The failure of the R-36MUTTH/SS-18 missile (in its incarnation as a Dnepr launcher) that was supposed to deliver 18 small satellites into orbit, reminded everyone that there are limits to extending missile lifetimes. The missile was launched from one of the silo launchers at the Baykonur launch site at 23:43 MSK (19:43 UTC) on July 26, 2006. According to Roskosmos, the main engine shut off at the 74th second of the flight. The missile's remains were found at about 150 kilometers from the launch pad in an unpopulated area of Kazakhstan.
There is nothing particularly unusual about failures of missiles or space launchers - these things happen. It is interesting though to learn the details of the preparation for launch. The missile is apparently one of the R-36MUTTH, produced in the early 1980s - their deployment was completed in 1983. This particular specimen was reported to have been taken out of service three years ago, after 20+ years of service. It was already a second missile chosen for this launch - the first one was withdrawn due to some technical problems discovered during preparations for the flight (which was originally scheduled to take place on June 28). This probably means that the customers of the Dnepr launchers would be more cautious about reliability of the missiles that the Rocket Forces offer to them.
I don't know what happened to the Rocket Forces plan to keep R-36MUTTH in service until 2007-2009, but this may be reconsidered as well. As for the R-36M2 missiles that are now in service (there are about 50 of them out of 70+ SS-18-class missiles), they are unlikely to be affected by this incident. These were built in the late 1980s-early 1990s and still have a few years before they will start to push that 20-25 years limit. But at some point they will.
The book
Comments
This is not good...embarrassing and should not happen as often as it has with Russia. This is one of the hi-tech export advantages they have - outside of weapons - and they have made a name for themselves as exporters of these services....I guess the price for which they can offer these services is still better than other countries and companies will continue to use Russian services, but using a 22-23 yr old and retired missile for your busines - after all these are their clients - is pushing the envelope. There was a European sat. lost in October or November 2005 and a new Russian military sat right around the same time....how many more people can Putin fire?
Yes Pavel, everything should have limits. I think Russia is always a leader in making great carrier rockets. They don't need such converted rocket (Dnepr) to launch satellites. I think they use such converted rocket because it is much cheaper than a new carrier rocket. Another launch of Rokot carrier rocket (converted SS-19) with South Korean satellites from the Plesetsk was successful though. Well, I don't have idea how they are converted to a carrier rocket to launch satellites. Would you give litle idea?
There is an argument that the problem is not only missile safety, but personnel quality as well. The Soviet space programme was founded to a greater extent on the problem-solving abilities of its participants than on technical excellence. As mission control specialists and missile designers continue to retire, the Russians suffer ever more from a lack of experience.
Regarding this particular case, there have been reports that both "Dnepr" rockets experienced flight control system problems, in which case the rockets' propulsion systems may have been in good working order.
It should be noted that the main purpose of these launches is to eliminate the missiles and to certify extention of their lifetimes. The Dnepr launches, in fact, are conducted as part of the Rocket Forces training schedules (unlike those of Rockot).
The loss of experience is certainly a problem, although I'm not sure how serious. I think it is likely that during the Soviet times the majority of the Rocket Forces crews never took part in a live launch. The Rocket Forces just had to live with that.
An interesing detail - Baykonur cannot launch R-36M2 missiles, only R-36MUTTH.
Does anybody know what happened to the Strela launcher development programme? As far as I know Strela launches take place from Baykonur, because the Svobodny launch pad has never been finished. The only test launch in 2003 carried an engineer model of the Condor E satellite (Gruzomaket), but no further launch plans have been announced so far.
It looks like the Strela launcher program is still alive:
Persona is part of the Condor program, which includes a satellite developed at NPO Mashinostroyeniye to be deployed by the Strela launcher.
But I haven't seen anything else recently.
All launches of SS-18 missiles are now suspended - not only those of R-36MUTTH/Dnepr from Baykonur, but also R-36M2 from Yasnyy/Dombarovskiy.
Pavel Podvig:
'It should be noted that the main purpose of these launches is to eliminate the missiles and to certify extention of their lifetimes.'
Oh, if that's the case, the objectives of the launch were rather completed.
And yet some students from MGTU im. Baumana expressed their exasperation with the launch that had destroyed the 'USD 5M' satellite - not a trifle for Russian university. This is but one example of the 'righteous anger' of course, since that 'Dnepr' rocket carried multiple satellites from different countries...