Nasa loses its first CO2 satellite after launch failure

Nasa loses its first CO2 satellite after launch failure

www.timesonline.co.uk

Nasa has lost the centrepiece satellite of its $280 million climate-change mission after a catastrophic launch fault today.

The Orbiting Carbon Observatory satellite was fired from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California on a rocket, but after blasting through the Earth’s atmosphere its protective shield failed to jettison.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
news.bbc.co.uk
www.google.com
www.dailymail. co.uk

[edit on 24-2-2009 by afaik]

[edit: title to same as source]
Headline: Please use the original story headline from your source.

[edit on 24-2-2009 by 12m8keall2c]

Not a good start hey?

I wonder if there is a conspiray of sorts here?

I can just imagine a script where a pro global warming influence group affected a sucessful operation to make sure the first satellite to monitor and document CO/2 emmisions was doomed to fail.

Or maybe I have been spending too much time on ATS.

Who knows?

www.timesonline.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

The rocket they used had previously failed 1 out of 7 times.. now 2 from 8. If someone said, I want you to drive your Lamborghini across the road but you will have a 1 in 7 chance of being totaled - would you drive it across the road?

Either they took the budget option and payed the ultimate price for being cheap chumps or they were just plain moronic!

IRM

Maybe it was meant to fail. Maybe someone got scared that the readings that it would see, would prove global warming wasn't real. That would mean a lot of people involve in the global warming business would end up on the short end of the stick.:

Are these the same rockets they are going to start sending astronaughts up in after they retire the shuttle?

If so i dont fancy there chances much, why do they even bother when they have other technology kept hidden from us?
Just seems like a waste of money to me.

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
The rocket they used had previously failed 1 out of 7 times.. now 2 from 8. If someone said, I want you to drive your Lamborghini across the road but you will have a 1 in 7 chance of being totaled - would you drive it across the road?

Either they took the budget option and payed the ultimate price for being cheap chumps or they were just plain moronic!

IRM

why are they using such unreliable rockets given they are the most advanced space program on earth and that less advanced programs are using rockets which have a much higher success rate?

given that nasa has been mastering rocketry for 50 years and in the past had few problems with launching rockets especially when they are carrying military satallites,why the sudden failure rate?.

would be interesting to see all the failed launches and see if there is a pattern,i suspect its scientific equipment.

im smelling a "rat" again,probably his son or something....

umm

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

just after one satellite is reported to generate bogus ice cap data, another fails to enter orbit.

interesting.

MORE PROOF THAT AMERICAN EQUIPMENT IS JUNK AND CRAP , JUST LIKE AMERICAN CARS

Privatization of aerospace technology at its best.... all work going to the lowest bidder....

I don't think it will necessarily be abandoned. There are other space-capable nations that will gladly launch a satellite for the right price. Unless of course, there was a reason they didn't want another country to handle this particular satellite.

It does raise some questions.

Originally posted by afaik
Or maybe I have been spending too much time on ATS.

Possibly.

NASA have been delaying and gutting satellites that could study climate change for a while now.

Look into the DSCOVR mission. Virtually paid for ($100 million) then mothballed and now maybe having all the instruments that could study climate change removed. Essentially blinding the satellite from giving us the info that would help advance this area of science.

The stories of the republican political interference within NASA funded climate science are legion.

But, of course, with some creative thinking we can infer that some greenie sabotaged the mission, lol.

NASA just isn't what it used to be...

on a lighter note, maybe they can carpool. I hear Virgin is practically giving away trips.

It does seem a little suspect.....

I'm going with it reporting data that would have made Al-Gore poor!

:-)

Well when faced with our ultimate demise, it is best o put on the feigned

appearance of at least showing interest in our rapidly deteriorating

environment.

Could be one of two things:

1. Sometimes we have launch failures and this was one of those times

2. Al Gore paid someone to have it destroyed because he knew his GW fraud was going to be exposed.

Ok, am I the only one, or is that a big NO by our little helpers when it comes to a new system to monitor carbon output, and possibly a new global tax system?

Oh well, might be just a little harder to spread that new carbon tax around now.

INSERTED ON EDIT SOME KEY WORDS
The Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) was designed to map GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION and seasonal variations OF EARTHS natural and ANTHROPOGENIC CARBON.

Originally posted by afaik

Nasa loses its first CO2 satellite after launch failure

[edit on 24-2-2009 by 12m8keall2c]

[edit on 24-2-2009 by SoulOrb]

that reminds me of this...

stupid video



[edit on 24/2/2009 by GEORGETHEGREEK]

Could just be a cover story. The thing might be up there functioning normally for all we know. And again, how are we to know a C02 measuring satellite was really the cargo. Could have been some secret military payload...perhaps some new spy satellite or weaponry satellite.

It was launched from Vandenburg...a military base. A perfect place for launching classified sensitive payloads.

I wouldnt trust NASA's given their history. Not all there at NASA are bad guys, but there are plenty of...how did one poster put it...."rats" in that house.

And yes its quite odd how the expensive payloads use cheapo launch vehicles and blow up or some other odd mishap happens. Those too are suspicious, and most probably made it as well, we were just told they were to to be "out of sight, out of mind".

There is no better way for NASA to play the "hide and seek-em" game than to fill the media with "oh no we lost the darn thing" and blow it off like no big deal..ya right...they are going to just throw away 280 million worth of hardware.



Cheers!!!!

That is a good point. Another good way I guess to get more money for the bank buyout, no satellite in the first place, or more money for a civilian defense force, what a great shell game.

reply to post by RFBurns

That must have been very Embarasssing George, were you in the front or the back? And you might want to get new friends, that guy who posted the video, that is very mean.

Originally posted by GEORGETHEGREEK
that reminds me of this...

stupid video



[edit on 24/2/2009 by GEORGETHEGREEK]

heres something of maybe of intesest maybe not.. hell, i am but a pleb in the wheel of the unknown, don't know how much longer i can keep this up... ( says my sife)


mito.cool.ne.jp



[edit on 25-2-2009 by guessing]