10 Rocket Launches That Went Horribly Wrong
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 09. 2023
- 10 Rocket Launches That Went Horribly Wrong
SUBSCRIBE: bit.ly/3obsVlo
► Music Licensed From SoundStripe/Envato Elements
For any and all copyright matters, please email me directly at UnderworldCopyright@gmail.com
Unless otherwise created by Underworld, licenses have been obtained for images/footage in the video from the following sources; pastebin.com/w3TAntts
Underworld is creating the best new educational videos about the lesser known stories from around the world. We post Top 5’s, Top 10’s, Caught on Camera and much more! Be sure to SUBSCRIBE to never miss an upload!
18:45 wait a few seconds and you will hear a noise that made me through my phone across the room!
Made me jump!
That just made me jump
I'm not quite to the 18 minute mark but I'll be listening..
Wth was that? I had headphones in, that shyte hurt lol😅
I'm surprised Space Shuttle Challenger is not in this video, as being the most failed launch that costed the lives of 7 astronauts.
That's outside of the scope of this presentation
They should make a video "10 Re-entries That Went Terribly Wrong" and have Space Shuttle Columbia that costed the lives of 7 astronauts.
@@rezzer7918 It's because the channel is biased. The whole world saw the solid fuel ROCKETS explode and kill seven people all through failures made by american workers. The usa has killed more people in 1 launch that the rest of the pace going nations put together.
@@rezzer7918 Looks like mishaps causing death and serious injury are out... Others include The Nedelin Catastrophe in 1960 and The Intelsat 708 launch in 1996.
However, it seems like the N1 Rocket should have made the list.
@@rezzer7918 Apparently, the scope of this presentation is to make the Russians look bad.
What really happened with the Arianne launch was they upgraded the software from 16 bit to 32 bit but they didn’t check all the variable data types so at one point they tried to stuff a 32 bit value into a 16 bit register, resulting in the dreaded buffer overflow and that was all she wrote.
tumble weed roles past .........@...
yeah pretty much all regular media channels covering rockets get just about everything wrong lol. hell they didn't even get the name of the launch site for spacex correct.
Buffer overflow killing a rocket is... something else
Integer overflow, technically. Buffer overflows involve streams of data, originally ASCII strings.
It's not a buffer overflow. It's an integer overflow.
12:49....😂😂😂🤣🤣 "the smoke made it higher then the rocket did"
At 15:36 I absolutely love how they're setting up these big steel rocket launchers right underneath a set of transmission lines. That's what's so pure about fireworks festivals in South Asian countries, it's like "We're celebrating our ancestors today and dammit, safety isn't how those ancestors got where they are. So we honor them by completely ignoring it too!".
Humans are awesome.
18:48 Was that an attempt to blow out my headphones?
It scared me to death lol
18:50 What the hell was that noise!? Made me jump out of my skin!!
18:55. That's one firework I will NOT be returning to.
Upper stage of Starship had 6 engines, not 9.
And nobody who knew rockets thought it would do any more than it did.
It did very well. Now if it will just repeat that every time it launches.
7:50 The greatest atmospheric pressure at 26,000ft? My god, all my life as a meteorologist I have been getting it wrong.
MAX-Q is explained in EVERY single rocket launch by hosts, yet authors of this movie seems to forget what it means 🤣
"Maximum dynamic pressure" is what they meant to refer to. That combines forces from the acceleration, atmospheric drag, etc...all forces acting on the vehicle. 26,000 feet sounds about right.
@@cyril-rr2jkya, agreed. Mr. Meteorologist did kinda crack a funny, tho, in the absence of a Max Q explanation.
I gave up watching the rest after the second major error. The first was referring to the "Centaur" explosion. The Centaur series are upper stages, inside the nose fairing of the rocket shown. The 1st stage was what exploded, which was a notoriously unreliable early Atlas.
The second major error was during the footage of the Starship Heavy test. The engines shown and described in the narration as the engines that "stopped working" and caused the failure were at the base of the second stage, not the first. They never had a chance to start working and footage highlighting the ones that did stop isn't shown.
Do better research before misinforming people.
Yeah. This is pretty bad. I can't trust any of this. Also said the starship flight went "horribly wrong" at stage seperation... but it never made it anywhere close to stage seperation.
and he said the upper stages 9 engines didn't light.. Starship has 6. 3 Sea level, 3 vacuum.
10:04 I love the way mission control called it a 'Flawless countdown'! My smartphone's clock app can do a flawless countdown, but it doesn't do it's own version of jazzy Jeff's Boom! Shake the Room at the end!
Lord. Good laf.
Totally incorrect on the spaceX article. That's not what happened at all
Did Elon say it was supposed to blow up? That they were testing their self-destruct system?
Great job, don’t forget the Challenger Disaster in January 1986 when the rocket exploded 73 seconds into its flight and killed all 7 of its crew.
It’s a (tragic) technicality, but the SRB didn’t explode - the external fuel tank did after the leaked hot gases from the SRB burned through the skin of the tank. Both SRBs spiraled away from the explosion, out of control, until destroyed by the range safety officer.
Prior to the explosion, the orbiter was traveling at almost Mach 2; the damaged SRB and tank structural damage created aerodynamic forces that tore everything, including the orbiter, apart. The massive explosion happened an instant after, which engulfed the Shuttle and tank. I don’t know, however, if most of the Shuttle’s damage was caused by the explosion, or by being aerodynamically ripped apart. As you undoubtedly know, the crew capsule portion was found relatively intact at the bottom of the ocean.
Such a tragedy that should not have happened. The Shuttle was a big deal then, space being far from routine. Like millions of others, especially kids at school, we watched the launch on TV in northern Wisconsin, jokingly around, not paying really close attention. Mrs. Bangs was recording it on the VCR, like she always did. I was almost sixteen, so maybe a sophomore, and the freshmen and juniors were also there - small school; I graduated in a class of nine. When it happened, we did what every other person on the planet did, who were watching…just stared in shock.
Something profound and serious and unexpected and tragic happened in front of our eyes.
Not since Pope John Paul II’s attempted asassination (Phelps had a lot of Catholics, even in our public school) had we been so jarred by reality. And for me at least - 15’s a pretty impressionable age - not again til 9/11. For a lot of us, Challenger will probably always be something of a sacred event in our lives.
The Centaur is the secaond stage of the Atlas, starting from Atlas I thru Atlas V. The Cantaur uses LH2 for fuel, while the Atlas, in all versions, used RP-1. I helped put 80 Centaurs into space over 15 years, but the SpaceX Falcon does that many launches in less than a year now. Innovation and progress is much more rapid in a program that doesn't rely on gov't dollars and micromanaging.
almost like private enterprise is ALWAYS more efficient than gov projects......nahhhhhhh
They also push the equipment to failure to learn from it...
Furthermore, the Atlas is not really "America's workhorse" today since its first stage is powered by a Russian rocket engine developed during the Soviet era. In fact, this is precisely why it has been permanently retired. "America's workhorse in space" is the Falcon 9.
Falcon/SpaceX is independent operator. And for that reason they do shit that goverment contractors would take decades to do. I started on Atlas in 1990 when Atlas was first going commercial. Their first 2 "commercial" Atlas I launches failed, due to Centaur upper stage engine failure. Each shut down the program for nearly a year. Falcon fails and they cheer just because their vehicle cleared the tower or whatever, and they push on. Goverment oversight is a huge ball and chain.
I was there when Atlas transitioned to RD-180. Scratchin my head. The Russian propuslion team was sequestered in a cubilcle in the blockhouse and I'm thinkin, "How are we gonna launch Nat'l seurity payloads like this?" @@rbrtck
As my dad, a programmer on Blue Origin's New Glenn rocket and former programmer on the SLS project says, "A failed launch is invaluable data."
That's impressive, your dad has a cool job. I'd want to tell everyone if I were in your shoes as well.😂
@Mediocre_JT pardon me for establishing the authority of the statement's source.
You gotta launch to fail so get your dad to give Bezos kick up the jacksy!
@@kristideeleyYour dad is 100% correct. I’ve been in aerospace (propulsion) for almost 40 years, the silver lining of any failed launch attempt is that the best way to learn how to do something right is to learn what NOT to do to make it fail. The fault trees we create are humongous when trying to think of all the things that can go wrong, but the problems arise when it was something we did NOT think of.
Cheers to your dad! My best friend from high school is a manager up in Kent. Blue Origin is an amazing company. 👍🏼
@@Rocket_scientist_88True enough. I bet it has to be extremely hard to handle, though, if and when the telemetry is somehow compromised or nonexistent, and the engineers are left going “wtf.”
Avarage KSP Experience:
This first time I saw Columbia launch in 1981, I have to admit the roll manuever after liftoff concerned me...until I found out it was programmed!
In the words of Thomas Edison: i have not found ten thousand failures... i have sucessfully found ten thousand ways that don't work. haha made me laugh.
Refer to that 1 as a *Lightbulb* moment 😂
Why not just use an SR71 and a some O2 tanks.......Engines would Stall when Atmosphere is gone (boundary of Space) 🤔🤔
Reverse the Exhaust cones to Front of TFE allowing for Rapid rate of Air Fuel ratio on Decent back to Earth?
Faster Decent would have Jump start effect on Turbine Fan Engine (TFE) Plane is Hypersonic 🤔
18:48 What happened to the audio 💀I didn't know underworld included jumpscares now..
I'm surprised that there wasn't any early German V2 test flights in the video as some of those were spectacular failures.
- The Atlas Centaur is NOT NASA's workhorse and never was, the Titan D is their go-to rocket
- The problem with the Ariane 5 rocket was NOT too much data in a tiny chip, the problem was that the data was from the Ariane 4, it commanded the Ariane 5 to adjust course. The Ariane 4 was a very slow reacting rocket, the Ariane 5 was very quick to adjust course and it over g'd the frame.
The Ariane 5 test flight failure was caused by an issue with converting a 64 bit integer to a 16 bit integer. It was the same system used on the Ariane 4, but Ariane 5 was higher performance and accelerated faster, causing the 64 bit encoded value to overflow the 16 bit value on conversion. The overflow caused the horizontal bias to suddenly go from a large positive value to a large negative value and the rocket's control system understood that the rocket was essentially flying backwards and made control inputs to try and "turn around."
The Atlas-Centaur combo was not a workhorse, you're right. At the same time, the Centaur family upper stages ( combined with various lower stages ) have been used extensively for decades, so I can see the term applying to just that part of the rocket shown.
Something something stack overflow.
This guy's just making shit up to get views. He doesn't research any of this. Can't even get the name "Boca Chica" correct.
Titan D? What the frak is a Titan D? And your Ariane analysis is equally suspect. But you did well at sounding confident, despite not knowing what you’re talking about.
These rocket launches have gone through my skull. As far as I'm concerned, you can never be too certain in this world. Things do end up horribly when you least expect it.
Such a pitty you didn't include the Challenger tragedy on this compilation as it should have been at 1st place... it was not only tragic, it costed 7 human lives.
As a software developer, I can confirm that most managers want us to run Elden Ring on a PS2
I am uniquely surprised at this video. I came here expecting the usual garbage of how rocket launches are expensive and dangerous and should be abandoned coupled with videos using terrible foley work and voice over to the effect of "It was a total failure. A horrible set back. They never recovered!" Instead, this narrator and whoever made this video were very fair in describing these launches and how successful even a rapid unscheduled disassembly can be.
At 14:00, the Russians said the SU-300 performed perfectly. It was supposed to pop up then fall to the ground where upon landing, they tested their rocket engines which performed flawlessly. It was supposed to make that shudder sound as it was testing how well the rocket could withstand vibrations. Then it didn’t actually blow up but was supposed to use up all its fuel in a record amount of time.
The rocket test was called the “Special Military Zero Altitude Rocketry Operation”. The word Blyat! You hear everyone yelling is not a cuss-word, but actually a Russian custom where they call their rocket a “whore” upon liftoff.
In my best Comic Book Guy voice : " Ha ha, boy, I really hope somebody got fired for that blunder."
Rocket development, gold! All the things that can go wrong in a launch without having to blow it up yourself!
The amount of mistakes in this video is astounding
18:49 What the heck? That noise sounds like what the rocket would’ve sounded like if it was a dart.
Enjoyed this one.
The cutey rocket tat fot he was a baby dart 😊
"The Starship's failed launch was successful." Yep: they learned how to completely destroy a launch facility in about four seconds.
it survived the last launch hehe
"completely destroy", seriously? it was up and running 6 months after the first launch with upgrades even, doesnt look like "complete destruction" to me.
Starship launch went horribly wrong? What you are drinking?
It did it blew up
@@harryvlogs7833 Granted, but the ship wasn't planned to go into orbit either. They were testing the separation systems, which failed. It was to do one flip as part of it process. Least they did get valuable data from it.
@Ragetiger1 yes it was planned to go to orbit Elon said. He also so it had 50% of getting there
Gracias por crear conciencia a través de este video. Es crucial que comprendamos la gravedad de los eventos catastróficos y tomemos medidas.
"It has worked hundreds of times in the past. What could possibly go wrong in this attempt?"
that last one, I think a little gunnery practis would have been in order.
I was working on a ground breaking satellite with an ion drive that as luck would have it was 2 years late, otherwise it would have been on the first Ariane 5 launch. I worked in Project Management so I would say that delivering on time is not always a good idea. In the office we were watching the launch and were we glad our project was late.
Bro, the fkin sound glitch you had at fkin 18:49 fkin made me deaf
the commentary is horrible🫢😵💫
I remember when Challenger blew up. I was at work when it happened. Terrifying.
Hahah, the auto-generated subtitles say "[Applause]" for the rocket explosion sounds.
Man that’s a real big bottle rocket 🚀. 😆
MaxQ is the time of greatest DYNAMIC pressure, not greatest ATMOSPHERIC pressure. Atmospheric pressure at any given altitude is relatively static; while dynamic pressure varies with the speed of the launch vehicle.
Funny how 50 years ago they have same progress as 50 years later, still not to the moon haha!
*sigh* the SpaceX launch was only a test and they didn't expect it to succeed
HELPFUL CORRECTIONS:
1. Centaur - that wasn't "spiraling out of control" - it appears to remain on trajectory, but explodes. "
2. "According to SpaceX..." are you unable to do your own research and VERIFY it IS the most powerful launch system ever developed"? -
Also, nice Edison Quote 👍
Wow - 17:15 an eco friendly self extinguishing low altitude corkscrewing missile, what a display of engineering ingenuity.
That one rocket went from 108% to 10000% instantly.
_”Interplanetary missions?!”_ 🤣
The atlas/centaur explosion is in the last part of the film "Koyaaniqatsi"
A good movie, and the final part with the music is mesmerizing
The sustainer was pretty much intact all the way til it hit the Atlantic
Thanks for showing some in the first 18 seconds. I can now do something else in the next 19 minutes.
"Mistle" LOL
No no no! Starship flight did not go "horribly wrong at stage seperation". The ship didn't even get close to the point where it would seperate. What went "horribly wrong" is there was fires in the engine bay started by a few failed engines. These fires caused more engines to fail and eventually cut through flight control lines leaving the ship unable to control itself. The flight termination system was activated, and it eventually came apart. They were no where close to the speed, altitude, or mission flight time for stage seperation.
This was the recent 2023 launch. The narrator completely botches the story. ("Some engines failed to fire," as the video shows the not-yet-active second stage engines, is hilariously stupid.) Stage separation was in fact successful; the booster failed to re-ignite it's engines and was unable to return for a landing as planned (the video shows the booster falling out of control untl the self-destruct is activated.) The second stage proceeded as planned for a while (apparently the narrator doesn't know this), before it had its own problems, and the flight was terminated over water.
@@jpdemer5 This was not the recent November 2023 launch (the second prototype test), this was the April 2023 launch (the first prototype test). You mostly describe the second test correctly other than: 1. The booster did infact relight all but one of it's mid ring engines after stage seperation for the boostback, but they quickly began to fail. 2. Based on language from SpaceX that the booster was a RUD (Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly), many assume the booster was NOT terminated by the FTS (Flight Termination System). Jury is still out on that at this time.
The Firefly Aerospace rocket launch should be included. Sept 3, 2021. The Air Force had to shoot it out of the sky because it started to lose thrust and started to flip. The debris field on land was so wide the company got in trouble.
it did not get "shot out of the sky", rockets have a flight termination system built in
*Wow, I was not expecting that! This video is a real eye-opener!*
very interesting video
The first one looks shockingly similar to the Challenger explosion. Thank goodness it was unmanned, and unwomanned. (and undogged)
And unchimped! 🐵
To quote Scott Manley, "Check your Staging!"
I was there to watch the ill fated launch of #6. It was launched from Wallops Island, Va. As soon as it exploded, I yelled to anyone within earshot to brace themselves for the shockwave in a few seconds. It was like a big cannon had just been fired! 😮
Poor baby missel 😞
8:20 Nine engines? Starship has only six, what are you talking about?
he got at least 2 things wrong abt starship :P
9 engines and
"as u can see, a few engines stopped working" *proceeds to show view of ship engines (never ignited)*
how could you not include at least one of the "vanguard" launches from the 1950's or '60's? no one should ever forget that glorious news service headline, "vanguard fizzles again!"
Ummm. There are only 6 engines in the second stage aka Starship.
It's difficult not to make sarcastic remarks, evident here, but research is key, and some people put their lifes work into this.
Lol. The speaker seems to have a major crush on S-300 AA missiles.
why the people clap their hands on the spacex was because it looks like firework
Regarding #10… Centaur is only the UPPER stage of the Atlas/Centaur. The vehicle was still in the boost phase when we hear that AWESOME early 60’s announcer’s voice proclaim “MALFUNCTION!!” Centaur was still fully tanked, its engines had not yet started.
Centaur is indeed still NASA’s workhorse - as an upper stage for additional boost, and as a vehicle to carry payloads to deep space.
Centaur III is still used today with the Atlas V booster (still Atlas/Centaur but quite significantly updated from the Atlas I and Centaur I coupling) and most recently, with the Cert-1 flight of Vulcan/Centaur on Jan. 8.
Atlas V has been a incredibly successful vehicle, which says a lot about the people at United Launch Alliance, who build and launch these today. 👍🏼
1:10 He said this like he cast a spell
I worked as a tech editor for Space Systems/Loral years ago. We had some, um, interesting things happen in some of the launches our satellites were on. One of them was with a Russian launch vehicle with a multi-satellite payload. We were able to watch a live broadcast of the launch. Several minutes into the launch, contact was lost, but according to the Russian commenter, everything was fine, when it was obvious something had gone wrong. Turned out he was reading a script, not relating the actual info.
Typical Russians!🤥
Any idea what happened that time? What did you allegedly see?
@@pimpinaintdeadhoнет у него идей кроме этой сказки😂
Have a nice day
*Thank you for sharing these good moments. I'll leave this comment here and review it every time someone likes it. great videos*
Pa was usaf, we lived on Vandenberg during the 1960's, rockets going wrong was our daily entertainment, dodging falling rocket parts, priceless...lol
I like these rocket failure-videos very much!😀❤❤❤
Literally that was a efficient burn now they should have tested differently
1:12 - Man says Malfunction like a command; rocket obeyed. 🤭
A spectacular explosion, and they report a flawless countdown!...
These are the most expensive fireworks I have ever seen.
Wow so cool
"Neil Armstrong was 7 years away from landing on the Moon'???
Why would anyone be nervous, they used a completely different rocket for Apollo?
Starship launch didn't go horribly wrong, it went much better than anyone expected.
No it didnt. It failed from the start. The launchpad itself was so poorly designed that it caused 3 engines to die before liftoff. If you honestly believe that that went much better than anyone expected, then you have bought into the propaganda.
@@jasonkay9345 LOL Elon stated, if it gets off the launch pad that a win.
“The system didn't think they were healthy enough to bring them to full thrust so they were shut down."
The rock tornado started after engines were bought to full thrust.
You obviously believe everything you see in social media as fact.
Yes it ate the launch pad (pretty sure if you designed it it would not have), but it got 24 miles into the air and gave SpaceX plenty of great telemetry.
No one with half a noggin thought it would actually get to space, not even Elon.
@@jasonkay9345 BS. The launch went well and shown how strong the structure is even despite being bombarded by debris at launch and spinning in the atmosphere. Not even FTS could break it. All of the issues are now fixed and starship is scheduled to fly again on Nov 17.
Should have included the Top Gear launch of the UK Space Shuttle (aka Reliant Robin)
For information, Slovakia does not have s300 systems. The government used to unconstitutionally donate them to Ukraine.
Notice every time each rocket gets to a high enough altitude it explodes, the firmament is real we cannot leave the earth.
Geeez I would use an RPG on that last "dart" thing, I would def not get near it 👀
The Starship never reached the altitude and speed at which stage separation would have taken place. That is why there was no stage separation. There was a fire in the engine bay that eventually severed the flight computer's control lines to the engines, and the rocket went out of control.
Also, the second stage in this case had 6 engines, not 9. There is a lot of misinformation here.
Why is it that these and similar videos always have the sound of the failure/explosion at the same time as video is showing the explosion? In reality, the sound would not reach the ground where the camera is for some significant period of time. To me, that makes the video look fake.
Lest he having fun on the sky tell he weant boom 💥
18:50 crash sound😂
3:52 - When someone who does not understand the thing, tries to explain the thing.
cant believe challenger wasnt on
3:22 Flight Director: "All propulsion parameters are normal, the trajectory is normal." In the same time, the rocket is exploding. Irony of fate.
Why they clapping😂😂😂😂 8:45
I don't mean to take credit away from anyone, but if you're going to use the word "workhorse" then the Falcon 9 would have to be the one. The Atlas V is very reliable, but that program just doesn't have anywhere near the launch rate, as in cadence, of the Falcon 9.
And this goes especially because you said "America's workhorse", when the Atlas V's first stage is powered by a Russian engine designed and developed in the Soviet era. That's why it's being retired permanently now.
I.S.T. Japanese President Takahiro Inagawa, after the second failed launching, promptly left the building and committed seppuku.
Which "boundaries of space" did crapship one reach?
This is why you shouldn't use fireworks that have not been approved.
your research into those topics is abysmal. Arianne 5's problem was that a test parameter was kept track off caused an integer overflow because the software for Arianne 4 was reused in large portions. The CPU caught the error and handed off control to a second, redundant system. But that system had already crashed a few fractions of a second earlier from the same problem and was currently outputting diagnostic data, which the guidance system then interpreted as steering data. The rocket actually blew up because the people on the groud triggered the self destruct explosives, put into rockets to prevent them from crashing somewhere where you don't want it if it does end up loosing control.
There is test footage of a Saturn 5 the US Moon rocket, where the test rocket falls apart, due to the inertia. So from that you can tell how much work was done, to get the Apollo Moon rocket right.
All of the Saturn 5 rocket launches we successful. There were glitches with some of the flights but none of them "fell apart".
@@jimfarmer7811 Go look at the footage.
Your explanation of the first Starship launch is totally incorrect. It was not trying trying to undertake stage separation at all. It never even got close ...
14:37 Dude there was *NO EXPLOSION*
Dictionary! 🤦♂️