins on the left side. Just after that flame bursts out right above the motor and it loses thrust.

[ccw9mm]

Interesting information about the chronology of "space" flight ... the attempts, failures and successful launches.

• Spaceflight -- 1944-1950 -- starting with the first launch to reach space, in June of 1944 (V2 rocket).
  
• Spaceflight -- 1951-1956 @ WikiPedia, summaries based on data from NASA Spaceflight, Spaceflight Now, and Chronology of Space Launches @ Space.Skyrocket.de.
  
• Spaceflight -- 1957-present. Sputnik (from Russia) was in 1957. By August of 1959, the USA had successfully launched the first KH-1 series Corona reconnaissance satellite into orbit (minus the fact that the film was never retrieved from 9 of the 10 early KH-1 sats).

It's amazing, at least to me, how many attempts were made prior to 1957, though perhaps not as surprising to find out how many of the attempts were failures. Understandably, there was a the vast increase that occurred in the handful of succeeding years.

A brief summary of just the USA-based efforts from 1951-1957 (* based on the WikiPedia summary of data from various sources [see above]):

1951 -- 6 failures, 10 launches
1952 -- 4 failures, 26 launches
1953 -- 11 failures, 34 launches
1954 -- 5 failures, 11 launches
1955 -- 15 failures, 46 launches
1956 -- 13 failures, 68 launches
1957 -- 41 failures, 149 launches
----------------
106 failures, 344 launches

[Blackhawkgirl]

Years ago, I talked about NASA with groups of kids. I would show them this video compilation of unmanned rocket explosions. I saw 3 or 4 of these explosions in person.

[Blackhawkgirl]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Saw that on the news last night, just after liftoff there is a small puff of flame just below the stabilizer fins on the left side. Just after that flame bursts out right above the motor and it loses thrust.

Thanks for pointing that out, I see it! Seal leak? O-ring?

[msgt/ret]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Thanks for pointing that out, I see it! Seal leak? O-ring?

With the secondary flash just a bit higher and the loss of thrust my bet would be something failed in the fuel system.

[Stumpkiller]

Looked to be solid fueled - it lacked the secondary pFWHOOM! when the tanks rupture.

[Blackhawkgirl]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Looked to be solid fueled - it lacked the secondary pFWHOOM! when the tanks rupture.

Soooooo, o-ring then? O-rings, always the first suspect, but probably cannot blame the cold.

[Blackhawkgirl]

https://www.cnet.com/news/nasa-annou...er-sonic-boom/

[Blackhawkgirl]

I guess one of the boosters failed shortly after launch maybe 45 minutes ago. No video, but the crew is down after a "ballistic" re-entry somewhere in Kazakhstan. Contact has been made with them, they are alive and say they are well. Rescue teams ETA in about another hour+.

NASA Mission Control is currently on-line and providing live updates:

https://www.nasa.gov/nasalive

I hope they truly are well, and I want to see video!

[elmacgyver0]

I am pretty disgusted with our space effort (or lack of) these days.

[Siam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I am pretty disgusted with our space effort (or lack of) these days.

Is that more because of National Pride or because you beleive it is worth spending that money for something that is tangible?

[ccw9mm]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I guess one of the boosters failed shortly after launch maybe 45 minutes ago. No video, but the crew is down after a "ballistic" re-entry ...

Have always been impressed with Russia's designs that involve the capsule-on-top, ejection integrated, automated sending of failed booster stages, etc. Much safer, all things considered.

Must have been quite a ride. Beats the local roller coaster at the theme park, any day of the week.