Hacker News Reader

Comment by PaulHoule | Hacker News Reader

When they shoot the missile they point those canisters up in the air. There is a cold gas system that ejects the missile up into the air, it then ignites, then it takes off in some direction like

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ministryofdefenceua/3189460316...

if the engine doesn't ignite then the missile falls back down on the launcher, resulting in this genre of Youtube video

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=S-300+FAIL

Sometimes the fuse goes off when the missile hits the launcher and usually blows up the other missiles in the launcher. Other times the fuse doesn't go off but then you've got an awful unexploded ordinance problem. (Who knows when it will go off?)

View on HN

Heard (anecdotally on reddit) that its one of the advantages of having hot launch VLS as opposed to cold launch like the Russian style.

That way if there is a failure to launch its contained inside the VLS cell instead of potentially covering the decks in missile components.

Although I suppose a cold launch has a good chance of throwing a failed missile off the deck and into the sea if its at any angle.

Soviet cold-launch approach was to increase the chances that a failed missile would fall to the side instead of exploding the launcher, which is why naval soviet-style launchers are angled - a failure to launch will drop into water.

Is there a particularly high failure rate with these missiles or is this a widespread problem in systems where the engine ignites after launch?

What do they do after? Is the site repaired? Scrapped?

Most accounts are that those failures are "rare"; the missile is sealed in a canister so it's likely to be a defective missile from the factory, not some mistake on the part of the operators.

It happens enough that there are a handful of videos on Youtube. Similar failures happen with vertically launched missiles from ships

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydsm1uzkNu4

Great videos! But the launches all seem "normal" to me.

https://youtu.be/dKG9HGPjMrg https://youtu.be/cikuNhTjCe8

The missile should continue up not fall back down.

I would love to understand the circumstances of the second video (the one on the Commandos455 channel).

Not the technical failure, that is clear enough but the role and reaction of the crowd the camera is in. They seem to be wearing green fatigues so one would think they are soldiers… but they are all so unorganised? I understand that when a missile falls back one would swear or shout as an involuntary reaction, but they seem more like a partying higschool group than professionals at work.

The cherry on top is the redheaded girl who seems to have started to leave without her coat and someone brings it after her. Sadly I don’t speak the language.

I’m wondering is this maybe a high school group on a military themed day trip? Or I’m just massively overestimating the professionalism of soldiers? I would be curious if anyone has any insight into that video.

In Soviet Russia, S-300 launches you!

In America, microwave oven cook food. In Russia, it only a little different: microwave radar cook YOU!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com