****-colored ones lose another launcher

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...
In article KPCdnWBws8XWPYvQnZ2dnUVZ_q-
hdakotatelephone, says...

Another view of the launch and break-up he
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t33SXyAWOII
That's the launcher that uses a solid-fueled core stage with four
liquid-fueled strap-ons, a fairly odd way of doing things by western
standards.

Fairly odd is an understatement. Any word on what caused the failure?


http://spacenews.com/launch/101227-g...s-liftoff.html

This article implies that they got their calculations wrong pertaining
to the structural integrity of the increased payload.

"My analysis is the vehicle broke as it was not capable of taking the
higher structural load brought about by tilting beyond the limit (plus
or minus 4 degrees) of controllability due to excessive payload
weight,” the source said. “It is possible the analysis by our
scientists to look at vehicle stability after increasing the payload
weight had gone wrong somewhere.”

Pat Flannery wrote:
On 12/29/2010 7:12 AM, David Spain wrote:
Jeff Findley wrote:
In article KPCdnWBws8XWPYvQnZ2dnUVZ_q-
hdakotatelephone, says...
That's the launcher that uses a solid-fueled core stage with four
liquid-fueled strap-ons, a fairly odd way of doing things by western
standards.

Fairly odd is an understatement.

Budget constraints?

Core stage is related to their solid-fueled nuclear missile program
developments.


Aha I see. Two birds, one stone....

Dave

On 12/29/2010 7:12 AM, David Spain wrote:
Jeff Findley wrote:
In article KPCdnWBws8XWPYvQnZ2dnUVZ_q-
hdakotatelephone, says...
That's the launcher that uses a solid-fueled core stage with four
liquid-fueled strap-ons, a fairly odd way of doing things by western
standards.

Fairly odd is an understatement.

Budget constraints?

Core stage is related to their solid-fueled nuclear missile program
developments.

Pat