The Untold Story of the Intelsat 708 Accident
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 тра 2024
- On February 15, 1996, a Chinese Long March 3B rocket carrying the cutting-edge American satellite Intelsat-708 attempted to lift off on its maiden launch. However, it rapidly veered off course and crashed into a hill a few kilometers away.
This incident is not only one of the most spectacular launch accidents caught on film but also one of the most consequential. The failure led to a long-lasting rift between the US and Chinese space industries, resulting in a decoupling of the Chinese space sector. Additionally, it sparked a controversy regarding the death toll.
In this episode, we provide a detailed explanation of the launch's context, how the crash occurred, and the short- and long-term consequences for both the US and China
If you like what you see and would like to support me, please consider joining our small Patreon community at / dongfanghour !
We also have some very cool space merch available at shop.dongfanghour.com .
00:00 Some context: Intelsat 708 & the Long March 3B
01:30 The 1980s and 1990s: warming US-China relations
02:44 The accident
03:52 What happened, where, and how?
05:16 The controversy on the death toll
06:34 A strong reaction in Washington, D.C.
07:25 The Cox Report
08:43 Short and long-term consequences
10:45 Future prospects for international & Sino-US relations in space
Some great sources for additional reading (English):
www.thespacereview.com/articl...
www.thespacereview.com/articl...
www.smithsonianmag.com/air-sp...
Past CCTV interviews and reports are also a gold mine for details (in Chinese) - Наука та технологія
I watched the launch live at the time. In retrospect the failure became the mother of future successes. A valuable learning experience.
I bit harsh from the USA. Military paranoia probably isn’t the most diplomatic response. NASA politician Bill Nelson gave a fine example of hypocrisy. I’d love to hear the farmers perspective though!
China has a rich history of intellectual property theft. They were also very closed about the investigation.
Seems like a rational response.
Intelsat 708 satellite was a 4,180 kg (9,220 lb) payload intended for placement into geostationary orbit (GEO)
but USA's own NASA Space Shuttle had a limited maximum GEO satellite payload of only 2,270 kg (5,000 lb) with Inertial Upper Stage (IUS):
which could not handle a GEO satellite payload like the Intelsat 708
which gives some context why USA looked to China to do the GEO delivery satellite launch
Another great presentation with excellent research and coverage.
I'd argue the Intelsat 708 Accident was used, and not the cause of the political ramifications. While the Wolf Amendment was briefly mention, what's most significant is in April 2011, US Congress "banned NASA from engaging in bilateral agreements and coordination with China." This was part of a Department of Defense and Continuing Appropriations Act, not in legislation related to NASA specifically. This greys NASA's original mission of being having a purely civilian role in space activities, as this ban was implemented in military defence legislation outside of that specific to NASA civilian authorizations. Makes Bill Nelson comments included in the video appear as hypocrisy.
The Wolf Amendment is a ban specifically directed at NASA, it does not specifically ban any commercial space activities. How things evolve, could get interesting as India is growing launch provider and a number of commercial launch providers globally will be orbital capable within the next few years.
China is not the first country US has restricted technologies on rocket boosters. After World War II, Japan was banned from using inertial navigation systems on its boosters over concerns it might develop military missiles. As a result Japan's boosters to this day launch on a ballistic trajectory. Only the upper stage has guidance navigation. (a not so well know impressive accomplishment)
On a positive note, in 2019 NASA collaborated with China for the Chang'e 4 mission on the Moon's far side by providing images from a lunar orbiter. NASA requested and received special authorization from Congress.
The UN could work to clarify what member countries can and can not limit under the UN Outer Space Treaty, which is in much need of an update from its 1967 heritage. Perhaps we need another UN sponsored "International Geophysical Year" (1957-58), which was international scientific project to encourage scientific interchange between East and West after the Cold War of the previous decade. This planted seeds for many planet wide and space related scientific endeavours that catalyzed focus on technologies for use in space during the 1960's.
Hopefully the geopolitical politics on Earth do not mirror into orbit and other worlds in our solar system. Not only in space, but humans need to better cooperate to address the climate issues on our home world.
Well said! I agree with you, the Intelsat 708 accident was not the cause but just one of the triggers that led to the subsequent restrictions. Back in the late 1980s and early 1990s when the US signed approvals to have American-made satellites launch on Chinese rockets, there was already plenty of criticism from Congress (including a certain Bill Nelson).
@@DongfangHour A Tl; DR from @AerialWaviator would be appreciated, but IMHO the Intelsat 708 disaster was used as an excuse for many policy decisions and probably a few new laws.
Failure happens, what matters is if you learned from the mistake or not.
If it came from the payload you didn't even build even better!
I remember this event, I was maybe 14-16 years old living in Budapest , Hungary at the time. I was very disappointed for the failure, and how everyone talked down on Chinese space program. American also ban China using the International space station. as teenage, I always feel that we are not able to catch in my life time with the west. fast forward to today, China has her own space station, Global position system, advanced high speed train. Chinese pulled it off well. I hope there are more to come for China in the decades to come.
how many foreign commercial satellites were lost by non-China foreign satellite launch providers since, due to this loss by China in China, scaring others away to seek alternative satellite launch providers?!
China’s space technology development is on track. Failures are excellent teachers. Keep up the excellent work Dongfang
Quality content, brief yet not oversimplified, keep up the good work👍🏻
Thanks Lin-De!
🙏+1🙏
🙏🙏🙏 thank you.
That’s 1996. That’s history. Today 2023 , China launched 3 astronauts to their space stations.
The 3 taikonauts are just the latest of a series of unblemished record of crews to the Chinese space station, replacing the five months of the previous crew that welcomed them and six of them stayed at the station shortly before they bade farewell to the returning crew.
China has a perfect record of space launches to moon, Mars and human to orbit payloads. Considering the fact that less than half of Mars expedition are successful, although China only has one attempt which is successful in launching an orbital vehicle, landing craft and rover to Mars all at same time. Also a clean record of moon explorations when compared to other countries attempt.
Not a soul on this earth would believe you if you say China would have 6 taikonauts in their own space station in 27 years right after the failure in 1996.
As a shout out to my Chinese friends, the Long March rocket program has recovered since the 708 failure, and is now one of the most reliable ways to deliver spacecraft into orbit and beyond.
I love that this channel exists
😊
I watched the launch live from Intelsat HQ in DC, as a member of Intelsat's ground network launch team. Usually we watched launches in the middle of the night from Kourou. This was a rare afternoon launch from China. We watched the launch on a large screen monitor, in my case we watched from the 3G pod. As soon as the rocket tilted two seconds into the launch, the video changed to static. We were told the Chinese government cut the feed. We had coworkers at the launch site and our immediate concern was for their safety. It was a few days until we knew our coworkers were safe. Soon after we learned about all the people who died as a result of a space rocket going horizontal and killing people along the way. Crying about it again. Fuck.
Hi, I come from bilibili. Your videos are truly impressive.
So... There's a guy translating your video into Chinese and uploading it there. I understand that you've given him permission, and he's doing it non-profit, which I'm grateful for. It's just... I can't help but wonder... why not just create your own account there? I'm sure people from China really love your content. And tbh, bilibili also lacks content creators (like you) who mainly focus on in-depth Chinese space exploration. You could just straight up hire that guy, or set up a revenue-sharing arrangement with him.
Just a small suggestion though, and feel free to disregard it. I initially planned to email you about this, but since you've just released a new video, I thought I'd leave my thoughts here to avoid any inconvenience.
He got approved already
@@JYF921 I know, that's not what I'm asking
可能就是单纯嫌麻烦吧，再说这个体量开了号也很难拿到收入，他现在不都是Patreon这些的？
@@waynehu4086 可能吧，主要是不忍心看到一个翻译的打白工，明明可以互利共惠的
Hey Grayson, thanks for your kind suggestion and interest in Dongfang Hour!
I have thought about opening a channel on Bilibili before. The main obstacle is the lack of time due to Dongfang Hour being a hobby (next to a full-time job).
I'm currently trying to focus my efforts on improving monetization. With more revenue, I would be able hire a small team to help with script-writing/editing/translating/promoting + perhaps plan some exciting trips (filming a trip & guide to Wenchang for example).
At the moment, Dongfang Hour is mainly 1-person operation (me) + a part-time motion graphics designer.
Hopefully things can evolve in 2024, and perhaps a collaboration with a Bilibili creator can be envisaged 😉
Cheers
Jean
your diplomacy is always appreciated, jean
Thanks to the Cox report, we now have our own space industry.
Wow, i didn't know about this! Thanks for covering.
top quality video thanks for this
As China and the US get closer and closer to permanently manned moon outposts or moon orbiting manned space stations there should be agreements to avoid confrontations, conflicts , and misunderstandings and also to facilitate backup emergency rescues. That would be the prudent and wise thing to do but of course when you see each other as adversaries it will make this much harder. I enjoyed this video. Thank you for creating it.
such agreements about activities in space orbit already exist
but USA makes such agreements pointless given USA will break them whenever it suits them (often broken as soon as any agreement is made)
so, making new agreements will be just as useless: an empty gesture to trick others into an agreement only USA will never hold to anyways
but USA will use these agreements to tie others up into restrictions which USA knows it won't acknowledge
It was the Americans who closed the door first, and when the Wolf Act was born, the United States had already made a choice.
China is not seeing the US as an adversary at all. Chinese politicians do not mention the US every other three sentences.
@@neo_smith
*The American government
@@carcinogen60yearsago99% of americans treat china like the great satan nowdays so its pretty accurate, americans are more brainwashed than north koreans often.
im not sure detonating a bomb was a good way to get to salvage whatever technology was on that satelite.
great info and reporting!
My heart skipped a beat in panic watching it for the first time! The fact that it flew towards a town was, depressing!!
Great storytelling and analysis. I hope to see more cooperation with China, especially NASA, in the future.
Thanks Scott! I agree, hopefully we can see more cooperation at least in the area of space exploration and space sciences. My gut tells me this is not for the near future though, considering the current hostility in Congress towards China.
Thank you for your informative video🙏
Really interesting episode!
U$: Сhina appropriate space tech!
No evidence provided.
Meanwhile, there's plenty of evidence of how the U$ has appropriated Soviet satellite tech when the USSR was leading in the sector.
First rule in рropaganda: Always accuse the other side of what you yourself are doing.
YOuTuber Carl Zha said the same but better: Whatever the USA accuses China of doing, it is USA projecting its own bad behaviour on China.
I assume there must be significant insurance coverage for the payload?
Yes, the launch phase was insured by Intelsat insurers (15-20 insurance underwriters from what I read, mostly US, European, as well as Japanese)
Interesting comment. Spacecraft operators are careful about choosing outside insurance versus self-insurance. Which of course depends on the probability of a failure. Novelty is also a factor. If it hasn't been done before the risk is immeasurable.
Also, risk of launch failure is completely different from risk of payload failure.
How well tested is the payload, not just on its own but also through thermal vac and other stresses?
I noted that your channel title mentions an hour. Since your videos don’t last an hour what does this signify?
The channel was initially a podcast, which lasted longer. We just kept the name 😊
"the first rocket launch without tested" - that's what I heard from the news at that time. OMG. "Without tested" .
But China really learned from it. Chinese rocket launch had no failure for the next 15-25 years - best record, at least at that time.
Yes, in retrospect it was a big mistake. At the time, it wasn’t tested because the rocket was composed of parts from other rockets already in service. As well as budgetary constraints
加入国际发射市场确实带来了宝贵的经验，但孤军奋战未尝不是一种锻炼
do/didn't they have a self-destruct mechanism?
They did, but the self-destruct system could only be activated after 15 seconds. The control center had a 7 second window to activate it (between T+15 and T+22s) but for some reason, they did not 🧐
I heard that China was going to build in Africa Space Station that would be very cool and the reason is supposedly the best launch site in the world could be found there
Thanks 😢
Thanks!
Thanks David! ☺️
Yup, a very handy excuse to prevent the competition... As the result of this shortsighted foolishness, there is the Tiangong space station today, and the whole new space race where I bet on China rather than the US to establish a permanent Lunar presence first.
9:09 and we are doing the same thing again in semiconductor industry to China.
Why the UAE's probe launch with China's rocket needs to comply with the US sanction rules?
probably because it had US parts
Because US is am imperialist empire and it controls other nations
@@XiaosChannel NO, because UAE is weaker than US
@@frankfleming1103 source?
@@XiaosChannel::: Even if the Satellite had no US component, UAE must obey Uncle Sam who carries a big stick.
Great reporting.
Know your focus is on China. But an interesting video would be on the Sea Launch Program. The program bought the USA, Russia, Ukraine and Scandinavia together with major seed funding (6 launches) coming from an international London based organization. Sea Launch was based in Los Angeles. As part of that program an erection test was performed before the ships departed to the launch site near Christmas Island on the equator. Basically a USSR rocket being erected on top of oil rig platform in Long Beach. Imagine that collaboration today - how times have changed?
This Intelsat failure was however the start of great power politics as some in the US could see the emerging threat to their global domination that China would become. The establishment and expansion of BRICS provides a key area of space related growth and collaboration efforts for the now mature Chinese space industry. it is also a logical extension/fit with the Belt Road Program to include international and domestic communication and other satellite based infrastructure systems. China will play a key role in providing these services to global south along with Russia and India. Cutting out the traditional domination by the USA and Europe.
Thanks Peter! Absolutely, Sea Launch would be a great story to tell, although it would require a bit more research effort on my part as it’s outside of my usual area of expertise. As you said, it’s crazy to think how times have changed
@@DongfangHour Unfortunately there was a golden moment of opportunity for global cooperation that the USA could have developed further but did not. Hopefully China can now lead the way with their Belt and Road, BRICS and space programs. Your reporting on the China space program is much appreciated.
I worked with BAe, Aussat, Imarsat and then ICO. So was fortunate to have worked closely with USA, European, Russian, Chinese and the Sea Launch on many Comsat and launch systems. Including unfortunately a few launch and satellite failure reviews during the period of your last report.
It's been a pleasure to see China's rapid space development from the early days. Please keep up your great reporting of it. The long term future of space lies with China now not with the West. Collaboration would be great but it's simply impossible in the current political environment that eminated in your last report. In hindsight it was a pivotal period more so than many appreciated including myself.
Dropped a like😆
Why can’t you say congressman. He is a congressMAN.
I suspect both ways. U.S. and China. China definitely did gain valuable technology at crash site. US most likely did sabotage the launch but to what extent? No one knows
4:47 “the accident was caused by a defect in the bonding of the inertial system” - This doesn’t tell me much about the root cause. Is this all the information that the Chinese released on the cause of the crash? Trying to connect the dots I am envisioning the navigation accelerometers or other devices used to guide or orient the rocket were bonded on to the substructure and became loose or fell off due to launch vibrations. Secrecy can be an impediment when you are trying to project confidence and trust to the rest of the world. Also from an engineering standpoint adhesives are quick and cheap attachment devices but are a horrible substitute for mechanical fasteners in a critical joint.
There is a more detailed description on the Wikipedia page of the accident in Chinese, but the English page is brief. I'm not an expert but I can try giving a rough translation here: An electric circuit fault caused the inner ring of the gyroscope to malfunction, giving out false pitch and yaw data to the onboard control system, which tried to correct the non-existent pitch and yaw error, causing the crash.
@@lekters9215got it. Thanks. So the bonding failure was incorrect.
bonding here means connector failure rather than adhesives. Specifcally the eletrical connection for one of the four feedback loop is broken (offical phrase is no current flow) cause the navigation control is sense an non-existant deflection which the control tries to correct, thus cause the failture.
below is the from the offical faiilure new report report in Chinese.
在分析、判别的基础上，通过大量地面试验，包括控制系统半实物仿真及大回路闭环试验，使故障现象得以复现。即由于四轴平台的随动环稳定回路功率级无电流输出，导致内环工作异常，致使惯性基准发生变化，同时向箭上控制系统输出了火箭在作正俯仰和正偏航运动的错误信息；控制系统为纠正火箭实际上并不存在的正俯仰和正偏航运动，控制火箭进行负俯仰和负偏航，箭体快速向预定射向右前方倾倒，最终撞到了距离发射场约1．85公里的山坡上，发生爆炸，星箭全部损失。
It was a success, they collected lots of invaluable data
Failure is good... Success will come later.
Luckily, it's just some money + hardware they were lost as opposed to much more valuable human lives.
at least China learned to make good rockets now.
3am💀💀💀
Western technology 😂😂😂
You don't know this before?
With all due respect, the conclusion you present is the epitome of naiveté.
Frankly, to state something without explanation is the height of ignorance. go away.
This is a good report. I remember the period & repercussions well. Two things: 1. Nitpick: Don’t describe official US policy as a ‘blockade’: as you pointed out, for example, the Wolf amendment itself applies only to NASA/China bilateral (not even multilateral) activities (and also OSTP, by the way). “Blockade” implies a US iron ring around China preventing others from coming/going on space matters; & that’s not true. It’s about US components et al not being allowed to be part of any systems launched on Chinese rockets (etc.). That’s simply the US refusing to participate in bilateral space trade vis a vis China; hardly a ‘blockade’, ok? (Words matter; tho, I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s the word the CCP uses).
2. Going forward: Some of the countries that have signed on to participate with China in space have also signed the Artemis Accords- a voluntary, international code of behavior, consistent with the Outer Space Treaty, that, among other things, requires transparency in things like lunar activities. (It was that requirement in the AA for transparency that led several years ago for Russia to pull out of the tentative agreement to join the Artemis program). Now, the PRC is not known for its commitment to transparency. Yet, several of its now space partner countries have signed the AAs, which require it. It will be interesting to see if those countries do indeed cave in to normal PRC behavior for less-than-fully transparent operations - as you can tell, I’m afraid I consider that likely- or rather maintain their signed commitment to the AAs and transparency when it comes to lunar exploration and development. (It should be kept in mind: tho they have similar names, there is NO legal connection between the Artemis Accords codes-of-behavior, and NASA’s Artemis Program. India & Saudi Arabia have both signed the AAs; they are not part of the Artemis Program). - Dave Huntsman
Addressing your two points:
1. You didn't even watch the video before you replied, did you? 10:04 in the video literally told you the "blockade" nature of the US policy against China. Did you not see it or did you just ignore it?
2. Your Western brainwashed bias against China is so blatant it's hilarious to watch. To criticize China's transparency record while every country in the world has state level secrets is simple double standard. The US alone has three levels of security clearance throughout it's entire government: confidential, secret, and top secret. You just say China lacks transparency because when China doesn't tell you everything you want to know, it's China lacking transparency. When US or other countries don't tell you their state secrets, it's national security.
Double standard at it's finest 😂
wrong. USA's blockade against China has always been multilateral, affecting the whole world negatively with punishments and restrictions to whomever want to do business with China
no one else is so blockade-happy as is the USA is in the world
just like it is now, as before
1) It is a blockade, regardless of US state department propaganda saying otherwise. The fact that the blockade is ineffective is a testament to US incompetence and not intention.
2) PRC is significantly more transparent than the US or its vassals. The PRC is the only country that explicitly states what it will do 5, 10, 50 years ahead of time, then it accomplishes exactly what it says it will. The US in contrast is a totaliarian empire of lies that can't keep its promises even for the length of one presidential term, and it regularly tortures whistleblowers and journalists who try to shed light on war crimes. The US empire of lies is so completely totalitarian that nearly all of its citizens believe the lie of its own transparency, because the US empire controlls all major media organizations and flood the search algorithms with self-referential sources that privilege approved narratives.
3) The Artemis Accords is not an international code but a US-controlled lawfare regime. It's the outer space equivalent to the so-called "rules based order" which is an illegal lawfare regime in which the US makes up the rules and orders everyone around.
So it's not a blockade, but a one-way self-imposed isolation from collaborating with China, based off of suspicion and xenophobia. That makes sense
USA’s signature on any agreement is not worth the paper it’s written on. Native Americans learnt that long ago. The Vietnamese learnt that in 1972. Russia learnt that in the Kiev Accord. Transparency in U.S. government ? Go as Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Robert Hayes, Daniel Ellsberg, etc.
The USA is now inviting China to participate in the ISS/Artemis, but first China must condemn Hamas.
why?
The US has a long way to go, there are 140 other UN countries on the wait list.
LoL😂
With the current progress of the two projects, I think it is easier for China's plan to become a reality, especially since Shenzhou 17 is the 30th successful mission.