Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Russian Rocket Crashes In Siberia

Posted by Soulskill on from the space-stuff-is-hard dept.

An anonymous reader writes: A Russian Proton-M rocket carrying a Mexican satellite broke down shortly after launch and crashed in Siberia. Russian space agency Roscosmos is investigating the incident, but the cause is not yet known. In the video, the rocket appeared to sputter and stop providing thrust when the third-stage engine unexpectedly switched off. Communications were lost with the rocket before that happened. This comes just a couple weeks after Russia experienced another high profile rocket failure when its cargo ship bound for the International Space Station failed to reach a high enough orbit and began spinning out of control. Russia's Proton family of rockets has been in use since the 1960s, though the current Proton-M incarnation was first flown in 2001.

3 of 96 comments (clear)

  1. Re:and yet, the GOP blocks private space. by prefec2 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    First, The russians use different rockets for human spaceflight and quality problems for the cargo rockets might come from sabotage or the Western emargo.

    And second, the GOP is not interested in space flight at all. They would be if you can kick the commies with it. Otherwise it is not necessary. If they would think positively about space flight, they would have funded NASA accordingly.

  2. Re:and yet, the GOP blocks private space. by Virtucon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sabotage huh? Any proof of that or are you just echoing what Russia Today says? Launching things into space isn't without risks and it knows no geopolitical boundaries.

    I think you'll also find that NASA's budget continually grows yet they're not flying shuttles, they still have the ISS (3+ Billion/yr) and they still
    have their other programs.

    Also, if you look at the administrations request for NASA they were funded above their 2015 budget. If the Executive Branch asks for X dollars and Congress funds them above X, your argument about "funded NASA accordingly" is full of shit. If you exclude ISS, NASA has $15B to play with.

    https://www.nasa.gov/sites/def...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Oh and the privatization of space launches was pushed for by the current administration. http://www.space.com/7835-moon...

    Get your facts straight next time please.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  3. Re:and yet, the GOP blocks private space. by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    LOL. First, All of America's gov. sats use American launchers. 2 launchers use Russian parts, of which 1 of them blew up several months ago. Secondly, SpaceX's F9 is SAFER, and MUCH CHEAPER than the Russian Rockets. In addition, within another year, they will be even cheaper again. Right now, SpaceX has over 1/2 of the commercial launch business that is available for the future.

    First of all: i did not mentioned specificaly USA (other than to inform you that an American company is partner with the Russian that operates the Russian Protons), but just "Western", because i wanted to avoid THIS...

    Also, i used the word "usually": USUALLY, *commercial* satelites are launched with Russian rockets nowdays because of economic reasons - something i find o.k. (note: i am Greek/European - we are "competitors" AND "partners" also!)

    About this "SpaceX has over 1/2 of the commercial launch business that is available for the future": FOR THE FUTURE...

    Not everything is "YOU/US" against "THEM" - you will be suprised if you learn in how many fields WE cooperate

    --
    Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!