Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

8andahalfby11 t1_j11z2dl wrote

Telemetry lost at T+6:51 with vehicle rapidly dropping before that. Arianespace CEO claims second stage underpressure issue.

57

kdiuro13 OP t1_j121owq wrote

Yep confirmed here. Underpressure in the 2nd stage. Either a failure to ignite or an underperform. Either way a launch failure. Apogee was 110km and vehicle impacted Atlantic Ocean shortly after.

37

toodroot t1_j125b34 wrote

The ground camera says it lit. Remember 2 failures ago, when it burned through the top of the 2nd stage? This is a different stage (wider). But still.

22

cjameshuff t1_j12f45p wrote

It looked like it lit, burned a while, then something happened that caused the plume to become much wider and more diffuse, and the stage was either gyrating or tumbling. Maybe a major failure of the nozzle?

9

Barrrrrrnd t1_j12mtuo wrote

That’s what I was thinking. Either they burned through it or the back fell off. Either way they lost command authority and thrust.

4

citoloco t1_j12x6ya wrote

What about the front?

9

TADthePaperMaker t1_j16ei2f wrote

Well it’s not supposed to fall off, I can tell you that right now.

6

cjameshuff t1_j15y1jx wrote

It seems like the third stage separated and ignited normally, and that's attached to the front. Maybe it broke away before that though, the CGI was obviously not an accurate depiction of what was going on.

2

TbonerT t1_j151tje wrote

Probably something like that. You can see the speed start to drop right then, too.

1

electromagneticpost t1_j12z6i7 wrote

At least they made it to space, although I don't think the satellites were supposed to end up at the bottom of the ocean.

2

toodroot t1_j130no0 wrote

This is a good example of why most people think "space" means "orbit".

14

electromagneticpost t1_j130wgn wrote

The Karmen Line, which is what I was going off of, is arbitrary with some aerodynamic calculations to back it up, it’s much easier to to define what an orbit is rather than where space begins.

3

[deleted] t1_j131313 wrote

[deleted]

0

fnands t1_j130fd1 wrote

Damn, and with two Pleiades Neo satellites on board.

That sucks a big fat one for commercial earth observation. The Neo's have such great sensors.

26

toodroot t1_j130pr2 wrote

There's a lot of competition!

5

fnands t1_j1318f0 wrote

Such as? The only sat that's really close (that I'm aware of) is Worldview-3

10

silly_tilly t1_j133vpk wrote

Is it possible to retrieve the satellites, or did they burn down?

3

fnands t1_j1344g1 wrote

Not sure if they made it high enough to burn on re-entry, but they are dead anyway. Probably deep under water and in a thousand pieces.

10

silly_tilly t1_j134xo1 wrote

Well, that's sad and expensive.

7

fnands t1_j13978c wrote

Very expensive. I hope they were insured.

They have been waiting on launch since May, so this is a huge setback. I mean, luckily there are already 2 in orbit, but planned constellation size is 4.

I wonder if they will replace or just move on to the next thing

7

Layer_4_Solutions t1_j14etd4 wrote

> Very expensive. I hope they were insured.

Doubt it. Governments generally self-insure.

1

mangalore-x_x t1_j16bize wrote

They are also the ones wanting space industry so particularly here it is a wash Because France wants arianespace to continue and finances both.

1

outjet t1_j144oy8 wrote

Those things are crispy and useless unfortunately.

2

MASSiVELYHungPeacock t1_j15965w wrote

Ugh people at Airbus gotta be just hurting watching so much work burning up on reentry, lost in sea. Know the weight constraints probably make it impossible, but it sure seems like it would be wise if the cone they were in had a parachute? Have a way to possibly salvage something if not all of it?

4

HolyGig t1_j15cjn4 wrote

No, it would land in the ocean anyways and satellites don't mix with salt water even if they survived intact

5