Delta GOES-G destructs over Cape Canaveral (5-3-86)

A Delta rocket with the GOES-G weather satellite, NASA's first mission after the Challenger accident, destructs shortly after liftoff when the vehicle's main engine - providing all the steering - shuts down prematurely (look for the flameout), sending the payload (seen coming off first) into the Atlantic ocean off the Florida coast on May 3, 1986.

Просмотров: 95131
Длительность: 2:37
Комментарии: 119

Тэги для этого Видео:

Найти больше видео в категории: "28"
Видео загрузил:
Показать больше видео, загруженных


Автор Thor God of Thunder ( назад)
That "uh-oh" is priceless!

Автор Alpha Adhito ( назад)
Feel sad for Iris probe :'(

Автор MrOrthogonalization ( назад)
"And we're now raining debris all over the Atlantic...."

Автор Daniel Meyer ( назад)
Ha Ha Get rekt!

Автор Tim stro59 ( назад)
"we show a premature main engine shutdown"
I can't imagine why.

Автор MesserZchmitt ( назад)
All the firmament fags use this video as proof

Автор David n ( назад)
The Delta II rocket now is incredibly successful. It has now launched 99 straight successful times, more than any rocket ever!

Автор Vulkan: Games & Space ( назад)

Автор Zoomer30 ( назад)
What basically happened was the jolt of the airlit solids igniting caused a short circuit in the computer and it shut the engines down.

Автор Zoomer30 ( назад)
86 was just not a good year for NASA. This happened just a few months after Challenger.

Автор cottagechskitty ( назад)
Yeah that is one very obvious flameout

Автор Greg Rix ( назад)
The rocket exploding was intended, once the main engine malfunctions and the rocket veers off course in order to protect property and people that are outside the launch corridor a UHF blast from the main controls detonates charges in the cases of the solid boosters and main rocket body, detonating the fuel at altitude as opposed to when it hits the ground. Although spectacular, it's much safer. 

Автор Zoomer30 ( назад)
The PR announcer generally does not have a video feed to look at (at least in 1986) so they can seem to be behind the loop. You could see a change in the plume as the engine shutdown. Amazing that the rocket remained intact even after it flipped around backwards. Until the RSO terminated flight.

Автор Obed ( назад)
American have had more rocket explosion than I can count. I wonder why so many?

Автор 52cccc ( назад)

Автор BitGridTV ( назад)
"we have a main engine shutdown"

:D  AFTER the explosion LOL

Автор Guardian Observer ( назад)
Premature engine shutdown. Ooops!

Автор cloud0123 ( назад)
phase conjugated scalar EM wave used to destroy some of the key systems of this...but shhhh never happened.

Автор fs10inator ( назад)
She did the last Atlas-G Centaur-D1AR launch carrying the final FLTSATCOM.

Автор Gabriel Berg ( назад)
You can clearly see the rocket exploding at 2:13.

Автор Matthew Picou ( назад)
Go to my videos if you want to see an awesome rocket

Автор ethaneatscookies ( назад)
Thats called smart people talk, maybe they should dumb it down for people like you

Автор 3210andLiftoff ( назад)
A lightning strike took out an Atlas launch in 1987.

Автор RealGalactic70 ( назад)
Wasn't that one a Delta rocket from 1977?

Автор griv2000 ( назад)
You can see the central engine shutting down at 1:54, then, the autodestruction system was triggered to prevent the rocket crashing on populated area

Автор Pavel ER ( назад)
americans should be banned from space exploration .. no nazis in space

Автор SPUTNIK ( назад)
No, takie są te Wasze rakiety.

Автор Liam Jay ( назад)
a main engine can be shutdown, I think you are thinking of SRB's which cannot be shutdown.

Автор MarsFKA ( назад)
A year ago today, I watched the launch of the Opportunity Mars Rover, also with a Delta 2. During the pre-launch chatter, we heard that NASA will not launch if there is lightning within ten miles of the pad.

Автор Itchono ( назад)
my bad, delta 1

Автор Itchono ( назад)
It's weird how the challenger, titan 34D, and this delta 2 all failed that year

Автор hoghogwild ( назад)
That's all that they see at their controllers is the engine shutdoiwn, they cannot report what they don't know.

Автор sambowman91 ( назад)
If all the solid boosters were ignited at liftoff, the vehicle (and satellite inside) would experience very high accelerations. Carrying the booster allows for a more constant static acceleration profile through the flight.

Автор danthemanzizle ( назад)
air ignited solids? doesn't seem very efficient to me to carry low specific impulse boosters strapped to the side from lift off through max Q

Автор smadzenites ( назад)
Disintegration at close to max Q looks spectacular.

Автор TheConman656 ( назад)
Should have switched SCE to AUX.

Автор 3210andLiftoff ( назад)

Автор 3210andLiftoff ( назад)
You are thinking of another mission

Автор kuki5050 ( назад)
It was "Delta 178"!!!!

Автор Andy Gilbert ( назад)
1986 was definitely a bad year for NASA.

Автор Ferrariman601 ( назад)
The SRBs didn't have nozzle gimbal capability if I'm correct. That's why all control was lost after the stage 1 engine shut down?

Автор vincent7520 ( назад)
where my taxes go … 

Автор R5H4D0W ( назад)
Wired.com says the electrical fault was caused by a lightning strike, but they are the only source that speaks of this, can anyone confirm thats what it was?

Автор fyadcorp ( назад)
Heh heh... "strap ons"

Автор lestef23 ( назад)
@reknas78 You're absolutly right.

Автор mkp823 ( назад)
@reknas78 You're correct. It IS better to just be silent. Take your own advise, dimwit.

Автор VirginianHighlander ( назад)
Supersonic flight over Cape Canaveral in early 1986 was not recommended....
....a little too late.

Автор Clarinerd617 ( назад)
@reknas78 You do realize that it is the height of scientific heresy to do as you just suggested?

Автор navyfreek1129 ( назад)
@reknas78 Uhhh.. use your eyes, you can see them shut down. It then loses stability and disintegrates.

Автор RavenBomb123 ( назад)
action at 2:00

Автор blablubb12345 ( назад)
Ok, looks like the 1993 Titan IVA crash was caused by it's SRB. Didn't have that one on my list.

Автор blablubb12345 ( назад)
Neither the Ariane 5 nor the Titan IVA explosion had anything to do with their solid boosters. Both were caused by a guidance failure, a short circuit on the Titan and a software glitch on the Ariane. The last two Taurus failures were caused by the payload fairing which did not seperate. FYI, the Delta 4 uses up to 4 SRBs.

Автор Chad Snow ( назад)
@blablubb12345 Good track record unless you are an Indian National rocket, Space Shuttle, Titan IV, or a Delta II, Orbital Taurus, or any solid rocket fueled system created after 1985. The Ariane 5 is not bad with only one major explosion. Most catastrophic solid failures are about 1/60 with 90% success. Delta rockets have scientifically scaled back the use of SRB's. Out of 4 systems only 2 use SRB's and not more than 2 on each rocket. Luckily, their heavy lift system has no SRB's.

Автор blablubb12345 ( назад)
That's not true by both accounts as solids have a rather good track record and even the Delta 4 uses them. Btw. this launch failed because the liquid fueled main engine shut down early, leaving the rocket with no steering capability.

Автор swimfeared ( назад)
@reknas78 or thats exactly what caused the rocket to fail.

Автор Chad Snow ( назад)
I am glad for the sake of Delta rockets that the next generation will not be using solid rocket boosters. SRB's have killed the reputation of most modern rockets that have used them.

Автор Manuel Huber (1459 лет назад)
skip to 1:50 (: you are welcome ^^

Автор Keinlicht ( назад)
@Knepperify1 Yeah, I know. Thanks for nothing.

Автор 3210andLiftoff ( назад)
@DirkDiggler1711 The information is correct. Not sure what reknas78 means.

Автор 3210andLiftoff ( назад)
@reknas78 I'm not sure what you mean, the vehicle did have a premature main engine shutdown. And yes, it has a main engine, the core engine on the first stage of the Delta vehicle. The first stage has nine strap-on SRBs surrounding it.

Автор krazykhrisya ( назад)
"and we have main engine shutdown" yeah, that's an understatement. xD

Автор Keinlicht (1975 лет назад)
@soylentgreenb Ah kay it makes more sense if they're just looking at the telemetry data

Автор soylentgreenb ( назад)
@Keinlicht You fool; they're not looking at footage of the rocket, they're doing their job. If the rocket explodes there is no means of recovery, obviously, hence they're looking for anomalies they may be able to fix.

Автор Keinlicht ( назад)
I never understand why they keep commenting without describing anything, "main engine shut down"? Really?

How about "vehicle offcourse, rocket breaking up"? that's pretty evident from the footage. If not that then just offer a "Shit!" at the beginning and be silent!

Автор reknas78 ( назад)
Ah...a premature engine shutdown...??? Try an explosion and there is no main engine. Look at you monitors and see the explosion. Embarrassing when you say " Premature engine shutdow" or "We have an anomaly" it's better just to be silent.

Автор FalconKPD ( назад)
At least no one died.

Автор dhbiza ( назад)
Thats what happens when you let women run things, even as announcers.

Автор MattTheSaiyan ( назад)
Considering how reliable this rocket usually is/was/whatever, this disaster must have come as an extra huge shock...even more so coming within months of Challenger.

Автор altfactor ( назад)
I believe CNN also showed the launch live, given that it was the first NASA launch since Challenger.

Автор jetfreak4 ( назад)
1986 was a bad year for NASA, that's for sure.

Автор Bram Nauta ( назад)
"We have a main engine shutdown"
Erm...what main engine?

Автор altfactor ( назад)
@RJY4356 CNN also carried the launch live, given it was the first U.S. launch of any kind since Challenger.

Автор Victor_D ( назад)
All right, but saying that AFTER the rocket just exploded is a bit... redundant, if you catch my drift.

Автор blablubb12345 ( назад)
The rocket veered off course and finally exploded BECAUSE the main engine shut down permaturely. You can see this at 1:55.

Автор Victor_D ( назад)
I love the euphemisms they use when their rockets blow up: "we show a premature main engine shutdown" - yeah, I guess you can say that when your main engine has just been pulverized by an explosion :-D Or the "we have had an anomaly" in another Delta-III explosion, after which fire and debris literally rained down all around the launch pad. That was epic.

Автор NorthsideRecords613 ( назад)
Good news is it didn't have people inside

Автор blablubb12345 ( назад)
Only the main engine is steerable on a Delta II, the boosters have fixed nozzles. With the loss of the main engine, the rocket also lost all steering capabilities.

Автор Pai0near ( назад)
the rocket turned! something mustve happened in one of them air start srb's

Автор lithiumdeuteride ( назад)
I guess "parking orbit" doesn't roll off the tongue as automatically as "parking lot".

Автор ugowar ( назад)
Looks like the payload and 2nd stage were ripped off while the 1st stage was left more or less intact, though apparently ruptured judging by violent venting that quickly stopped.

Автор 3210andLiftoff ( назад)
You can see when the RSO detonates the remainder, but the initial breakup is aerodynamic.

Автор 3210andLiftoff ( назад)
I did not realize that, thanks.

Автор RJY4356 ( назад)
Well, yes, among the firsts...I know she did an Atlas-Centaur launch (AC-63) in 1985, a year before this.

Автор RJY4356 ( назад)
Also this was one of Lisa Malone's first launches she did in 1985-1986 before she started doing shuttle launches in 1989.

Автор RJY4356 ( назад)
I remember watching this LIVE on The Weather Channel of all places...wheneevr there was a NOAA satellite launch they'd show it live. This was at 6:18 p.m. on a Saturday evening. I remember the weather channel guys didn't realize what happened at first and it took them a moment to replay it and realize the RSO destroyed it after they lost control form the engine shutdown.

Вставка видео:


Поиск Видео

Top Видео


Seo анализ сайта