Spectacular: Launcher malfunction?

[ace5]

http://www.ceticismoaberto.com/news/?p=825<br /><br />http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=-508428482961312148&#038;hl=en-CA<br /><br /><br />It seems like a Soyuz launcher malfunction. Anybody aware? <br /><br />

 

[PistolPete]

Hey, Ace5! Long time, no see! <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br />I thought it was a comet at first, but it was moving visibly. As for the curly smoke cloud at the end, I don't have a clue.<br /><br />Do you have a link to an article in english? I can't read portugese. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><em>So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.</em></p><p><strong>-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai</strong></p> </div>

 

[comga]

Try www.google.com/translate. Feed in the URL<br /><br />"Now, what he interests. The video probably shows the launching of a rocket. Of beginning, the initial tracks indicate the engines of the first period of training. The first period of training if extinguishes, and after some moments, we see the next one. E the spiral? As the period of training probably was turning, and the track of the combustion would have such form. Unhappyly, or conveniently, the video does not allow to see beyond this point."<br /><br />It is not easy to read, but it is better than nothing. However, there is little information. Just guessing. IMHO, no correctly functioning rocket would leave a spiral.

 

[holmec]

Here is a translated part of it:<br />"Now, to what interests. The video probably shows the launching of a rocket. Of beginning, the initial tracks indicate the motors of the first period of training. The first period of training is extinguished, and after some moments, we see the near one. And to spiral? The second period of training probably be rotating, and the track of the combustion would have such form. Unfortunately, or conveniently, the video is not going to see beyond that point. Comments in the video question itself would have the launching of a rocket about a city. Well, rockets are created for go up. It is a broadly known fact. And specially high, of more distant you can be seen (your horizon will be bigger). Also we know about this. With the rocket to several kilometres of height, the cameraman and the city would be able to be to a huge distance and still see-him. It would have a false impression of proximity, result of a common little event — effect that can be related with apparent discrepancies in accounts about the reenterd of the Long March in the New Year about the center of Brazil. As regards the visibility of the tracks of smoke, possibly also itself must to that big height: she still partially be lightened by the Sun, while the cameraman already was in the half-light. This effect is very common with commercial planes condensation paths that are confused with UFOS or "static meteors". Finally. The video also can be a digital fraud, or a Gray maneuvering in its nave, clear. Between many other possibilities. We bring up to date this post case have corroboration about the identification. "<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[nyarlathotep]

Looking at the homepage is instructive, it's an astrology/UFO/paranormal/HAARP kook site. I wouldn't take its postdate as reliable, this video could be a number of years old.

 

[morik]

Hi, I'm the editor of the website mentioned in the link. It's in Portuguese, and does indeed deal with UFOs and kook things, but from a skeptical point of view. The name of the website is "Open Skepticism" (Ceticismo Aberto).<br /><br />Anyway. I just found what it was, a Soyuz launch from Baikonur on September 2006. The video was taken in Tomsk. See more details on the original link on my website.<br /><br />I'll be launching an English version of the website soon, but you should really try to use some automated translator before judging a website.

 

[morik]

There's one doubt, though: Why the spiral trail show up only after the sepparation of the first stage? The second stage was ignited at launch, and was there firing all along. Why does its trail appear only at the end?<br />Surely it's not just a contrail, and that's not the third stage firing.

 

[holmec]

Automated translator....thats what we did. lol. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[holmec]

I bet it was one of the first stage boosters spiraling out of control. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[morik]

[sarcasm]Aren't those automated translations done by some third world hindus, anyway? God bless America. [/sarcasm]<br /><br />The footage shows the successful launch of a Soyuz 11A511U with a Kosmos 2423 on Sep 2006, as seen from Tomsk.<br /><br />The rocket trail is still being lit by the sun, given the high altitudes, while it's already dark in Tomsk. They are noctilucent.<br /><br />But that still doesn't seem to account for why the second, spiral trail starts only moments after the first stage seems to detach. The second stage is firing from the moment of the launch, it should have a continuous trail.<br /><br />If anyone can explain that, it would be greatly appreciated.<br /><br />Thanks in advance.

 

[edkyle98]

>>"Anyway. I just found what it was, a Soyuz launch from Baikonur on September 2006. The video was taken in Tomsk. See more details on the original link on my website. "<<<br /><br /><br />You may want to investigate this a bit further. There were only two Soyuz launches from Baikonur in September. Kosmos 2423 was launched on September 14. Soyuz TMA-9 was launched on September 18. The TMA-9 launch occurred in broad daylight. The Kosmos 2423 launch occurred at dusk, but launch images at the link below appear to show a substantially brighter sky than the one shown in the video.<br /><br />http://www.federalspace.ru/NewsDoSele.asp?NEWSID=1797<br /><br />Here is a video of the daylight Soyuz TMA-9 launch.<br /><br />http://spaceblog.xprize.org/2006/09/19/soyuz-tma-9-launch/<br /><br />Tomsk is quite a way downrange, and east of Baikonur, so it might be possible that it was dark in Tomsk when the Soyuz launcher flew overhead. I wonder about the sunset lighting angle though.<br /><br /> - Ed Kyle

 

[morik]

Thanks for the input, Kyle. That the launch ocurred at dusk is precisely the condition that would favour the noctilucence (I don't know if I wrote it right). If Tomsk was already in the dark, then we have further confirmation.<br /><br />The first link you pointed actually has a comment about the video being discussed here. More links:<br />http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=4325&posts=12<br />http://allrussiannews.com/news/15-september-2006-inhabitants-of-tomsk-approve-that-saw-ufo.html<br />http://72.14.235.104/search?q=cache3AsUozJsd4J:news.rin.ru/eng/news///9485/11//&hl=en&lr=&strip=1<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />Mori

 

[edkyle98]

I like the last link you provided. Goodness do they have troubles in Tomsk. UFOs! Falling Rocket Stages! Bird Flu! Two Headed Calves! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />I agree with another post about the spiral. It would have to be one of the strap-on first stage boosters spiraling and perhaps breaking up after it was jettisoned.<br /><br /> - Ed Kyle

 

[bpcooper]

The Soyuz has four liquid strap on boosters. They only look like they are a part of the first stage with their curved design. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-Ben</p> </div>

 

[edkyle98]

>>"The Soyuz only has one first stage. There are no strap on boosters."<<<br /><br />The first stage is composed of four strap-on units that serve as "boosters" for the core, second stage. That's why I called them first stage boosters. The Starsem User's Manual describes the vehicle as having "a lower composite consisting of four liquid-fueled boosters (first stage), a core (second) stage, and a third stage"<br /><br />The first stage booster units are jettisoned about 2 minutes after liftoff. The core second stage burns for an additional 2.75 minutes, roughly.<br /><br /> - Ed Kyle

 

[ace5]

edkyle98:<br /><br /><br />"I agree with another post about the spiral. It would have to be one of the strap-on first stage boosters spiraling and perhaps breaking up after it was jettisoned. "<br /><br /> />> AFAIK, the four B,V,G, and D strap-ons are jettisoned after their RD 107 stop the propulsion phase. Only residual smoke, with no flames, are being expelled by the engine chambers during the effective separation.<br /><br />I bet on the simple contrail theory.<br /><br />