Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Botany

(70,449 posts)
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 05:19 PM Oct 2014

Washington Post; Antares rocket explosion: The question of using decades-old Soviet engines

The tale of the engines that propelled the Antares rocket, which exploded in a spectacular ball of flame in Virginia Tuesday night, begins four decades ago, thousands of miles away, in the land of communism and Sputnik. There, in the Soviet Union, rocket scientists conceived and built dozens of rocket engines meant to power Russian astronauts into the cosmos. But it didn’t work out that way.

Instead, all four launches of the mighty N1 Soviet rocket, which used an earlier iteration of the first-stage engines used in Thursday’s launch, failed between 1969 and 1972. And as the Soviet Union abandoned the idea of putting cosmonauts on the moon, those engines languished in Russia “without a purpose,” reported Space Lift Now.

That was until they were snapped up by Dulles-based Orbital Sciences, which built the rocket that exploded. It uses two modified versions of those Russian engines to propel missions to the International Space Station, according to the company’s user’s guide. To be clear, investigators say they do not know what caused Tuesday’s explosion, which destroyed hundreds of millions of dollars worth of equipment. But some observers are questioning those Soviet-era engines.

snip

Elon Musk, the chief executive of Orbital’s competitor SpaceX, has long warned against using such decades-old technology. Calling it one of the “pretty silly things going on in the market,” he told Wired last year some aerospace firms rely on parts “developed in the 1960s” rather than “better technology.” He called out Orbital Sciences in particular. It “has a contract to resupply the International Space Station, and their rocket honestly sounds like the punch line to a joke,” he said. “It uses Russian rocket engines that were made in the ’60s. I don’t mean their design is from the ’60s — I mean they start with engines that were literally made in the ’60s and, like, packed away in Siberia somewhere.”

**********
outsourcing ..... what could go wrong?

10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Washington Post; Antares rocket explosion: The question of using decades-old Soviet engines (Original Post) Botany Oct 2014 OP
The blind hand of the market upaloopa Oct 2014 #1
What a company load of dumbasses. Old rocket engines? What could go wrong!? Dont call me Shirley Oct 2014 #2
That shows how stupid the gubmint is.... louis-t Oct 2014 #3
I heard differently on NPR. Darb Oct 2014 #4
My Sis in law sent me the story and she works for NASA Botany Oct 2014 #6
Aerojet provided the refurbished engines to Orbital; the WP article doesn't provide that important detail Neurotica Oct 2014 #7
refurbished is just another way of saying old Botany Oct 2014 #9
*Russian Official in Moscow* Xolodno Oct 2014 #5
Nice documentary on those engines FLPanhandle Oct 2014 #8
Well, a brand new shiny Virgin Gallactica rocket motor blew up today daleo Oct 2014 #10

Dont call me Shirley

(10,998 posts)
2. What a company load of dumbasses. Old rocket engines? What could go wrong!?
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 05:34 PM
Oct 2014

Fire the person/people who awarded orbital the contract.

louis-t

(23,273 posts)
3. That shows how stupid the gubmint is....
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 06:09 PM
Oct 2014

What? Really? You mean a private company actually tried to build a rocket on the cheap so they could make a profit? The Dickens, you say!

 

Darb

(2,807 posts)
4. I heard differently on NPR.
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 06:49 PM
Oct 2014

NPR report did say that the engines were old and refurbished, but that they had come from AeroJet in Sacramento, CA.

Just saying.

Neurotica

(609 posts)
7. Aerojet provided the refurbished engines to Orbital; the WP article doesn't provide that important detail
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 07:41 PM
Oct 2014

although you can find it in many other articles on the launch failure.

Keep in mind that the cause is not yet known; everything is speculation at this point. That's why Failure Review Boards are convened--to determine the facts and the cause (and sometimes make recommendations for future courses of action/fixes).

Botany

(70,449 posts)
9. refurbished is just another way of saying old
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 07:50 PM
Oct 2014

Those engines were 40+ years old and God only knows what could have
gone wrong with them over time.

Xolodno

(6,384 posts)
5. *Russian Official in Moscow*
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 07:24 PM
Oct 2014

RFSA guy: You want to buy that old shit we haven't had a chance to recycle yet? Why?

Orbital rep: We want to use the rockets to resupply the ISS.

RFSA guy: What the Fu......???????? Riiiiigggghhhttt!!!! Ok, pick it up the trash....er...I mean museum pieces.....er...I mean rockets when your ready.

Orbital rep: Thanks! *Leaves, and closes door behind him*

RFSA guy: What a дурак

*picks up phone*

RFSA guy: Hello...yeah....have one of our birds ready on stand by when the Orbital company gets ready to launch a resupply rocket....why?....the Americans are "outsourcing" again.

daleo

(21,317 posts)
10. Well, a brand new shiny Virgin Gallactica rocket motor blew up today
Fri Oct 31, 2014, 08:01 PM
Oct 2014

You never can tell. That's why rocket science is so difficult.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Washington Post; Antares...