Launch News (Failure) Phobos-Grunt and YingHuo-1 atop Zenit-2 on November 8/9, 2011

[Cosmic Penguin]

Chinese commenters are angry about the news of the PhG problems (stucking Chinese spacecraft from proceeding):



Google:

My translations:

1. If the Russians are clever, they would have transferred the key technologies for building large launch vehicles to China. They must know that Russia is now in decline.
2. The Russians are not reliable. We must find a way to do that ourselves.
3. The Russians are just so unreliable...
4. China is hitching a ride because we do not have large enough rockets to send the probe to Mars. (Editor's note: I believe this is not true.) However I have heard that China is trying to develop larger rockets.
5. That's a deliberate act by the Russians, just like what they did to the Koreans with the launch of the Naro last year. How come they fail again and again? They didn't know how expensive spacecrafts are? They thought that there's too little space junk in Earth orbit?

This explains how frustrated Chinese spaceflight fans are. At least they can find consolidation in yet another successful Chinese orbital launch today. (more on that later...)

 

[SiberianTiger]

I've found the TLE, but am unable to get them into Orbitron. Could you post the file?

Here you are:
View attachment phg.txt

 

[SiberianTiger]

It's totally unconfirmed and heavily doubtful, but I think I'll quite it:

http://www.astronomy.ru/forum/index.php/topic,43035.msg1733803.html#msg1733803

Old Growler wrote:

« Reply #1015 : Today at 16:13:35 »
Second attempt to start towards Mars is today, between 3 and 5 am in Moscow. 80% chance it will be a success.

 

[N_Molson]

Go Probe !! Blast off to Mars !!! You have it in your circuit cards !!



*runs into a probolistic frenzy*

 

[SiberianTiger]

This makes a good sense:

http://www.interfax.ru/politics/news.asp?id=216042

Roscosmos specialists will attempt to save Phobos-Grunt tonight

November 9, 2011, 17:40

Moscow, November 9. INTERFAX.RU - Speciatists of Roscosmos will attempt to eject Phobos-Grunt spacecraft to a Mars-bound trajectory during the night of Wednesday and Thursday's morning, told a source in the rocket&space industry to Interfax AVN.

According to him, at 23:00 Moscow time (19:00 UTC) Phobos-Grunt will pass within visibility range of the primary measurement and command centre in Baikonur. At this time, specialists will collect telemetry information from the spacecraft, that will allow them to determine the exact cause of the issue.

After analyzing the information, measures will be taken to address the problem, if it is found solvable. If possible, manoeuveres to boost into the intermediate orbit and then to escape trajectory will also be performed.

The source highlighted that Phobos-Grunt will appear in range of Russian tracking stations earlier, about 21:30 MSK (17:30 UTC), but only Baikonur station is capable of gathering the full set of telemetry information and, what's most important, to issue the command to perform the manoeuvres.

"Having the issues with the present orbit's height and electric supply of equipment, we have to perform boosting as soon as possible. But undue hurry is not desirable, as well. One error now may cost us the whole mission" - he remarked.

 

[4throck]

Let's see what comes out of this. It is interesting that the situation was anticipated.
I think that is due to an insufficient tracking network, with critical maneuvers occurring completely in the dark. You can account for that with contingency safe states, but your reaction time is slowed, as we are seeing.

I'd ignore any conspiracy theories. That history is very old, I've heard it since the Phobos missions. In reality it meant faulty CPUs / software on the spacecraft.


Let's hope that all goes well tonight! I want to see the grandson of The Probe on the way to Mars!

 

[SiberianTiger]

Here's my draft of visibility windows for the three Russian ground stations for tonight (somehow Ussuriysk is out of business, judging by the official reports).

UU = Ulan Udeh
BA = Baikonur
MSK = Moscow

UU
2011-11-09 17:17:07 (21:17:07 MSK)               229.4  1.0  ecl  1621  18.5 -53.9
2011-11-09 17:20:37 (21:20:37 MSK)               155.0 25.0  ecl   509  19.9 -53.7
2011-11-09 17:24:18 (21:24:18 MSK)                81.9  1.1  ecl  1714  21.3 -53.5

BA
2011-11-09 18:43:32 (22:43:32 MSK)               201.0  1.0  ecl  1585 337.5 -59.4
2011-11-09 18:46:40 (22:46:40 MSK)               138.8 12.8  ecl   785 338.9 -59.6
2011-11-09 18:49:56 (22:49:56 MSK)                76.9  1.0  ecl  1657 340.4 -59.8

UU
2011-11-09 18:50:17 (22:50:17 MSK)               262.5  1.1  ecl  1656  51.0 -45.7
2011-11-09 18:54:00 (22:54:00 MSK)               177.4 78.0  ecl   249  52.0 -45.2
2011-11-09 18:58:00 (22:58:00 MSK)                87.3  1.0  ecl  1774  53.2 -44.7

BA
2011-11-09 20:16:24 (0:16:24 MSK)               253.1  1.0  ecl  1612  22.0 -59.5
2011-11-09 20:20:00 (0:20:00 MSK)               337.6 48.0  ecl   303  23.6 -59.2
2011-11-09 20:23:49 (0:23:49 MSK)                60.9  1.0  ecl  1711  25.3 -59.0

UU
2011-11-09 20:23:42 (0:23:42 MSK)               277.5  1.0  ecl  1711  74.8 -32.9
2011-11-09 20:27:32 (0:27:32 MSK)               194.5 54.6  ecl   314  75.7 -32.3
2011-11-09 20:31:39 (0:31:39 MSK)               110.5  1.0  ecl  1831  76.6 -31.7

MSK
2011-11-09 21:47:30 (1:47:30 MSK)               210.8  1.0  ecl  1626  13.0 -50.7
2011-11-09 21:50:34 (1:50:34 MSK)               153.4 10.5  ecl   929  14.1 -50.6
2011-11-09 21:53:46 (1:53:46 MSK)                96.7  1.0  ecl  1710  15.3 -50.4

BA
2011-11-09 21:50:25 (1:50:25 MSK)               287.1  1.0  ecl  1664  56.7 -49.0
2011-11-09 21:53:56 (1:53:56 MSK)               357.2 18.4  ecl   675  57.7 -48.5
2011-11-09 21:57:39 (1:57:39 MSK)                66.0  1.0  ecl  1771  58.8 -47.9

UU
2011-11-09 21:57:16 (1:57:16 MSK)               274.6  1.0  ecl  1762  94.0 -18.6
2011-11-09 22:00:49 (2:00:49 MSK)               211.5 14.9  ecl   861  94.7 -18.0
2011-11-09 22:04:34 (2:04:34 MSK)               148.8  1.0    ?  1867  95.4 -17.5

MSK
2011-11-09 23:20:03 (3:20:03 MSK)               245.5  1.0  ecl  1655  44.7 -44.4
2011-11-09 23:23:36 (3:23:36 MSK)               172.8 23.7  ecl   555  45.7 -44.0
2011-11-09 23:27:23 (3:27:23 MSK)               100.5  1.0  ecl  1764  46.9 -43.6

BA
2011-11-09 23:24:11 (3:24:11 MSK)               299.7  1.0  ecl  1718  79.1 -33.9
2011-11-09 23:27:57 (3:27:57 MSK)                16.0 27.8  ecl   524  79.9 -33.3
2011-11-09 23:31:58 (3:31:58 MSK)                91.9  1.1  ecl  1832  80.7 -32.6

BA
2011-11-10 00:57:39 (4:57:39 MSK)               293.3  1.0  ecl  1773  96.3 -17.8
2011-11-10 01:01:36 (5:01:36 MSK)               213.5 41.8  ecl   404  97.0 -17.1
2011-11-10 01:05:49 (5:05:49 MSK)               133.0  1.0    ?  1885  97.8 -16.3

MSK
2011-11-10 00:53:11 (4:53:11 MSK)               262.4  1.0  ecl  1704  69.7 -33.4
2011-11-10 00:56:48 (4:56:48 MSK)               192.0 21.2  ecl   634  70.6 -32.9
2011-11-10 01:00:39 (5:00:39 MSK)               121.9  1.0  ecl  1814  71.5 -32.4

 

[N_Molson]

So only 3 tracking stations ? It is where the famous tracking ships would have been useful...

 

[SiberianTiger]

So only 3 tracking stations ? It is where the famous tracking ships would have been useful...

All hopes are put into deploying of Luch-A series of satellites, the nearest launch in this December. They are analogous to American TDRS system.

While I'm away from the computer, could someone please calculate (or take readings from simulation) delta-Vs and expected acceleration during the planned burns? My post 1 in this thread should contain enough information for that, I think...

 

[4throck]

It is easy to talk now, after things happened, but I think that a system of "status tones" broadcasting in low power, perhaps in shortwave or VHF frequencies could easily be picked up by standard amateur equipment.

In theory, with such a system, all you need is a ham radio operator listening. So no need for a boat, just send a radio operator with a portable setup.

Sometimes the simplest things get overlooked.

Nevertheless, the fact that the situation is under control does indicate a robust system and knowledgeable people behind it. It kind of reminds of JAXA troubles with Hayabusa! :tiphat:

 

[SiberianTiger]

While I'm away from the computer, could someone please calculate (or take readings from simulation) delta-Vs and expected acceleration during the planned burns? My post 1 in this thread should contain enough information for that, I think...

By the way, the biggest acceleration it can achieve is simply:
19777 N / (13505 kg - 7150 kg) = 3.11 m/s^2

I think solar arrays can withstand that, given that we had seen pictures of them deployed at constant acceleration 9.81 m/s^2...

Now, a poster at NK forum quotes another table of Baikonur station visibility times (in UTC+4 zone):

PHSRM	09/11/2011 22:44:48		-09/11/2011 22:51:41	 
PHSRM	10/11/2011 00:17:54		-10/11/2011 00:25:39	 
PHSRM	10/11/2011 01:52:05		-10/11/2011 01:59:38	 
PHSRM	10/11/2011 03:25:59		-10/11/2011 03:34:08	 
PHSRM	10/11/2011 04:59:34		-10/11/2011 05:08:08	 
PHSRM	10/11/2011 06:34:10		-10/11/2011 06:39:46

It turns out, only this station (IP-5, or Area 23 at Baikonur) is good for exchanging transmissions with PhG while it's still in LEO:

While RT-64 deep space stations in Medvejyu Ozyora and Ussuriysk are too large to track a fast-moving object:

 

[Urwumpe]

Isn't it possible to use ESA stations as supplement?

 

[SiberianTiger]

Isn't it possible to use ESA stations as supplement?

I think, might have been possible if this situation had been foreseen. Like providing security codes, etc. Or at least, I think so.

In addition, not having data for a while might not be a worst problem at hand.

 

[Wally]

Isn't it possible to use ESA stations as supplement?

They just did.

 

[SiberianTiger]

They just did.

Yes, but still, is acceptance of this proposal technically possible for Roscosmos?

 

[Notebook]

Came late to this, is the mission recoverable?

N.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

:uhh: They're trying hard, but no word yet one way or the other.
For now, I'm doing this:
:lol:

 

[Cras]

Last I heard they hope a reboot of the computers would fix the problem and let them light the next stage. But "experts", for what its worth, seem to doubt it.

James Oberg, a former Shuttle mission control engineer, quoted as saying, ""The go-for-broke nature of this mission, aiming for the first Russian deep space success in a quarter century, always looked awfully bold, and now looks just plain reckless -- whatever happens next."

<EDIT>

The idea of sending anything to another planet/moon with an atmosphere always gets me excited. And the prospect of going to a Martian moon and getting samples was certainly a bold and exciting goal. Hope it works out.

 

[Codz]

Imagine what the Chinese think. Personally I don't care, hope every Chinese unmanned rocket fails horribly myself, but I do admit I was very sad to see that it failed to get into the proper trajectory to get to Mars. .

While I am not a fan of the Chinese, I believe anyone making scientific steps into space is a good thing.

 

[T.Neo]

Personally I don't care, hope every Chinese unmanned rocket fails horribly myself,

I am sorry, I really do not want to derail this topic, but all I could think of when I read that was "imagine what the Chinese think".

Seriously, what do you think about all the people, who designed those vehicles... who build them, integrate them, operate them, maintain the facilities that launch them. Do you really wish constant failure on them?

Those rockets do not hurt you. At least, they do not hurt you any more than a Delta IV or Atlas V launch hurts the average Chinese citizen.

China as a nation may do things that are wrong, but this is no reason to hate China. And even less of a reason to hate their space program.

And I think that is something very important to keep in mind. Because there are many, many people out there, who hate the US in exactly the same way.