Soyuz mission failure 2 minutes after launch to ISS

[Electroman]

So how does it separate in Falcon 9?

 

[ecarfan]

So how does it separate in Falcon 9?

Spring-loaded “pushers”, electrically activated, I believe.

 

[bxr140]

...the solid booster to not jettison properly....

Quick check--the four conical(ish) boosters jettisoned at the staging event in question are liquid, not solid.

Fortunately SpaceX doesn’t use pyros to separate stages or payloads. Wise decision.

I think we need to be careful about conflating concepts. In context of this topic its really hard to beat the simplicity and reliability of what is essentially black powder. The root cause of this issue is not going to be "damn, we shouldn't have used pyros like we have been for the past 50 years on this rocket", its going to be workmanship or some other human induced negligence (pyros in aerospace have expiration dates, for instance). Those human problems, while unfortunately almost a systemic issue at this point with the Russians, is equally applicable to any separation device.

Not really related, IIRC there's even been very similar Russian staging failures in recent-ish years. Maybe a Proton? Its hard to keep up...

Anyway, a big benefit to using something other than pyros is the production efficiencies that open up. When your plan is to turn rockets on a very fast schedule, not having to deal with roadblock health and safety regulations surrounding the handling, transportation, and integration of explosives is going to be massively beneficial. When you add up seemingly insignificant things like not having all of your technicians take/maintain ATF training, not having to regulate access around ordnance, etc., there's a huge recurring cost and schedule implication. IMHO this is likely the primary reason SpaceX has chosen to avoid explosives.

Another major benefit is generally reduced shock load for all hardware, which is especially helpful on the payload side that is typically the most vulnerable element of the launch stack. Space units are categorized (among other ways) by their capability to withstand shock levels, so what happens at the spacecraft configuration level is that designers are restricted to locating low tolerance gizmos in areas of the structure that are well attenuated from shock--notably shock from the launch vehicle adapter that is connected directly to the payload's primary structural "backbone" (whatever that looks like). Put another way, there's sub-optimized spacecraft layouts specifically because of a pyro-driven flight adapter that can be better optimized with softer flight adapter loads. Das its gut.

So yes, it is a wise decision for SpaceX to not use pyros...and...that concept is completely irrelevant to this situation.

 

[e-FTW]

On reliability, I just happened to be reading up (yes, I fell into another rat hole) on Titan II when I saw this and it tweaked my frame of reference:

Because the Atlas had its fair share of problems in its early life (it had a 51 percent success rate when Glenn rode one into orbit)

Source This is Why the Titan Rockets Launch with a "Bwoop!"

51%. Think about that.
(And the courage of John Glenn)

 

[Grendal]

The commission investigating the Soyuz MS-10 launch accident has approved a preliminary report on its causes (which aren’t mentioned in the statement); a final report and recommendations will be ready by Oct. 30.

Jeff Foust on Twitter

 

[Nikxice]

Coincidentally Oct. 30th is the next scheduled launch date of an unmanned Soyuz. Roscomos is looking for a minimum of 3 successful launches prior to the next crewed launch to the ISS, currently scheduled for Dec. 19th. With 5 Soyuz launches on the manifest prior to MS-11, the MS-10 abort might end up having no long term impact on the ISS crew rotation.
After Soyuz Abort, Russia Wants 3 Successful Robotic Flights Before Next Crew Launch

 

[e-FTW]

The commission investigating the Soyuz MS-10 launch accident has approved a preliminary report on its causes (which aren’t mentioned in the statement); a final report and recommendations will be ready by Oct. 30.

Jeff Foust on Twitter

Man that was fast.

 

[Grendal]

There you go. Obviously safety is only an important thing when it's for commercial crew.
NASA chief says agency plans to launch crew on Soyuz in December

 

[Electroman]

Well if something bad happens you can always blame the Russians.

 

[cwerdna]

That video is interesting to show the NASA spokesperson was reading from a script. In another video, she went on for two or three minutes until finally mentioning the booster failure we eventually hear her mention here. The graphics are completely wrong and showing a normal launch. The translator is fantastic, repeating what the astronauts are saying. The control room shots are great. Everyone seems so calm, cool, and collected in the face of an emergency.

You're talking about the video in post 16, right?

Out of curiosity, do you understand the Russian language?

Someone on another forum pointed to NASA astronaut describes close call following failed launch

Hague — the first American to experience a launch abort like this — communicated in Russian throughout the more than half-hour ordeal.

"All of my instincts and reflexes inside the capsule are to speak Russian," said Hague, who had two years of training in Russia.

Since I don't know understand Russian and don't know any of the voices, I don't know which, if any of the Russian in the video was spoken by Hague.

 

[cwerdna]

BTW, I was hoping to find a video of Nick Hague speaking Russian but after trying not very hard, I didn't find any. I did stumble across

along the way. Maybe he speaks some in there?

 

[Nikxice]

There you go. Obviously safety is only an important thing when it's for commercial crew.
NASA chief says agency plans to launch crew on Soyuz in December

Jim Bridenstine is not someone I'm comfortable with heading NASA, especially hearing him chime in on the safety of a foreign spacecraft. He's a politician and a recent previous staunch denier of climate change. Which way is the wind blowing today Jim? Time will tell if he can follow through on his lunar visions and support of commercial exploration companies. Would hope that prior to MS-11 NASA engineers are involved with the pre and post inspection of any Soyuz launch vehicles. American astronaut Anne McClain is slated to be one of the three crewmembers.

 

[Grendal]

Here is a direct video of the Soyuz launch and failure:

 

[Nikxice]

The separation problem occurs around 1:25. Studying the video frame by frame, the nose section of the first stage booster on the left appears to have had the pyro issue.

 

[Grendal]

Scott Manley on his take with the video:

 

[cwerdna]

Russian official says Soyuz rocket failure caused by an errant sensor

 

[e-FTW]

Here is a direct video of the Soyuz launch and failure:

Man, that was much more violent than I expected! When things go wrong at those speeds, they go wrong big!
We had seen the crew get tossed around at that moment, but seeing the horizon snap away like that, am very glad the abort system did such a great job. Can't imagine how badly those forces damaged the rest of the rocket.