General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWashington 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 didnt 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 Thursdays 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 companys users guide. To be clear, investigators say they do not know what caused Tuesdays 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 Orbitals 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 dont 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?
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)Or is that a magic hand
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Fire the person/people who awarded orbital the contract.
louis-t
(23,273 posts)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)NPR report did say that the engines were old and refurbished, but that they had come from AeroJet in Sacramento, CA.
Just saying.
Botany
(70,449 posts)n/t
Neurotica
(609 posts)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)Those engines were 40+ years old and God only knows what could have
gone wrong with them over time.
Xolodno
(6,384 posts)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.
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)daleo
(21,317 posts)You never can tell. That's why rocket science is so difficult.