It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Russian rocket engines suspected in launch blast

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 11:48 AM
a reply to: SLAYER69

LOL it's all made in China anyway.

Russia outsources too.

posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 11:54 AM
a reply to: neo96

posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 12:28 PM

originally posted by: neo96
For the record here.

Since the end of the space shuttle program that was ended without a replacement.

The US has been hitching rides with Russia. That mas made billions off of.

We started back up again Russia looses money.

So Russian sabotage is not out of the realm of reason especially considering the Russian mob runs the country.

And made it's ex KGB leader the 'boss'.

or it was just a random failure which happens to everyone from time to conspiracy.

posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 04:44 PM
The funniest part is the quaint history behind much of the Soviet-era tech that remains in use today.

I recall speaking with an American scientist who had worked with them while cooperating on this:

U.S. And Soviet Astronauts Unite Ships And Then Join In Historic Handshakes

'Glad To See You'
Crewmen Eat Lunch--Brezhnev and Ford Praise Link-Up

By John Noble Wilford
Special to The New York Times

Houston, July 17 -- Astronauts of the United States and the Soviet Union united spaceships today and then joined hands in the first international meeting away from earth, a symbolic gesture of the two nations' expressed desire to cooperate in the exploration of space.

The American Apollo made physical contact with the Soviet Soyuz at 12:09 P.M., Eastern daylight time, about 140 miles over the Atlantic Ocean, 620 miles west of Portugal. Then, three and a half minutes later, the two ships achieved a firm link-up.

"We have capture," Brig. Gen. Thomas P. Stafford of the Air Force, the Apollo commander, radioed in Russian to the Soyuz commander, Col. Aleksei A. Leonov...."

Source: 1978

He had mentioned the sense of astonishment he and his team had when they were reviewing calculations and noticed that the apparently original mathematical work of the Soviet scientists had been written vast expanses of chalk-board...

It gave the Americans a curious feeling because, like many advanced calculations, mathematicians often "leap" intuitively to the next iterations of the formula, without the kind of confirmation modern computing equipment provided for the Apollo program. Yet the formulas, as they were, were nevertheless correct. My friend said that it reassured him that the formulas and subsequent works were all there, "in your face" (my words, not his.)

I suspect there no bad thing that can be said of equipment that endures in it's usefulness and robust nature.... but, when the new school folks show up and start tweaking and improving things, you inevitably end up with a device that "should" work, and fails catastrophically. I consider it a symptom of failed direction, and subsequent failures in management.

Of course, there is the outside chance that this is an example of corruption at work, after all, the principle actors don't really "lose" anything... but I am certain no one will ever travel down that rabbit hole.
edit on 30-10-2014 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 08:53 PM
SpaceX makes their own rocket engines. Merlin Engine I think their technology is much better because they use 9 smaller engines rather than 1 or 3 giant engines. Smaller engines are much easier to manufacture. Their rockets can loose one of the 9 engines and still complete the mission. In fact, this already happened on one launch. They lost 1 engine and the mission was completed. The 9 engines can all be individually throttled so the guidance software throttled up the remaining 8 engines to compensate for the lost one. Link

SpaceX is also building a much larger rocket called the Falcon Heavy. Falcon Heavy It is basically three Falcon rockets strapped together and it will be able to lift more than twice the payload of any other existing system. Only the NASA SLS system will be larger whenever it is finally ready. The Falcon Heavy rocket is scheduled to launch a test flight in early 2015 and has a commercial payload scheduled for later in 2015.

edit on 30-10-2014 by itguysrule because: Add Links

posted on Oct, 31 2014 @ 01:59 AM
a reply to: Laxus

Who would have thought back in the days that the mighty USA space agency would end up using Soviet 60s engines for space. Sounds like a bad Hollywood action movie.

(S'd but unable to F)
i've found the "further out" i cast my gaze
(on just about anything)
EVERYTHING starts to resemble a bad hollywood movie if you'll excuse me, i have to wag the dog

posted on Oct, 31 2014 @ 02:24 AM

I'd forgotten all about Remo Williams.
So bad it was good.

By the way, even with blowing up a payload every now and then, commercial space launches are probably a lot more economical than the space shuttle program.
Back before it was mothballed it was already known to be an overpriced and bloated system that didn't do any of the original things it was planned for. The scientific, commercial and military performance expected for the shuttle were all not met.
The cost was always over what it needed to be to get the job done.

When you are trying to put something into space with a rocket, you have to expect failure from time to time.

It's not like ordering a pizza.

Hopefully they have good insurance.

posted on Oct, 31 2014 @ 11:08 PM
Well, you have to wonder when things like this pop up in clusters....


new topics

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in