Initial analyzes of the incident indicate that the first occurred at the base of the missile, that is, in its first or second stage. Heavy damage was done to the launch site on Wallops Island
A launcher belonging to a private company that won a contract from NASA to launch supplies to the space station exploded tonight at the launch site on Wallops Island in Virginia. It seems that the part that exploded was the base of the missile, an Orbital Sciences' Aners model (that is, in its first or second stage). The missile's warhead and its payload managed to fly several meters but fell to the ground and caused a second explosion.
According to NASA television, no casualties were reported at the launch site, but it appears that heavy damage was caused to the launch vehicle. Universe Today's messenger to the Wallops launch site, Ken Cramer, will report later today from a press conference held by Orbital Science.
This is the first failure of a rocket within the commercial launch program funded by NASA. Enters has so far recorded five successful launches. The launch was initially planned for October 27, but was postponed a day after a boat entered the restricted marine area off the coast near the launch site.
The mission was the third of eight supply missions that Orbital Sciences is performing under the contract it signed with NASA. The Cygnus capsule, named by Orbital "SS Deke Slayton" after a deceased astronaut, carried 2,290 kg of cargo to the International Space Station.
Itay Nevo adds this morning on the Network B website that this is the fourth launch of an "Antress" missile, but the first in which the missile's upgraded engine was used. The spacecraft carried by "Cygnus" was supposed to bring about 2,300 kg of supplies, equipment and scientific experiments to the space station. It also carried a private research satellite that was destined for launch from the space station. This is the first time a private rocket has exploded on its way to the space station, since commercial launches there began about two years ago. The cause of the accident is still unclear.
Orbital Sciences is one of two companies that won a NASA contract to launch supplies to the space station. The second company is Elon Musk's spaceX, which developed the Dragon spaceship, which is intended for reuse. In addition to them, the space agency carried out a series of five ATV series cargo launches to the space station. This is of course in addition to the regular launch of Russian Progress cargo spaceships that serve the Russian launch stations and later the International Space Station every few months, One of which also exploded in August 2011.
A few weeks ago, NASA announced the winning companies in the tender to develop and send astronauts to the space station - SpaceX and Boeing.
This article is based on the reports of Ether Universe Today And of Nebo is with me. The knowledge site will continue and report on the developments.
9 תגובות
Miracles
You should add one more thing. A company that fails time and time again in developing technological products and it doesn't matter if it is spaceships or bicycle production will be seen as not serious and will lose its reputation and the economic results for it will be devastating. Reputation is also an attractive factor in terms of potential customers. It is not enough to think only about profits, but also and above all about reliability.
It should also not be forgotten that the production of spacecraft systems was done in the past by the large and private companies such as Boeing, McDonnell Douglas and others, even though in the previous decades the method was different. NASA as a government body worked through tenders. Mistakes are inevitable. In any technology, even if it is the most advanced, malfunctions may occur.
Eyal, here is the answer:
https://www.hayadan.org.il/kidron-interview-3010147
A government company, or a private company that is funded by the government. It's not a matter of ideology, these are needs. If they decided one way or another, it doesn't matter. It's a matter of management approach. A government company can be efficient, or with political appointments and a paralyzing committee. Or wasteful private management A problematic committee. The question of whether there is effective and professional supervision.
Agrees with the miracles and everything he wrote.
To the authors of the chair A. Ben Nar and Eyal I can only assume....that you have no idea in the technical field and in building new devices with all the problems that arise.
A. Ben Ner
Forgive me, but your comment is irrelevant and even offensive. There was no lack of accidents before privatization. And of course there is no shortage of accidents in Russia.
On the contrary - an accident is a very, very, expensive event for a private company.
Flying into this space is complicated, at the limit of existing technologies on several levels. There will always be accidents. You have to learn from them and improve.
And there is no need to express an opinion before investigating what happened.
To Eyal
After an investigative committee investigates and an inspection team examines and experts submit a report, a report will be found
The reason for the accident is as follows: Save money and use cheap components.
This is the necessary and inevitable result of privatization.
I don't understand how such a catastrophic failure occurs during launch, the missile must have passed very strict tests before launch, how did the engineers miss such a major failure that could cause such a disaster? Did you not check that all the screws are tightened? Didn't they check that there are no leaks? What mechanical failure can cause such a thing, which cannot be noticed before the launch?
(sorry if the question sounds a bit stupid)