Wallops launch in T-1hr!

ThirstyBarbarian said:

Has anyone heard whether the explosion resulted in the loss of Reid Wiseman's crab cakes?

Click to expand...

I think they may be over-cooked... and probably hard to find:

Tasty! Astronaut's Favorite Crab Cakes Headed for Space (Video)

https://www.space.com/27571-astronaut-crab-cakes-space-delivery.html

Winston said:

I think they may be over-cooked... and probably hard to find:

Tasty! Astronaut's Favorite Crab Cakes Headed for Space (Video)

https://www.space.com/27571-astronaut-crab-cakes-space-delivery.html

Click to expand...

Good job, Winston! I was wondering if anyone would know what I was talking about.

My wife seemed more upset about this failed launch than I would have expected, and if I tell her about the destroyed crab cakes, she's going to be inconsolable. She loves Maryland Style crab cakes, and whenever we are in that part of the country, that's all she eats. And all I eat is pulled pork. I hope there was no pulled pork on that rocket.

Did anyone zoom in on the video to see if there was a guy on the launch pad with his okole squeezing the rocket?

Apparently this was the first launch with a larger second stage motor, so that could explain the reduced liftoff velocity.

Mushtang said:

Did anyone zoom in on the video to see if there was a guy on the launch pad with his okole squeezing the rocket?

Click to expand...

LOL! It's an episode of Jackass gone horribly wrong!

I'm not sure I accept this theory, but I'm sure there were plenty of okoles that slammed shut once things went awry.

The flashes I'm seeing at peek appogee, way clear of the gantry. They preceive the larger explosion before it descends.

Hmmmmmm...

Antares AJ-26 engine fails during Stennis testing
May 22, 2014

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/05/antares-aj-26-engine-fails-stennis-testing/

Excerpt:

One of the AJ-26 engines set to launch with a future Antares rocket has failed during testing at the Stennis Space Center on Thursday. Sources claim the engine “exploded” on a Stand located in the E Complex at the famous rocket facility. The failure is currently under evaluation, although it may delay the next Antares launch that is tasked with lofting the the ORB-2 Cygnus to the International Space Station (ISS).

[snip]

It is not yet known which AJ-26 was being tested at Stennis on Thursday. However, L2 sources note the engine failed mid way through it firing, some claiming it actually exploded, during the test that occurred sometime around 7pm UTC.

Winston said:

Hmmmmmm...

Antares AJ-26 engine fails during Stennis testing
May 22, 2014

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/05/antares-aj-26-engine-fails-stennis-testing/

Excerpt:

One of the AJ-26 engines set to launch with a future Antares rocket has failed during testing at the Stennis Space Center on Thursday. Sources claim the engine “exploded” on a Stand located in the E Complex at the famous rocket facility. The failure is currently under evaluation, although it may delay the next Antares launch that is tasked with lofting the the ORB-2 Cygnus to the International Space Station (ISS).

[snip]

It is not yet known which AJ-26 was being tested at Stennis on Thursday. However, L2 sources note the engine failed mid way through it firing, some claiming it actually exploded, during the test that occurred sometime around 7pm UTC.

Click to expand...

Wow,,,
Now that is interesting...
I hate to ask,,
Were they using a known inferior product for budget concerns ????

Teddy

Some early video of the damage to the launch facilities:

https://wavy.com/2014/10/29/raw-video-chopper-10-flies-over-nasa-rocket-launch-debris/

-- Roger

ThirstyBarbarian said:

Has anyone heard whether the explosion resulted in the loss of Reid Wiseman's crab cakes?

Click to expand...

Don't know, but the case of toilet paper was toast. Gonna be tough up there for a while.

onebadhawk said:

Wow,,,
Now that is interesting...
I hate to ask,,
Were they using a known inferior product for budget concerns ????

Teddy

Click to expand...

More on that. Looks like they should have pushed up the implementation date of their "plan.":

Orbital Sciences had a plan to retire rocket engines before explosion

https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-nasa-explosion-folo-20141030-story.html

Excerpt:

Orbital contracted with Aerojet to buy 20 of the refurbished Russian engines, which are known as the AJ-26. Aerojet purchased dozens of the powerful engines from Russia in the 1990s.

Even after the reworking, the engines have repeatedly failed. In 2011, one of the engines caught fire during a test at the NASA Stennis Space Center in Mississippi. Executives later said that the 40-year-old metal had cracked, allowing kerosene fuel to leak.

And in May, another engine exploded during a test at Aerojet's facilities at Stennis. Orbital and Aerojet have not said what caused that failure.

This month, Aerojet told investors it had lost millions of dollars because of the failed test in May. It added that there was "no assurance that the company will not experience any further issues with one or more of the remaining 10 engines" that it was expected to deliver to Orbital.

About those engines:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NK-33

When the N-1 program was shut down, all work on the project was ordered destroyed. A bureaucrat instead took the engines, worth millions of dollars each, and stored them in a warehouse. Word of the engines eventually spread to America. Nearly thirty years after they were built, disbelieving rocket engineers were led to the warehouse. One of the engines was later taken to America, and the precise specification of the engine was demonstrated on a test stand.[6]

About 150 engines survived, and in the mid-1990s, Russia sold 36 engines to Aerojet General for $1.1 million each. This company also acquired a license for the production of new engines. Aerojet has modified and renamed the updated NK-33 to AJ26-58 and AJ26-62, and NK-43 to AJ26-59

"The engines that came in from the cold" documentary - fascinating stuff on the history of these engines

[video=youtube;TMbl_ofF3AM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMbl_ofF3AM[/video]

I know this strays slightly off topic, but could someone explain the difference between these AJ-26 engines and the ones that are used by Boeing Sea Launch?

cvanc said:

"The engines that came in from the cold" documentary - fascinating stuff on the history of these engines

Click to expand...

Yep, seen it. Great documentary. I think I even started a thread here about it.

Science Experiments Lost in Antares Rocket Explosion

https://www.space.com/27595-antares-rocket-explosion-science.html

"In total, Cygnus was carrying about 4,883 lbs. (2,215 kilograms) of cargo, with about 1,603 lbs. (727 kg) of that devoted to science."

So, a 3:1 ratio of "spam in a can" support to science payload.

"The Antares explosion destroyed the Arkyd 3 (A3) spacecraft, a small technology demonstration from the company Planetary Resources. A3 was designed as a precursor to the Arkyd 100 Series — a group of space probes that could be used to hunt for asteroids that might be mined for resources."

Mining asteroids... enough said. If it could be used for asteroid threat detection, another story.

"A fleet of 26 tiny satellites from San Francisco-based Planet Labs was destroyed during the explosion as well. After arriving at the space station, the CubeSats would have been deployed and used to observe Earth from space."

The most useful payload IMO, one that could have been designed to be launched with zero participation of a space station. Perhaps a "Flock 2" not even mentioned on their site (that I can find anyway):

https://www.planet.com/flock1/

Doesn't look too bad, really.

Oh, that'll buff right out!

Well, at least they won 'closest to the pad.'

Is that 'fireball recovery'?

chadrog said:

Doesn't look too bad, really.

Click to expand...

You're looking toward where the blast originated in that photo. Looking from the opposite direction, it looks much worse. For example, the other side of the building in the foreground is opened up as if by a can opener and the tall building - which is just to the right of what we see in the image - looks bad.

But, yeah, it doesn't look as bad as I had imagined it would be when I saw the explosion. I'm glad I knew that no one had been hurt when I first watched the video. If I'd have seen it live, I might have assumed that someone might have been hurt or killed.

See: https://wavy.com/2014/10/29/raw-video-chopper-10-flies-over-nasa-rocket-launch-debris/

-- Roger

ShopVac recovery.


Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum

I still say, if you watch the video in slow-mo, you'll see a series of small explosions just before the big bang at peak appogee.
It's like the motor(s) are breaking apart.

chuck5395 said:

I know this strays slightly off topic, but could someone explain the difference between these AJ-26 engines and the ones that are used by Boeing Sea Launch?

Click to expand...

SeaLaunch uses a Zenit variant. This, in turn, uses a first-stage engine that is a four-chamber version of the two-chamber engine that's on the first stage of Atlas Vs. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zenit_(rocket_family) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RD-170#RD-171

Aerojet is a few miles from my house, wonder if they got the day off...

wfcook said:

Well, at least they won 'closest to the pad.'

Is that 'fireball recovery'?

Click to expand...

Oh, that's bad Bill.

Is there a female up in the ISS?

And to rubbers burn black?

Just Thinkin....

BEC said:

SeaLaunch uses a Zenit variant. This, in turn, uses a first-stage engine that is a four-chamber version of the two-chamber engine that's on the first stage of Atlas Vs. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zenit_(rocket_family) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RD-170#RD-171

Click to expand...

Thanks Bernard.

chuck5395 said:

I know this strays slightly off topic, but could someone explain the difference between these AJ-26 engines and the ones that are used by Boeing Sea Launch?

Click to expand...

NK-33 = AJ-26 The NK-33 was designed, produced but never flown in the 60's for the ill fated Soviet N-1 moon rocket. Production was mothballed in 1975, and resurrected by Orbital Sciences for their Taurus LV. Orbital had Aerojet modify surplus NK-33 engines and these engines were renamed the AJ-26. These engines have been problematic and last month it was decided to replace them with the RD-193, a "simplified" version of single chamber RD-191 which is 1/2 of the Zenit's 2 chamber RD-180 with is 1/4 of the RD-170/171 4 chamber LOX/Kerosene motor used on the Energia. The RD-171 is the most powerful and most technologically advanced LOX/Kerosene motor in existence and the smaller derivatives are produced to missions that do not need the higher thrust of the RD-171.

Orbital originally wanted the RD-180 for the Antares however it is used as the first stage of the Atlas v and Sea Launch and by contract the supplier could not sell them to Orbital so they went the NK-33 aka AJ-26. The RD-191/193 is not sold to anyone in the US so it was selected by Orbital to replace the AJ-26.

With the current tension between Russia and the US, it is likely that all of the fabulous RD engines will be unavailable after the current delivery contracts are completed and will be replace by somewhat inferior American made engines.

The reason my technology statement is that the US stopped developing liquid engines after Apollo with the exception of the LOX/LH2 SSME engine which never lived up to the 5-mission lifetime specification. Meanwhile the Russian never stopped developing improved cycle LOX/Kerosene engines with higher thrust, specific impulse, lighter weight and longer durability that the F-1 used in Saturn. The RD-170/171 was tested and is rated for 20 flights however it is so cheap to manufacture that the Russians don't waste time and money to recover them.

https://www.astronautix.com/engines/nk33.htm

https://www.astronautix.com/engines/rd191.htm

https://www.astronautix.com/engines/rd180.htm

https://www.astronautix.com/engines/rd171.htm

Bob

Thanks Bob! I appreciate the time and effort you spent to put that together. It's fascinating stuff (at least to me anyway).

I'm not bashing the American motor manufacturers. They have to go where the money is and they simply were not funded to continue advanced LOX/Kerosene liquid rocket motor technology development for 40 years and that has created the current technology gap.

Bob

thx Bob for the interesting update.


Gesendet von meinem iPad mit Rocketry Forum