NASA reports that Glory, a satellite to monitor aerosols failed to reach orbit, apparently from a fairing that didn’t release. See update below on the massive budget overruns for this failed project.
NASA’s announcement:
NASA’s Glory spacecraft launched aboard a Taurus XL rocket from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California Friday at 5:09:45 a.m. EST failed to reach orbit.
Telemetry indicated the fairing, the protective shell atop the Taurus XL rocket, did not separate as expected about three minutes after launch.
A press briefing to discuss the Glory launch failure is planned at Vandenberg for approximately 8:00 a.m. EST. NASA TV will carry the press conference live.
The new Earth-observing satellite was intended to improve our understanding of how the sun and tiny atmospheric particles called aerosols affect Earth’s climate.
Project management for Glory is the responsibility of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. The launch management for the mission is the responsibility of NASA’s Launch Services Program at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Orbital Sciences Corp. of Dulles, Va., is the launch service provider to Kennedy of the four-stage Taurus XL rocket and is also builder of the Glory satellite for Goddard.
h/t: Sera
=======================================================
Thanks to Ric Werme for posting this story. See previous issues with this launch here
NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory, another climate satellite, met a similar fate in February 2009 Bad week for hardware: Orbiting Carbon Observatory satellite burns up
Do you think Murphy might be trying to tell NASA something. Like maybe “get back to basics”? – Anthony
UPDATE: Frank K in comments psted this:
<a href=”http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2008-03-25-nasaprojects_N.htm” rel=”nofollow”>Major NASA projects over budget</a>
WASHINGTON — Two-thirds of NASA’s major new programs are significantly over budget or behind schedule, according to the agency’s latest report to Congress.
.
.
.
<b>
Hard choices also will have to be made to make up for the skyrocketing cost of the Glory satellite, which is 31% over budget. Under the 2005 law, NASA can’t spend any money on the project after the summer of 2009 without congressional approval — a requirement that could be moot if NASA launches Glory as planned in April 2009.
To make up for the extra $274 million that Glory and the other three programs will cost, NASA could reduce pre-flight testing, strip planned scientific sensors from over-budget spacecraft and scale back operations of older space missions, Maizel says.
The overruns “all the more put a crimp in NASA’s budget,” which is too small for the agency “to do everything it’s trying to do,” says Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla.
</b>
According to the BBC: “It is the exact same failure which befell Nasa’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) in 2009. It too launched on a Taurus XL rocket from the Vandenberg Air Force Base, and again the fairing failed to separate properly.”
It almost seems like someone doesn’t want better quality climate data.!
How hopeless are they, can’t even put a weather satellite into orbit LOL
What a waste of money, they should spend it on a probe to Europa, not this stupid project!
Why am I not surprised?
http://www.spacenews.com/civil/110303-doubt-europa-mission.html
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Convenient mishaps?
This failure can easily be blamed on anthropogenic global warming, or to be more exact, due to NASA’s obsession on AGW while neglecting it’s real reason of existence; space exploration.
Another launch fails to “measure climate change”. Is there a trend here?
Bad news. The data would have been useful to Svensmark I suspect.
Some might smell a rat here. Rather convenient for it to fail when it was likely going to report a cooling planet.
Cheers! (Formerly INGSOC)
Karma?
Things are meant to happen
Can they blame CO2 for it? If they used a rocket that didn’t emit CO2 maybe it would have worked, since CO2 causes everything else http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
Those diversity and community outreach programs cost a lot of money you know.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/06/nasa-official-walks-claim-muslim-outreach-foremost-mission/
Cheers! (INGSOC)
Scarlet Pumpernickel says:
March 4, 2011 at 5:23 am
How hopeless are they, can’t even put a weather satellite into orbit LOL
What a waste of money, they should spend it on a probe to Europa, not this stupid project!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Rightly said Scarlet, They can’t even put a weather satellite into orbit, while expecting us to believe what NASA’s Hansen prophecies on what the climate would be in a hundred year’s time. LOL.
NASA should be focusing on its riginal raison d’etre; space exploration.
When I just read this story on BBC, my first thought was that if I go to WUWT and there’s a post up about this already, either the main post or one of the first ten comments will allude to deliberate sabotage because they don’t want better quality data, because it’s all a conspiracy and the data won’t give them the results they want of course.
Glad to see I wasn’t disappointed.
It is more economical to gather data from actual models instead of gathering it for real.
Can they still use it to monitor the ocean?????
I wonder is it anything to do with the atmosphere at that altitude being very cold and the fairing locking up, much like the way you put a flywheel onto a crankshaft.
This is a real shame. The only decent thing that ever came out of this whole climate change issue was the extra money spent on satellites and other observational equipment like ARGO (not forgetting WUWT, of course).
NASA needs to refocus its attention on space and space exploration, not climate change, and not Muslim outreach, SPACE.
Patrick Davis says:
March 4, 2011 at 5:27 am (Edit)
> Another launch fails to “measure climate change”. Is there a trend here?
Depends on how many samples are needed for a trend. In sports, a losing streak generally starts at two.
Failed fairing releases have long been a problem in launches. You’d think people would have a better handle on them by now. One of the most famous failures was photographed in space, as it impacted Gemini 9A
I am sure glad their computer models are 100% accurate for the next 100 years of unknowable future. What would we do without such care.
I suggest they scrap the Muslims in space outreach program and use the money on launch vehicle improvements. NASA needs to stick to space exploration and give up on the rest. This is what happens when science gets political.
Good one, Hermey.☺
And good link, INGSOC. The Administration is spending NASA tax money on the Muslim religion by calling it “outreach.”
Probably all for the best. Less money is wasted by starving NASA of new data. They can’t waste money pencil whipping data to generate bogus ideological conclusions if they don’t have the data in the first place.
I’m ready to disband most of NASA and start over a bit at a time. The whole organization needs a cold reboot. Actually the same can be said for most U.S. government bureaucracies – they’re all bloated, unaccountable to the taxpayers, and generally out of control. Vote Tea Party now more than ever.
“Project management for Glory is the responsibility of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. ”
nuff said.
those guys must burn through a lot of $$$s.
this launch cost 424 x 10^6 dollars! a half a BILLION dollars. for what ?
Designed to fail, I say.
This is a shame. Claims that aerosols are “masking” human-caused global warming are a cornerstone of AGW faith in catastrophic future warming.
Did Gavin write the launch software?