KABOOM! Europe's heavy-lift rocket explodes on debut

[MKSheppard]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/021212/12/dglpb.html

Europe's heavy-lift rocket explodes on debut

By Will Knight

Europe's new heavy-lift Ariane 5 rocket exploded three minutes into its maiden flight late on Wednesday, destroying two satellites and showering debris into the Atlantic Ocean.

In a fiercely competitive space launch market, the failure is a catastrophe for Arianespace. Three of the 14 Ariane 5 launches to date have now been total failures.

Early reports suggest that the rocket's newly modified Vulcain-2 main engine may have suffered a problem after take-off at 2221 GMT from the Kourou space port in French Guiana. The engine's performance decreased severely before the rocket veered off course. Once the rocket deviates from its trajectory, an on-board self-destruct system is programmed to detonate.

Modified Ariane 5 on the launch pad (Image: Arianespace)

Arianespace, the European company behind the rocket, has yet to release any information about the cause of the accident, but a press conference is expected on Thursday.

Speaking after the failed launch, Jean-Yves Le Gall, CEO of Arianespace, emphasised the high-risk nature of the space launch business. "Our job is difficult, as we have been reminded tonight in a most cruel way," he said. "Tonight's failure is very serious, but we have been through difficult times before and always overcome our difficulties."

Redesigned engine

The rocket's Vulcain-2 engine was redesigned for this launch, to produce 20 per cent more thrust. The additional lift increases the rocket's launch capacity from six to 10 tonnes, allowing it to carry two satellites into a high orbit more easily.

The extra thrust is produced by burning more fuel at higher pressure and it is possible that this system was involved in the failure. The new rocket also has a modified cryogenic upper stage, but Wednesday's accident occurred before this stage should have fired.

The launch was supposed to have taken place on 28 November, but the attempt was called off seconds before lift-off by an automated safety system. Two igniters that burn off any excess of the hydrogen used to cool the rocket's main cryogenic engine were replaced before Wednesday's launch attempt.

Poor history

The Ariane 5 rocket was carrying Hotbird TM7, a telecommunications satellites for the European consortium Eutelsat and an experimental satellite developed by the French space agency CNES, called Stentor.

It is a catastrophic blow for Arianespace, which faces increasing competition in a depressed satellite launch market. Competition comes mainly from US companies Boeing and Lockheed Martin, which have both successfully tested new increased capacity rockets in 2002. Russia also has a proven launch industry, and India and Japan are both seeking to develop launch industries.

The impact of Wednesday's failure is intensified by the relatively poor launch history of Ariane 5. Since its debut in 1999, the rocket has made 14 flights of which three were complete failures and one left a satellite in a useless orbit. Arianespace's plan to retire the less powerful but very reliable Ariane 4 rocket in 2003 now looks less likely.

The failure also casts serious doubt over a major European scientific mission scheduled to launch from French Guiana using an Ariane 5 rocket in January 2003. The Rosetta spacecraft must launch within a 20-day window in order to catch up with Comet Wirtanen, which it will attempt to land on.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

Sucks for them...

[ArmorPierce]

and the US will remain the dominant force in space, but that would have been even if there wasn't that set back.

[phongn]

Arianne 5 has had more than it's fair share of problems, oddly enough. It's not the only recent failure, though - a Proton failed a short while ago.

[Kuja]

I just HATE it when a rocket explodes early...oops, did I just say that?

[Setzer]

Proof that Europe can't even wipe their own ass without help from America.

(I know I'm being a Jingoistic bastard, but I don't care!)

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

I just HATE it when a rocket explodes early...oops, did I just say that?

Especially my boyfriend's when I'm barely warming up! LOL

[Admiral Piett]

Proof that Europe can't even wipe their own ass without help from America.

And then the NASA is a bunch of incompetent idiots.Proof? The Challenger
Ahh, I love american logic

[MKSheppard]

And then the NASA is a bunch of incompetent idiots.Proof? The Challenger
Ahh, I love american logic

Either way, Ariane 5 is a POS.....

[Sea Skimmer]

Proof that Europe can't even wipe their own ass without help from America.

And then the NASA is a bunch of incompetent idiots.Proof? The Challenger
Ahh, I love american logic

1 out of 100 vs. 3 out of 14, European math makes me Laugh

[RedImperator]

I love how the combined effort of a dozen European governments is facing serious competiton from two PRIVATE U.S. corporations.

[Admiral Piett]

1 out of 100 vs. 3 out of 14, European math makes me Laugh

Causing the single biggest disaster (in terms of dead people and,as far as I know,money) of space exploration for a stupid procedure.The idea of using reesusable boosters was not a bright one, eh?

[Admiral Piett]

I love how the combined effort of a dozen European governments is facing serious competiton from two PRIVATE U.S. corporations.

Care to elaborate,please?
Last time I checked there was not exactly plenty of affirmed private competitors in this market.
Of course Ariane may well be totally flawed,but the point is that for a lot of people here everything that does not have the US flag painted on it is crap.
When some of this crap start to be a problem for US products,like Airbus or european steel,the it must be because "the europeans are bribing their way in".US products instead are winners only because they are the best things around,like microsoft
Yes there are people willing to use microsoft as proof of american superiority.

[RadiO]

I love how the combined effort of a dozen European governments is facing serious competiton from two PRIVATE U.S. corporations.

Uh-huh... Arianespace is a private company. It was privatised in the 1990s, IIRC, and no longer has a direct connection with ESA or other EU government agencies.
Granted, Ariane 5 was largely sponsored by ESA, since it was intended to support the Hermes shuttle and other ESA and international space projects. But as far as the production, operation, marketing and profit of the rocket goes... all private, as far as I can see.

[Oberleutnant]

I love how the combined effort of a dozen European governments is facing serious competiton from two PRIVATE U.S. corporations.

Care to elaborate,please?

Indeed.

I doubt that either of those two companies have designed and built modules to the ISS, launched satellites, or created their own counterpart to the GPS system...

Still, it's nice to know that my tax money is used on expensive fireworks over the South American sky.

Edit: Methinks ESA is shareholder of Arianespace

[Admiral Piett]

Still, it's nice to know that my tax money is used on expensive fireworks over the South American sky.

Yes,the US instead would never have fireworks with some of their expensive satellites (sarcasm)

[MKSheppard]

Causing the single biggest disaster (in terms of dead people and,as far as I know,money) of space exploration for a stupid procedure.The idea of using reesusable boosters was not a bright one, eh?

Actually, the russians come pretty damn close in CUMULATIVE
body count during the Space Age...

[Admiral Piett]

Actually, the russians come pretty damn close in CUMULATIVE
body count during the Space Age...

More likely they exceeded that by a fair number.I am quite sure they had more than seven dead.Single was the keyword.Especially when you include that engineer that went under a rocket to see why it had not started.

[tharkûn]

Causing the single biggest disaster (in terms of dead people and,as far as I know,money) of space exploration for a stupid procedure.
I don't know when that R-16 blew up at Baikonur it took loads of people with it. Yes it was an ICBM, but it was a two stage rocket that was part of the Russian space program.

[phongn]

I love how the combined effort of a dozen European governments is facing serious competiton from two PRIVATE U.S. corporations.

Care to elaborate,please?
Last time I checked there was not exactly plenty of affirmed private competitors in this market.[/b]

Well, there's 'only' Proton, Atlas 5 and Delta 4 competing in Arianne 5's market. All three competitors are privately-operated.

When some of this crap start to be a problem for US products,like Airbus or european steel,the it must be because "the europeans are bribing their way in".US products instead are winners only because they are the best things around,like microsoft

As for steel, Europe has superior methods of production (translating into lower costs), it seems.

As for aircraft, Europe's direct subsidies to Airbus enable them to sell their aircraft at lower prices than comparable Boeing aircraft. This is a major issue of contention. And why do you consider Airbus superior to Boeing aircraft, just curious?

[HemlockGrey]

Who's sats got blown apart?

[phongn]

I love how the combined effort of a dozen European governments is facing serious competiton from two PRIVATE U.S. corporations.

Care to elaborate,please?

Edit: Methinks ESA is shareholder of Arianespace

According to Arianespace's website, they have "1 space agency" as a shareholder. http://www.arianespace.com/us/about/share.htm

Presumably this is the ESA.

[phongn]

1 out of 100 vs. 3 out of 14, European math makes me Laugh

Causing the single biggest disaster (in terms of dead people and,as far as I know,money) of space exploration for a stupid procedure.The idea of using reesusable boosters was not a bright one, eh?

The fault was not with the decision to go with the SRBs. The fault was with the O-Rings, which did not perform well under cold weather. Said problem was fixed in post-1986 missions.

[phongn]

Who's sats got blown apart?

Hot Bird 7 from Acatel (communications satellite) and the Stentor technology demonstrator.

[Admiral Piett]

"Well, there's 'only' Proton, Atlas 5 and Delta 4 competing in Arianne 5's market. All three competitors are privately-operated."

Proton is russian.Atlas 5 is a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and two Russian companies (it uses a russian engine,btw).
And I would hesitate to describe both the american companies as "affirmed",Delta 4 is just at its first launch.Note also that 70 percent of of Lockheed Martin and Boeing launches are filled with government orders, compared to 10 percent in of Arianespace.

"As for aircraft, Europe's direct subsidies to Airbus enable them to sell their aircraft at lower prices than comparable Boeing aircraft. This is a major issue of contention."

So does the US to Boeing,in a direct and indirect (remeber that it is a DOD contractor, a lot of R&D is de facto paid by the military) manner to Boeing.Although it is possible that EU subsides may be larger than US ones.

"And why do you consider Airbus superior to Boeing aircraft, just curious?"

They are not superior,they are enough good to compete.