Slashdot Mirror
Russian Rocket Crashes In Siberia
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.
The GOP continues to gut funding for development of manned private space launch, but will continue to pour money into the SLS, AND having Russia do the manned launches. Fucking insane
The International Launch Services who operates those Proton rockets is a joint venture between a primary private Russian and an American (i think Lockheed Martin) partner - plus, those Proton rockets have a failure rate about 1 in 10 launches, which is good enough. So i think both the economic and the "patriotic" reasons you mention are covered enough right now. Of course more development is always good, but...
Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
Mexican satellite... Russian rockets... all made with parts from Taiwan!
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
In Soviet Russia, insurance company pays you!
Per Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P..., ten Proton-M launches have failed, the most recent before this being July 2013 and May 2014.The recent Western sanctions were not announced until March 2014. Doesn't seem possible that the sanctions and the Proton failures can be related.
Mexico has, er, "had" a satelite?? I found that surprising.
I was surprised too and wondered why they just didn't contract out to buy time on someone else's satellite since a billion dollars over the 15 year projected lifetime of the satellites will buy a lot of satellite time. Turns out it's for "National Security Needs", which I guess means they don't trust anyone else to provide service, though if the USA reneges on a deal to provide national security satellite services to them, Mexico has far bigger problems to worry about.
The NSA is going to intercept their data whether they have their own satellite or not -- it was bought from Boeing, so the NSA will certainly have full access to the Satellite during construction.
http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_...
Actually you'll find that the request for funding for Russian rockets comes from the current administration. Last time I checked, he wasn't a member of the GOP.
It's hypocritical to say you'll sanction Russia for issues in the Ukraine yet lobby congress for money to buy the rockets.
http://www.theblaze.com/storie...
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Why, they have 7 already, one fewer than Norway and and the same number as Denmark. They have the 15th largest GDP in the world, roughly the same as Australia's. The US has 10X the GDP and 200X the number of satellites so we spend a much higher percentage of GDP on satellites. The US has a sense of Mexico being a god awful poor 3rd world country mostly due to it's proximity. We unfavorably compare it directly to our own economy where as other countries further away have more of a 'must be better' mysterious sense.
Sure it's 66th in per capita GDP but that doesn't mean they as a nation they can't afford more modern technologies, particularly now that the cost is so low.
You're still full of shit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
As of May 2015, ten Proton-M launches have failed.
How is somehow a western conspiracy that these rockets have failed. What motivation would the US have in sabotaging a launch system that's still used by the ISS of which NASA spends over $3B supporting?
If you also would bother to read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... I think you'll find that although it's gotten better with the Proton K and Proton M, they still have a failure once in awhile. As you go back in time, you'll find that those beloved Protons had more failures than you'd probably like to admit. To be sure, the Atlas/Delta and Titan launch vehicles have also had their share of failures. It comes with the territory so drop the bullshit of it being
a conspiracy or sabotage and just admit that shit happens!
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
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!
Where's the obligatory dash-cam video?
Have gnu, will travel.
It goes against every instinct in my body to defend the GOP, but it's a bit unfair to attack the party for "block[ing] private space" when just below this article was another article about Congress making policy to suit the private space industry, mainly on the Republican side: