India's Rocket Fails To Put Satellites In Right Orbit In Debut Launch 23
India's new rocket launched for the first time on Saturday night (Aug. 6) but failed to deliver its satellite payloads into their intended orbit due to a sensor issue. Space.com reports: The 112-foot-tall (34 meters) Small Satellite Launch Vehicle (SSLV) lifted off from Satish Dhawan Space Centre on India's southeastern coast on Saturday at 11:48 p.m. EDT (0348 GMT and 9:18 a.m. India Standard Time on Sunday, Aug. 7) with two satellites onboard. The rocket's three solid-fueled stages performed well, but its fourth and final stage, a liquid-fueled "velocity trimming module" (VTM), hit a snag: Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) officials reported a loss of data from the rocket and, just over five hours after liftoff, ISRO announced the mission had failed.
"The entire vehicle performance was very good" at the start, but ultimately left the two satellites in the wrong orbit, ISRO Chairman S. Somanath said in a video statement after the launch. "The satellites were placed in an elliptical orbit in place of a circular orbit." Instead of placing the satellites in a circular orbit 221 miles (356 kilometers) above Earth, the rocket left them in an orbit that ranged from 221 miles to as close as 47 miles (76 km). That orbit was not stable, and the satellites have "already come down, and they are not usable," Somanath said. ISRO officials said on Twitter that a sensor failure that was not detected in time to switch to a "salvage action" caused the orbit issue. An investigation into the failure is planned.
"The entire vehicle performance was very good" at the start, but ultimately left the two satellites in the wrong orbit, ISRO Chairman S. Somanath said in a video statement after the launch. "The satellites were placed in an elliptical orbit in place of a circular orbit." Instead of placing the satellites in a circular orbit 221 miles (356 kilometers) above Earth, the rocket left them in an orbit that ranged from 221 miles to as close as 47 miles (76 km). That orbit was not stable, and the satellites have "already come down, and they are not usable," Somanath said. ISRO officials said on Twitter that a sensor failure that was not detected in time to switch to a "salvage action" caused the orbit issue. An investigation into the failure is planned.
So How Accurate Are Their ICBM's? (Score:3)
Just curious.
Re:So How Accurate Are Their ICBM's? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:So How Accurate Are Their ICBM's? (Score:5, Funny)
Jokes aside, ISRO does a pretty good job on a very tight budget.
Re: So How Accurate Are Their ICBM's? (Score:3)
Their story about the whole rocket performing well sounds off though. Achieving apogee, but not perigee sounds a lot like the stage that was meant to circularise the orbit either didnâ(TM)t fire, or cut off early.
Re: (Score:2)
You're correct that apogee is the furthest from Earth and perigee is closest to Earth, but they both matter here.
Apogee was around 350km and perigee was 75km (I rounded). If the orbit was circular you'd have identical numbers, ideally 350km/350km. The perigee, closest it would get to Earth, is too close to Earth to work. Anything below 100km has too much air drag, although really 300km is about as low as you want to go if you plan to stay in orbit.
What you typically do is launch into an elliptical orbit lik
This is what happens (Score:5, Funny)
When you outsource your engineering and development to ...
oh.
Re: (Score:2)
When you outsource your engineering and development to ...
oh.
I'm sure they'll do the needful thing and reinstall the OS...
Re: This is what happens (Score:2)
Microsoft calling about your windows. Wait, wrong call center.
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe their best engineers become outsourcees and they are stuck with those who can't get outsourcee gigs.
Invest in water coolers. (Score:2)
All new things have issues and you work through them. I am confident they will make it work!
My recommendation is that India installs more water coolers to provide the proper venue to have the conversations that start and end in F* and have 8 digit losses in between.
Should have outsourced engineering to the USA (Score:2)
yeah
That's how it goes (Score:2)
Has any space program (national or private) produced a new orbital launch vehicle without some failures?
Re: (Score:2)
Has any space program (national or private) produced a new orbital launch vehicle without some failures?
The Saturn program was, I think, the only one that developed new vehicles with no failures (ten Saturn-1, nine Saturn 1B, thirteen Saturn-V).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I was about to say Apollo 1 was a bit of a failure, but that really wasn't the fault of the Saturn V.
Indeed. In fact, the launch vehicle (SA-204) flew the Apollo 5 [wikipedia.org] mission just under a year later.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. In fact, the launch vehicle (SA-204) flew the Apollo 5 [wikipedia.org] mission just under a year later.
I never knew that. That's really cool to learn that they were able to reuse it. (virtual) +1 informative!
Messaging is in the eyes of the reciever. (Score:2)
When a US based spacecraft fails: Well it is an advance technology, with many conditions to deal with, we will learn from this problem and make the next one better.
When India/China/Russian spacecraft fails: Whoah! look at those looser! They should just give up, and let US do it all. Because it is obviously just too hard for other countries.
While as a US Citizen, I do take pride in our Countries accomplishments, however we don't need to relish in other countries failures. Because a failed launch the countr
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that's accurate. What I've seen (on Slashdot, anyway) is more like
When a SpaceX spacecraft fails: Well it is an advanced technology, with many conditions to deal with, Elon will learn from this problem and make the next one better.
When any non-SpaceX spacecraft fails: Whoah! look at those losers! They should just give up, and let Elon do it all. Because it is obviously just too hard for anyone other than our Lord and Savior, Elon Musk!
Well maybe (Score:2)
they should have called offshore tech support for assistance.