I know nothing about rockets and the video is great, but something is missing. The capsule twisted rapidly, i think. It's something i don't see in the video, besides that, great simulation.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 yes lets call the people who put the first satellite (sputnik), animal (laika), man (Yuri Gagarin), woman (Valentina Tereshkova), spacewalker (Alexei Leonov), the first country to put a probe on the moon, and the only country currently capable of manned spaceflight to the space station (china is banned from visiting so their space craft can't dock to it) the "sore loser" cause last time I checked America and china have always come in second behind the Russians in space (except for that whole Apollo thing)
@@ThePrimalEarth Really? Everything after Apollo was an American achievement. We dominate in low Earth Orbit. From Hubble to the damn rovers still operating on Mars to this day. We had a fleet of shuttles not one like Russia's Buran which was cancelled. And today our damn private Space companies are running circles around Russia's private and state space programs. You do know that the Soyuz is being replaced? After that Russia will fall out of Space news and tech completely. The only reason they are relevant is because we grounded our shuttle fleet. Other than being a ride they offer nothing. Yes the "Soviet Union" did wonderful things in Space but Russia not so much.
Early on, Russian officials have said that they were studying the footage from the rocket cameras. Whether it is true, who knows. People who work there say that they did not have the live video stream from the rocket, but there might have been cameras similar to GoPro, recording the video on board. The first stages usually survive the fall in relatively good shape, and their remains are always recovered. So it would not be very hard to add such cameras with very high chances for them to survive the flight. There are also ground based optical tracking stations along the flight path, though the footage from them had never been made public.
@@FutureMartian97 Soyuz MS-10 is the first crewed mission to get the new Astra avionics unit, new sensors, guidance computer upgrades (to handle significantly more data), and a significant telemetry bandwidth upgrade - allowing it to have several engineering camera streams. It's been tested a few times before on Progress missions before to ensure it was functional. Basically, if MS-09 or any previous Soyuz failed, you'd be right - but they just completed an upgrade and their first mission was a failure. They're very lucky they installed the new system.
They have the ground impact location coordinates for all the components. I've seen three pictures, since taken down from a Russian technical forum, of a Blok A on the ground. The caption had "MS-10" on one of the pictures. Two different Roscosmos officials have mentioned onboard video. I'm of the opinion they have sufficient data on the cause. Preventing it from happening again is the issue. On NASASpaceflight forum, information was posted on 3 earlier,1960's-1980's, flight failures due to the collision of first and second stage components. Video would show if the Blok D struts released with the ball joint binding causing the Blok D to swing back into the Blok A before the ball joint released or the delay or failure in the oxygen port pyro firing caused the Blok D to slide down the Blok A impacting near the Blok A propulsion section as depicted in the animation.
I had no idea that the Soyuz had a second emergency escape system in the shroud. That's really amazing and incredible foresight by the engineers back in the 80s. This accident happened seconds after the LES had been jettisoned too. When the shroud boosters failed and then the shroud fell away, I assume the entire Soyuz spacecraft (instrument, rentry and habitat) modules were still attached so had to be immediately detached?
The Saturn V and Apollo spacecraft actually had two launch escape systems as well. The Launch Escape Tower (LET) on top of the Command Module would pull the crew cabin off the stack up until the burn out of the 1st stage, after which the LET was jettisoned. Then while on the 2nd and 3rd stages the Command and Service Modules, which were still connected together, would separate from the rocket and the SPS engine on the Service Module would fire to push the CSM safely away from the malfunctioning booster. Eventually the Service Module was jettisoned and the Command Module by itself would parachute into the ocean.
This was deigned long before 1980s. Korolev had a hard rule that a manned rocket had to be able to save people at any stage of its flight, including launch.
No one, ever, was killed via soyuz. Period. And it's like almost half a century old and still in service. That's a lower casualty rate than passinger aircraft. That is how reliable a soyuz is.
Bloody fantastic job with the recreation. The angles, the timing, it all very much helps get a much clearer view of the failure step by step as it happened. To think only a handful of weeks ago we hardly understood the issue, now we have reach the point of such accurate simulations, with the problem already being corrected. How the progress of science marches on!!
Some of the finer details of the timeline of this accident have eluded me... Until now. Thank you for shining some clarity on this for me AND for bringing us all of these excellent renderings!
Never came across your channel before. I am amazed by the quality of your work. This gives me the exact vision I was trying to picture in my head of what happened when Scott Manley was explaining it and showing those grainy videos. Thank you So Much for this. Consider me Subscribed.
How did you manage ti be so accurate to the point that this was posted before the video was even published? and heck knowing you needed time to make this was even more impressive
Your videos are top quality you deserve much more subs and views! As for the failure, to me it shows how good the rocket is. They have had a failure on the pad and in flight and crew have survived.
Wow, you made this before the actual video of the onboard view came out and it looks so similar. You do really deserve more subscribers then you have right now. Hope some guys notice your talent.
For anyone who wants an explanation of what they're seeing, here's the quick version. The clearest view of all of the events is at 1:25. The view that's closest to the actual onboard footage we've seen is at 0:58. The first stage of a Soyuz rocket detaches in four steps. The launchpad abort rockets eject from the top of the rocket. Think of it as an ejector seat for the entire crew capsule. This is removed to save weight, as the rocket is high enough to not need it. Second, the bottom clamps on the boosters release. The booster motors keep running for a moment after this to hinge each booster upwards on the joint at their tops. Third, the joint at the top of each booster releases when the body of the boosters have hinged up far enough to not slam back into the rocket during step 4. Last, small vents near the top of the boosters push them away from the center of the rocket. They spin safely away while the second stage is started. The failure was in step 3. The Russian space agency tracked down the wreckage from the booster which didn't separate. They believe that the bolt in the center of the joint was bent during assembly. This would have caused the sensor to never reach the angle where it is programmed to send a signal to systems that automatically release the upper joint. Because of this, the booster either hinged back down into the rocket or tore the entire joint off. Possibly both. Sensors linked to the systems that monitor which direction the rocket is facing detected that the ship could not be brought back under control and automatically ejected the crew capsule from the lower stages. Props to Scott Manley, whose explanation is what I'm basing this on. Go check out his channel. He's smarter than I am.
9 o clock booster remained hinged and tore the skin of the core bursting it's fuel tanks in trying to peel away awesome animation can shed light on this incident
It didn't remain hinged (the only hinges are at the bottom of the booster), but it failed to turn the nose away from the core stage, which is why the damage occured.
Bloody excellent!!! You filled in the gap of the real video - and that's exactly what I thought it would look like - if ya know what I mean. Gee you are good at this...
with the exception of the MS-10 mission, every single soyuz mission since 1986 was a success. thinking of how the soyuz family is just a heavily modernized and upgraded R-7 design, it's impressive that these things works as damn well as they do.
If that is what really happened, this video is very accurate! Only missing thing is Soyuz spacecraft fairing grid fins deployment, I think. EDIT: I was wrong, as Ambient Morality pointed out below. Great work!
Great video. Minor nitpick, you show the rocket rolling during ascent, which Soyuz-FG doesn't do (launch pad itself is rotated to launch azimuth and the vehicle only pitches or yaws).
That was a lovely video of separation after failure but I definitely wouldn't wana be on the craft if that happened to me. Thank new technology for doing it's part to bring down are lovely people that do theses science experiments for us to all survive for future people. Thankfully the astronauts survived 👍
