Slashdot Mirror
Unmanned Russian Soyuz Blows Up On Launch
adagioforstrings writes "CNN reports that a 300-tonne unmanned Soyuz-U launch vehicle exploded 29 seconds after take-off from Russia's Arctic Plesetsk cosmodrome late on Tuesday, its blazing debris showering onto the launchpad and its blastwave killing one and injuring eight others. A modified version of this same kind of rocket will be used to carry cosmonauts to the ISS later this month."
A terrible blow to the Russian program, which has been plagued by awful cost overruns and low operating capital.
(Tempting to insert a joke about how it's unfortunate that this wasn't Lance Bass' ship, but I'll let that ride.)
Without Soyuz craft the ISS can only be run at a maintenance level--i wonder how long before they'll be back in full operation, or if the Russians don't suspend their programs the way we do when we lose an orbiter b/c of an O-ring.
A modified version of this same kind of rocket will be used to carry cosmonauts to the ISS later this month
Lance Bass still wants to go, right?
Well THANK GOD Lance Bass is safe!
Or maybe you should lay off the conspiracy crack pipe, at least until some facts make an appearence.
i could be wrong, but NASA isn't generally known for their cutthroat international sabotage.
That's just ridiculous, NASA practically funds the RSA, they could commit sabotage just by cutting the money out. I don't think it was sabotage, but it most certainly wasn't sabotage by NASA.
Look folks - the simple fact is that space travel isn't for tourists yet! Remember the Challenger?!? Rockets blow up ALL THE TIME. We take great care to make sure it doesn't happen, but it does. I saw statistics back in the late 80's that stated a failure rate of something like 1 in 25 launches. Now - that is from a 12 year old memory, but it's in the ballpark.
Consider also that the Soyuz hasn't had any accidents (admittedly - that we know of) for like a decade. They have a pretty good safety record for launches. Their launch success record is to e admired!
Have you compiled your kernel today??
The rocket was essentially a giant controlled firecracker with a half-jillion complicated parts that all had to work just right. Just one little oversight, part failure, or unforeseen way for something to go wrong, and ka-BOOM! is the natural result. Look at rocketry's failure history. Rocket launch facilities spread things far out, shelter people in blockhouses, etc. in ways that would be considered crazy overkill at a munitions dump. They've learned the hard way.
Not to say that the investigation of a disaster this big shouldn't consider sabotage, but long history suggests a vastly more likely alternative.
It's easy to make up & spread cool- and credible-sounding stuff. Finding & checking hard facts is hard work.
"A modified version of this same kind of rocket will be used to carry cosmonauts to the ISS later this month."
Let's hope they modify it to not blow up next time. I'd bet those ACME rocket plans and mail order boxes wasn't the best approach for their space program after all. Perhaps we should cut off their access to the Cartoon Network until after the manned launch.
As it says here, the R7 family is "..the most often used and most reliable launch vehicle in history".
The unmanned versions are built to a lower spec, as the cargo isn't as important as human life. Manned soyuz boosters continue to be the safest way into orbit.
The problem is that you need go up 200 miles and at the same time accelerate to 25000 mph.
I've always said if NASA would just stop spending money on shuttle ops and spend it instead on developing air-breathing alternatives it would make so much sense. A scram-jet based orbiter would get it's oxidizer from the atmosphere so would have to carry half as much fuel (roughly speaking). The weight savings can go to payload and more robust structure.
Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/:
The lost Foton had been the 13th in a series launched since 1985
ah! a logical solution: it was the unlucky 13th craft, of course.