Jump to content

10 posts in this topic

Posted

The excrement is hitting the fan in the wake of the latest Zenit / Sea Launch failure.

Just as Sea Launch, and its 95% Russian owners, suffered a massive failure in the last Zenit launch. This puts the two of the largest Russian aerospace companies at risk.

[Url=http://www.parabolicarc.com/2013/02/04/boeing-sues-sea-launch-partners-for-356-million/]Analysis at Parabolic Arc....[/url]

[quote]>
>
NPO Energomash being pushed to the brink of insolvency is very bad. The company makes a range of engines for different launch vehicles, including the RD-180 used in United Launch Alliance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm not really clued up on how a company can sue another from a different country, but doesn't the insurance cover it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Sea Launch was incorporated in the US, so Boeing has a better shot here than in Russia. Insurance on the dailed launch has nothing to do with the contractual obligations of the partners - this was decided before the recent failure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Correction: Sea Launch is registered in the Cayman Islands, but its bankruptvy after the 2007 debacle was a Chapter 11 in the US. Boeing can still file here because of its interests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='DocM' timestamp='1360091758' post='595503210']
Correction: Sea Launch is registered in the Cayman Islands, but its bankruptvy after the 2007 debacle was a Chapter 11 in the US. Boeing can still file here because of its interests.
[/quote]

Cayman Islands, ha.. classy....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There's a good reason to - all through the recent mess with bank after bank in trouble those in the Caymans are among the most stable in the world. That and their laws follow the KISS principle, not like in the US etc. where companies spend a big part of their operating costs doing an ever changing paper chase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This may not be the last lawsuit if the Russians don't get their act together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There was a Russian language report yesterday that they suspect the onboard power source in the first stage of the Zenit that failed. Sounds like the QA/QC people again. This is getting old. All the more reason for NASA to fund at least 2 of the 3 commercial crew spacecraft (redundancy) - we need to get our people off their birds.

We also need the US to wean itsell off Russian engines and follow through with the idea of putting an upgravede version of Saturn V's mighty F1 back into production (the F1A.) That or exercise our contract option to produce the Atlas V's RD-180 engines here instead of buying Russian made units. I vote for the F1A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It looks like Boeing is butthurt they don't own any shares of this highly profitable and successful company anymore and they are now using the latest incident as an opportunity to redeem themselves.

In it's entire history, Sea Launch has had 35 launches, three of which failed.

It's also worth mentioning that prior to Chapter 11, the company was managed by an American, who now heads Space-X. So it's no wonder it went bankrupt, the guy milked it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Boeing has losses the other partners were supposed to cover and didn't, so they have every right to recover them.

Sea Launch provides a launch platform and logistics, but Energia / Energomash etc. provide the Zenit rockets which are what's failing due to QC/QA problems. Zenit's [b]overall[/b] failure rate is now 15%, which is horrible. Just counting Zenit 3 it's still almost 10%, 4 fails in 42 launches, which while better is still horrid.

SpaceX is run full time by Elon Musk, who has had zero to do with Sea Launch. And as noted, Sea Launch is more a logistics & platform provider than a hardware provider, and the Russian hardware is the problem. Who was operating the bus when the baggage exploded is irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.