SOYUZ TMA 9 LAUNCH / EXP. 14 / ANOUSHEH

[staranjela]

good work here

[CaptainSn0wMan]

im curious way do they wait a while before unlaching the rocket after its lit? and why do they have those 4 laches on it the bottom holding it? is it the russian version of the american launch post or sumthind?

[malamagr]

Korolyov would be proud. His booster design still in use after 51 years and will be for some time yet. Wonder if they will change the basic design when they finally move on to a newer rocket. Isn't this the only rocket where there's an exposed engine that doesn't fire until later? The central stage stays off until the boosters drop away, right? The Chinese Shenzhou is similar but the center engine also fires during the 1st stage of flight, and AFAIK all other rockets have 2nd stage blocked.

[ConsciousAtoms]

@malamagr "Isn't this the only rocket where there's an exposed engine that doesn't fire until later?"

The central stage engine is ignited together with the boosters during launch. The original R-7 rocket was designed that way so that it would not be necessary to start any rocket engines during flight.

Technically, SpaceShipOne and X-15 are rockets with exposed engines that do not fire until after launch. If you interpret "launch" as "takeoff of their mother ships" ;).

[alpine1600s]

Soyuz doesn't launch ISS parts, the Proton launch vehicles do that. And yes, for the jobs in space for today, the shuttle is obsolete. It was the most inefficient launch vehicle to date. Since the F-1 will never be acknowledged as a supersized flamethrower! Lol

[beaniebrothers1]

the f-1 rocket used in the apollos had 0 failure

[spacebrdcst]

AEROSPACE ROXXXXXXXXX

[toiletcakes]

i will have reliability over tech any day

[decemberdazzle]

I hate how people compare Soyuz and Shuttle. They're completely different.

The Soyuz is an extremely reliable way of getting small numbers of astronauts into orbit, especially for docking with the ISS.

The Shuttle is a launch vehicle that is extraordinary in that it can launch like a rocket, carry many astronauts into orbit, and then land like a hypersonic plane.

Both are amazing feats of intelligence and teamwork, and both should be respected; I hate when people mock/complain about either one.

[NANOFORGE]

@decemberdazzle Problem is the shuttle is to unpracticle. It is an obselite craft now.

[decemberdazzle]

@NANOFORGE How do you think 90% of the ISS got into orbit? Can the Soyuz grab satellites from orbit and bring them back to Earth? What spacecraft do you think repaired the Hubble telescope?

I'm not saying that the Shuttle is superior to the Soyuz; I'm saying that it is far from obsolete. Although more expensive, it can do things that other launch vehicles just can't do.

[NANOFORGE]

@decemberdazzle I'm not saying the Shuttle has'nt contributed, it has contributed massivelu. The space shuttle could carry more cargo and that was the whole point with it. The reason why it is unpracticle was because it took twice as long to reach orbit than other craft and used much more fuel. Yes you are right though, the Space shuttle has put more machinery up there than another craft. It is sad to see these birds decomissoned.

[KyleP133]

Space Shuttle was and always will be a farce. I'm amazed they stuck with it so long. Solid Rocket Boosters arent the best choice either, merely hte result of congressional pork to pay back campaign contributors and lobbyists. It's a shame, I blame the shuttle for the pathetic state of the current US space program.

[eefree89]

We Americans may have tech, but Russians have reliability.

[AttemptingToBeBusy]

It's so clean!!

[GladiusDidimus]

So much quieter than a saturn V, or the shuttles SRB's

[SingularlyDatarific]

Now I know why Russian cars were shit!

All the smart people were working on building these beauties!

[litfuse55]

@SingularlyDatarific seriously

[davidlucasfer]

hermoso amazing

[verblendet]

awesome

[highintel]

2:24 it's the Star of David!!!!!

[themainproblem]

I love Russian hardware! Now that's a rocket! :-)

[airdriver]

At 2:59, you can see something that looks like a stuffed animal hanging down. That's what's known as a "Boris" doll. In the early days of Soviet spaceflight the Russians hung those on every flight so when the flight engineers viewed the cockpit films they could determine the exact second that spacecraft achieve final engine cutoff and entered zero gravity.

These days they hand it for tradition.

[greenseaships]

My one gripe about russian launches is their lack of the kind of telephoto lenses we use on shuttle launches. The really great visuals are over in a few seconds. Still, lovely sight.

[telescopereplicator]

With well over 1700 launches and only 1 abort and and 2 incomplete launches, the R7-based rockets are the best and most reliable rockets ever built. The R7/A2 rocket, used to launch people, has a success rate of 99.9966 percent. Which is better than ANY other type of rocket ever built.

Russian rocket engines are so good, that more and more American rockets are now equipped with Russian rocket engines.....! The Atlas rockets, f.i. use the RD-180.

[Eagle1Division2]

@telescopereplicator

#1. We don't know about all the rockets that failed, not during the past soviet administration.

#2. Isn't it kind of childish to be saying "my country is better than yours", anyways?

#3. You can't compare it to the shuttle, the shuttle is more capable but also more expensive.

#4. The ISS is INTERNATIONAL, Russians have flown with NASA, and NASA astronauts have flown with Russia.

Hate to tell you this, but the cold war is over.

[telescopereplicator]

@Eagle1Division2 #1. A lot of info has been released since. And since (and before, for that matter) the "Glasnost", only a few R7 launches were not satisfactory.

#2. I never said that, nor did I ever implicate it...

#3. I never mentioned the Shuttle...

#4. I never mentioned the ISS, either...

Hate to tell you this, but you are bad at History, reading and writing replies to YouTube videos.

Read more books, then reply, if necessary.

I am neutral. I like space travel in general.

[SepradistPhantom]

@telescopereplicator Well the British satellite launcher only ever had one failure during it's first test flight, i'd say that's up there. Especially with such a limited budget and time constraints.

[Consorharley]

@telescopereplicator Gotta call you out on your math. 3/1700 isn't a .0034 percent, its a .18 percent. That's still great, clearly, but you were way off...

[telescopereplicator]

@Consorharley Indeed, I just saw the error I made. I shouldn't have used that old Russian calculator...... ;-)

[CamiloSanchez1979]

which one is safer? soyuz or shuttle?

[kibabiba]

Soyuz crashed two times in 1967 and in 1971.

Since 1971 it was upgraded many times.

Shuttle crashed 2 time too in 1986 and in 2003

I rather choose Soyuz

[ukrainesuperpower87]

Sorry Anousheh Ansari's, but Iran and Russia must be destroyed for peace in the world. I hope that both these evil countries will be destroyed very soon

[featheredmusic]

The way you generalize reflects your intellect and ignorance. People like you should never have anything to say, so stfp

[shir2008]

space "soon to be retired" shuttle!

[featheredmusic]

look at that clean take off, no smoke at all, nice and fast. This is much better then the complex and expensive shuttle launch operation.

They need to switch to simpler lifts

[ProfessorJames]

Solid fuel rocket boosters leave smoke behind, but the shuttle's engines per se leave no smoke behind either, or the Apollo, I mean it's not a characteristic of Russian rockets.

[featheredmusic]

Ahh right, probably because they are much lighter and require less propulsion, cheers mate!

[Connecticut2009]

¿YOU CAN TALK IN ENGLISH?

[zgrillo2004]

fuck you PETA asshole. you are not gonna win the war. so take your shit somewhere else peta fags

[isadashhqdotcom]

Thanks! Check out the International Space Agency (ISA) site here by clicking on this user account! Also check out the International Space Plane (ISP) Program website! You can google "International Space Plane (ISP) Program", or you can go to this user account which has links to the International Space Agency (ISA) Organization.

[Kolfritz]

It's amazing how reliable the Soyuz system is.

[greenseaships]

@Kolfritz easy to be reliable when it doesn't have to be re-used. Think about it- every rocket that goes up is brand new and they've built 'em hundreds of times already. They can probably build 'em in their sleep. ;)

[Kolfritz]

@greenseaships That's a very good point. Most single-use things have to be that way.... I remember hearing somewhere that Soyuz means "unbreakable" in Russian; which seems revlevant.

[KnoxSUX]

@Kolfritz No, it means "Union". Short for Sovjet Union.

[Kolfritz]

@KnoxSUX Oops. Thanks for correcting me!

[darkfalzx]

@greenseaships True for ALL rockets. The fuel tank and the rocket boosters that lift the Shuttle are brand new every time as well. The stages of Soyuz falling down to Earth as well as the passenger capsule are most likely reclaimed for scrap. The shuttles, while retaining their names might've as well been brand new every flight too, as in order to re-certify them for every new flight they had to be nearly taken apart piece by piece and then put back together. Super inefficient - the American way

[malamagr]

@darkfalzx The shuttle boosters were re-usable, in fact the one that failed on Challenger had been used in at least one prior launch and was slightly out-of-round after hitting the ocean, this was part of the reason why the seal failed, there was more clearance at that point and the cold o-ring didn't seal at that point. The shuttle boosters had more in them than meets the eye, they were expensive enough to want to re-use.

[darkfalzx]

@malamagr As far as I know the term "reusable" in the space flight industry is very relative. Even though most of the booster is recycled from one expedition into the next, it is most definitely taken apart, each component is calmed over for signs of wear and potential failure, and about 20% of entrails are replaced outright. Any fragile mechanical object that hits water at 5-8 km/h, and then remains submerged in corrosive salt water for up to five hours would have to undergo this process.

[drummer4life92392]

Anybody else see borat in the background?

[dpay02]

I see somebody on this message board as simple as Borat that's for sure.

[proaudiohd]

Why is the audio on all NASA produced videos so horrible? Where is the exciting sound of the rocket? I think they could up their public image if they produced some better videos. It seems to always be local public access quality.

[stevenewyork]

What the Russians have demonstrated is reliability. Soyus has been flying for almost 30 years. One advantage is that each ship is used once, so nothing wears down. Also, it is easier to make improvements. NASA is learning from that. The new ship that will take astronauts back to the moon are single use capsules and they'll be using solar panels instead of fuel cells.

[Membrane556]

Soyuz's replacement clipper is to be reusable.

But on Soyuz's reliability it's mostly due to the lack of fickle things like hydrogen first stages and solid rocket boosters both things things have a real dislike for cold and wet weather. But it still took several failures before soyuz was perfected and the Soyuz TMA that flies today has little in common other then the same outward shape with the first versions of the spacecraft.

[JulianGardna]

When these trip will be affordable for common people I will be too old. Sad.

[AriaParsa]

yeah first Iranian in space

[morbidfrost]

I like this launch it isnt smoky like the American shuttle.

[monjott]

WoW... Anousheh Ansari is my newest hero! She makes me proud to be an American with 2 X Chromosomes!!!

[josuam]

they have to feel like gum on the floor! lol

[MSMineSweeper]

Why didn't she go up in the shuttle? Too expensive? A bit of a coup for the Russians. 1-0 Russia!

[lostinthetriangle]

And I thought Bermuda was an expensive place to go on vacation to!

[bodazey]

An Iranian-American WOMAN millionaire in outer space! WOW. If this doesn't break every stereotype and barrier on this planet, I don't know what does :) Congratulations to her !

[goldslinger]

Yea, except that a Rich Husband can give you anything you want.

[ls1983lsls]

18 Americans and 4 Russians died in accidents so far, that is 5% of all the flights. I congratulate to this woman, and gotta hand it to Russians, that with enough money you can visit space. AWESOME. Those are official stats.

[goldslinger]

4 that they will admit to.

[ls1983lsls]

well whatever, like NASA is admitting all of its deaths. Those are official numbers. You can check it anywhere.

[Tolbert1906]

more russians have died than americans. most of them died from explosions on the ground.

[ls1983lsls]

maybe so , but facts are facts. The number of Americans went way up because of Shuttle accidents. Russians didn't have any accidents for a long time now.

[goldslinger]

You're right; a seven person crew lost is a big thing; very sad. Both countries Cosmosnauts and Astronauts share a common Comradery and don't like it when either side loses brave Men and Women.

[aktovegin]

May be more Russians die. But it may be that more Americans. What a diference? Statistics tolking us that soyuz, zenit and proton is more dependable as shutle. Thats why NASA buy russian engins and start moduls. But Russian advantage in start, and orbital operation is only advantage in space. Anyway NASA beter than roskosmos in any other project. But as for me only together we can do something deserve in space. + ESA

[kibabiba]

4 russians died only in Soyuz-1 and soyuz-11 crashes.

In Chellenger and Columbia shuttles 14 austranauts, 3 dies in unsucsessful Lunar trip. 17 is for certain, I don't know about others catastrophes.

[blablubb12345]

No one died on a lunar trip. The Apollo 1 crew died at a ground test prior to the first manned Apollo orbital flight.

[Orionsaint]

Although not as impressive as a shuttle launch. I gotta hand it to those Russians. Those Soyuz rockets sure are reliable. Lord knows the Russians have had more accidents then anyone can imagine. Practice makes perfect.

[morbidfrost]

the only thing Iran is going to make is a rocket to attack people they dont like.

[ariapars]

yes, rockets to send this arabs to hell, this dirty islam is the reason why my land is since 1400 years an distruct of itself

[ariapars]

anousheh the iranian look at u know, so say to this ayatollahs in iran that islam is for the arabs and they may go back to arabia. i am sure someday iran will have it´s own space shuttle !

[goldslinger]

First, Iran has to get out of the Stone Age.

The only reason that Iranian Girl went for a ride; is because she had $25,000,000.00 to give to the Russians.

[samandjoesdad]

nice one ne0. 33000 kph???? thats what i call a blast

[proster]

Vibrations? The russian astronauts comment it as Overloads :P

[StarAtlantis]

Beautiful start. Envoy your holidays ;)

[mirafzali]

Go Anousheh! Go! You are the hero for thousands of Iranian women and girls! We love you.