#1
|
|||
|
|||
Vanguard
In case we've all forgotten, it was 50 years ago today that America's first
satellite launch ended in an embarrassing failure. The Vanguard was not known for it's reliability; 8 of it's 12 flights failed. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Vanguard
thewi wrote: In case we've all forgotten, it was 50 years ago today that America's first satellite launch ended in an embarrassing failure. The Vanguard was not known for it's reliability; 8 of it's 12 flights failed. Probably better we didn't launch the Shuttle today then; The Russians had a lulu of a rocket explosion on the anniversary of the Nedelin disaster several years back and launches nothing on that date now. Pat |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Vanguard
On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:12:34 -0600, in a place far, far away, Pat
Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: thewi wrote: In case we've all forgotten, it was 50 years ago today that America's first satellite launch ended in an embarrassing failure. The Vanguard was not known for it's reliability; 8 of it's 12 flights failed. Probably better we didn't launch the Shuttle today then; Why? The Russians had a lulu of a rocket explosion on the anniversary of the Nedelin disaster several years back and launches nothing on that date now. So? The fact that they don't doesn't mean they shouldn't. That's simply superstition, which has (or should have) no place in engineering decisions. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Vanguard
On 06 Dec 2007 19:47:19 GMT, thewi wrote:
In case we've all forgotten, it was 50 years ago today that America's first satellite launch ended in an embarrassing failure. The Vanguard was not known for it's reliability; 8 of it's 12 flights failed. And yet, Vanguard 1 is the only one of the early satellites still up there... Brian |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Vanguard
On Dec 6, 4:38 pm, Brian Thorn wrote:
On 06 Dec 2007 19:47:19 GMT, thewi wrote: In case we've all forgotten, it was 50 years ago today that America's first satellite launch ended in an embarrassing failure. The Vanguard was not known for it's reliability; 8 of it's 12 flights failed. And yet, Vanguard 1 is the only one of the early satellites still up there... Brian Vanguard was a successful program. Its goal was to launch at least one satellite during the IGY: it launched three. It was indeed far over budget, though only slightly behind schedule. However, it contributed advances in guidance, propulsion, and other technologies that lived on for decades in boosters like the Thor-Delta. Vanguard's problem is that it had its first failure at the worst possible time. The TV-3 launch was just that - a test vehicle - which was hyped by the White House as America's response to Sputnik. Matt Bille Author, "The First Space Race: Launching the World's First Satellites" (TAMU, 2004) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Vanguard
Matt wrote in
news: Vanguard was a successful program. Its goal was to launch at least one satellite during the IGY: it launched three. It was indeed far over budget, though only slightly behind schedule. However, it contributed advances in guidance, propulsion, and other technologies that lived on for decades in boosters like the Thor-Delta. Vanguard's problem is that it had its first failure at the worst possible time. The TV-3 launch was just that - a test vehicle - which was hyped by the White House as America's response to Sputnik. True, and if you look at the Vanguard's launch record, the only low altitude failure besides TV-3 was TV-3BU, which disintegrated because of a guidance system problem. The rest were due to upper stage malfunctions. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Vanguard
Brian Thorn wrote: The Vanguard was not known for it's reliability; 8 of it's 12 flights failed. And yet, Vanguard 1 is the only one of the early satellites still up there... Aren't one or more of our early Pioneer Moon probes in solar orbit? Pat |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Vanguard
OM wrote in
news: ...I hadn't forgotten "Kaputnik", but due to some pressing family matters I was unable to post the reminder this morning as planned. Notable links follow: The attempted launch of a lunar probe by a Thor Able in August 1958 was another widely publicized failure. I've never seen any pictures or video of that one. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Vanguard
In sci.space.history message ,
Thu, 6 Dec 2007 21:06:59, Rand Simberg posted: So? The fact that they don't doesn't mean they shouldn't. That's simply superstition, which has (or should have) no place in engineering decisions. Search for "A Random Walk in Science" by Robert L. Weber, page 14, foot; can be found at books.google.com by +physicist +horseshoe +believe +Cohen. There's a version at the end of sec. 8 of http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:X...ino.edu/academ ics/naturalsciences/Physics/doc/Anecdotes.doc+%2Bphysicist+%2Bhorseshoe+ %2Bbelieve+%2Bcohen&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=10&gl=uk. -- (c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. Turnpike v6.05 MIME. Web URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links; Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc. No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Catching Vanguard 3 | Marty | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | November 26th 07 02:27 PM |
New Vanguard model | Pat Flannery | History | 5 | November 19th 06 03:41 AM |
Vanguard-1 blow-up televised live? | Jim Oberg | History | 22 | May 15th 06 05:47 PM |