Documents / Report

Department of the Air Force Report, 1996

U.S. Department of War · 1996-09-10 · 181 pages · text from the file's own layer

This final report, dated September 10, 1996, was prepared by the Research Triangle Institute for the Department of the Air Force's 45th and 30th Space Wing safety offices. Titled Modeling Unlikely Space-Booster Failures in Risk Calculations, it shows how rare Mode-5 failures, in which a rocket veers well off its intended flight line, are modeled in the DAMP risk-analysis program. An appendix lists Atlas, Delta, Titan and Thor launch and failure histories through August 1996.

From the source:Release of 2026-05-08 Incident: 9/10/96, N/A. This report describes the Modeling of Unlikely Space-Booster Failures in Risk Calculations, documenting historical launch failure modes and recommending corrective actions to address them using novel modelling techniques.

  • p. 88 …Vehicle loses control at or shortly after liftoff, with all flight directions equally likely. Destruct is…
  • p. 106 …121 (8) Missiles/Space Vehicle Files, 45th Space Wing, Wing Safety, Mission Flight Control and Analysis…
  • p. 111 …Such behavior did not necessarily prevent the attainment of some, or even all, mission objectives. 50…
  • p. 131 …Due to excess speed, spacecraft passed 22,000 miles in front of moon, and primary mission…
  • p. 132 …Although Atlas performance was satisfactory, the mission was apparently a failure. No other data available. 134…
  • p. 133 …A flight-control malfunction occurred at about 15 seconds at the start of the pitch program…
  • p. 137 …Vehicle became unstable when B2 pitch control was lost at 121 seconds. Loss of pitch control…
  • p. 138 …The missile then lost attitude control, executing a hard yaw rate tum throughout and beyond the…
  • p. 139 …of the rate gyro or an electrical failure in the pitch channel of the flight control…
  • p. 140 caused yaw and roll rates that the flight control system could not correct. As a result…
  • p. 151 …Attitude control lost during second stage coast period. Third stage spun up, but did not fire…
  • p. 153 …One solid-rocket motor carried to MECO, but mission was still a complete success. 102. SMS…
  • p. 169 …Missile tumbled out of control at 130 seconds, then broke up. 104. IHA (65-210), 1…
  • p. 170 …Nominal mission through transtage second burn shutdown. Attitude control system engine failed to shutdown following vernier…
  • p. 171 …However, satellite propulsion system malfunctioned putting satellite in uncontrollable position with no possibility of restoring mission…
  • p. 172 …control until propellant depletion. Trajectory inaccuracies were compensated for during Stage-2 burn, and the mission…
  • p. 180 …Missiles/Space Vehicle Files, 45th Space Wing, Wing Safety, Mission Flight Control and Analysis (SEO), 1957…
Table 38. Flight-Phase Definitions
Flight Phase
0
Description
SRM auxiliary thrust phase
1 First-stage thrust phase if no auxiliary SRM's carried, or
First-stage thrust phase after SRM separation
1.5 Attitude-control phase after first-stage thrust phase or between
first and second-thrust phases
2
2.5
Second-stage thrust phase
Attitude-control phase after second thrust phase or between
second and third-thrust phases
3 Third-stage thrust phase, or third thrust phase if second stage is
restartable
3.5 Attitude-control phase after third thrust phase or between
third and fourth thrust phases
4 Fourth thrust phase, or
Upper stage/payload thrust phase
5 Attitude control phase after Flismt Phase 4, or orbital phase
In some cases, two•flight phases are listed opposite an entry, e.g., 2 and 5. This means
that some failure or anomalous behavior occurred during the second-stage thrusting
period that did not prevent the attainment of an orbit, but did result in an abnormal
final orbit. Other somewhat arbitrary decisions were necessary in assigning a flight
phase when an expended stage failed to separate, or an upper stage failed to ignite. If,
for example, the first and second stages failed to separate, any of flight phase 1, 1.5, or 2
could be assigned, depending on the exact cause of the failure. The detailed
information needed to make the proper choice was sometimes lacking.
Table 39 is provided to assist in understanding how flight phases were assigned for
Atlas, Delta/Thor, and Titan vehicles.
Table 39. Flight Phases by Launch Vehicle
·Flight Phase Atlas Deltall'hor Titan
0 Castor burn Castor /GEM burn SRMsolo
1
1.5
2
Atlas booster
Booster separation
Sustainer
First-stage bum
Vernier solo - Sep 1/2
Second-stage bum
Stage 1
Stage-1 separation
Stage 2
2.5 Vernier/ACS solo Coast between stg 2 / 3 Vernier solo
TS/Centaur/IDS
-
Second burn
3
3.5
4
Agena/Centaur
-
Second bum
Third-stage bum
Coast after stg 3
Second bum
5 Orbit Orbit Orbit !
9/10/96 99 RTI

Not linked to a story yet.

About this file

Report, from the pursue collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 181 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.