Slashdot Mirror


Experimental Air Force Rocket Launch Fails (theverge.com)

schwit1 writes: An experimental Air Force rocket, dubbed Super Strypi, failed seconds after launch. The launch was part of the Air Force's Operationally Responsive Space (ORS)-4 mission which aims to test small alternative launch vehicles. The Verge reports: "A small, experimental rocket meant to carry 13 communication satellites into space for the Department of Defense failed just one minute after launching from Hawaii last night, according to the US Air Force. Video footage of the event shows the rocket spiraling out of control as it falls back down to Earth, leaving a crooked contrail in its wake. This was the first flight ever for this kind of vehicle — known as a Super Strypi rocket — as well as the first rocket launch attempt from the Hawaiian Islands."

16 of 60 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Why a experimental launch carried 13 satellites by rockout · · Score: 3, Informative

    "meant" to carry.

    I know no one RTFA, but at least RTFS

    --
    I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
  2. Another view... by bswarm · · Score: 2

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Shows a heck of a spin during accent.

    1. Re:Another view... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The rocket spins like that during the ascent for stability. When I saw the footage, I thought that it might not be spinning fast enough. This rocket did not have a guidance system. Have a look at a sounding rocket spinning during the ascent:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTfgOYb1Fn8

    2. Re:Another view... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, it literally says IN THE VIDEO HE LINKED that it's spin stabilized. For those who don't know, spinning something puts energy into an object without changing the trajectory. More energy means it's harder to change direction. That's why rifled bullets spin.

    3. Re:Another view... by bughunter · · Score: 2

      Yea, but this one started precessing wildly at about 0:48.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
  3. Re:Why a experimental launch carried 13 satellites by sexconker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Failure of the rocket that was "meant to carry 13 communication satellites into space" does not mean that it wasn't carry those 13 communication satellites.
    It means that it did not carry them into space.

    Whether or not it carried them at all is not stated.

  4. A bit of clarification by amacbride · · Score: 5, Informative

    The rocket was in fact carrying satellites -- a large primary payload (HawaiiSat-1), and a number of small CubeSats.

    http://www.hsfl.hawaii.edu/wor...

    The SuperStrypi is an evolved variant of a spin-stabilized 1960s sounding rocket, so the axial spin is expected, though the anomaly that ultimately doomed the mission was not!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Disclaimer: I helped port some code to run on the system board of one the CubeSats. Let's just say it was a disappointing afternoon....

    1. Re:A bit of clarification by khallow · · Score: 2

      Whats going more wrong more often per design? Is the US just always trying new, cheaper, faster build methods or have too many advance skills be lost in some sectors per decade? Are the existing fast acceleration profiles even that good for some very hand crafted, bespoke satellite?

      New rockets always have a high failure rate. If it's still failing often after the fifth or sixth launch, then it's a problem.

      Can the new emerging US private sector do intelligence payloads soon?

      They've been doing them since oh, 1986 or so. The current launch provider is the United Launch Alliance which operates the Atlas V and Delta IV rocket systems though I believe SpaceX may be close to launching some military payloads on Falcon 9.

    2. Re:A bit of clarification by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      Yes the single stage to orbit has an interesting history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      Some new attempts with balloon-launched and other methods :)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  5. Hmmmmm by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 2

    So they're saying that it....went off the rails?

    No need to get up, I'll see myself out.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  6. Re:Why a experimental launch carried 13 satellites by mwehle · · Score: 4, Funny

    Also left unstated was whether these would be African or European satellites.

    --
    Wir sind geboren, um frei zu sein - Rio Reiser
  7. Re:Why a experimental launch carried 13 satellites by roger10-4 · · Score: 2

    At least one satellite was lost. It was developed by the University of Hawaii @ Manoa (see this article).

  8. If at first you don't succeed... by EzInKy · · Score: 2

    ...try try again! It often takes many failures to achieve success. Edison experienced many disappointments before who chanced on a practical light bulb design.

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
  9. Re:Why a experimental launch carried 13 satellites by bughunter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Experimental rockets often carry payloads, in fact it's better if they do because a) they don't have to carry ballast in order to mimic operational weight and CG, and b) they can partially defray the costs of the development program and launch campaign.

    Not that they charge much, and the payloads are not often insured, so it's usually University and High School and NGO satellites or experiments. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the space was donated.

    --
    I can see the fnords!
  10. Re:Why a experimental launch carried 13 satellites by bughunter · · Score: 3, Informative

    Also, TFS should have specified it was the first *orbital* rocket launch from Hawaii.

    (I've launched suborbitals from Barking Sands myself... it's usually used to send missiles towards Kwajalein, either to test an ICBM vehicle, or to launch targets for missile defense tests.)

    --
    I can see the fnords!
  11. Re:/sigh by robi5 · · Score: 2

    This. It's not even more sensational if it fails after 'seconds' rather than in a minute, so this is probably a routine journo hyperbole, the problem is, as you say, that they write without considering the target audience (i.e. they don't give a shit about them).