Delta GOES-G destructs over Cape Canaveral (5-3-86)

  • Published on Aug 8, 2009
  • A Delta rocket with the GOES-G weather satellite, NASA's first mission after the Challenger accident, destructs shortly after liftoff when the vehicle's main engine - providing all the steering - shuts down prematurely (look for the flameout), sending the payload (seen coming off first) into the Atlantic ocean off the Florida coast on May 3, 1986.
  • Science & TechnologyScience & Technology
  • Runtime: 2:37
  • rocket  explosion  delta  goes-g  

Comments • 126

  • Omaid Shokouri
    Omaid Shokouri 4 months ago

    obviously a major malfunction

  • Nicholas Maude
    Nicholas Maude 8 months ago

    I remember seeing this launch on the six o'clock news.

  • Thor God of Thunder

    That "uh-oh" is priceless!

  • Alpha Adhito
    Alpha Adhito Year ago +2

    Feel sad for Iris probe :'(

    • Amy
      Amy 6 months ago

      Gay probe coming to save me. Got it.

  • MrOrthogonalization

    "And we're now raining debris all over the Atlantic...."

  • Daniel Meyer
    Daniel Meyer Year ago

    Ha Ha Get rekt!

  • Tim stro59
    Tim stro59 Year ago

    "we show a premature main engine shutdown"
    I can't imagine why.

    • Tim stro59
      Tim stro59 Year ago

      I gathered that much from common sense. I'm not being insulting here, it's a safety protocol that's been in place for a long time....the '60s I think, as a response to lack of such a protocol from Nazi Germany's rocket programs.
      Although in hindsight, the technology for such a protocol might not have existed in 1944.

    • OneTallOrder
      OneTallOrder Year ago +3

      The rocket was destroyed by mission control because of the rocket engine stopping uncommanded, in order to keep the intact rocket from falling back to earth.

  • daOrangeDoom
    daOrangeDoom Year ago

    All the firmament fags use this video as proof

  • David n
    David n 2 years ago +4

    The Delta II rocket now is incredibly successful. It has now launched 99 straight successful times, more than any rocket ever!

    • Death Remote
      Death Remote Year ago

      +David n soyuz?

    • Zachary Sellingrr
      Zachary Sellingrr Year ago +1

      +David n Actually 98 consecutive successes. When JPSS-1 launches in early 2017, should it be successful, then it will be considered the 99th. Same goes for ICESat 2 later that year; however, that might count as the 100th straight success. ICESat 2 is scheduled to be the final Delta II while JPSS-1 is the next-to-last.

  • Vulkan Animations
    Vulkan Animations 2 years ago +16


    • okankyoto
      okankyoto Year ago +1

      WAY over 10 years true. Perhaps its additional value in that GOES-G can, despite being a failure, still contribute to pop culture.

    • Zachary Sellingrr
      Zachary Sellingrr Year ago

      Not really over 10 years. This "stunt rocket" did its duty nearly three decades before the film's release.

    • okankyoto
      okankyoto Year ago

      Just think of it as a "stunt rocket"... over a decade afterwards!

    • Bernard craz
      Bernard craz Year ago

      Yes Martian failure

    • Izhan Harris
      Izhan Harris Year ago

      +Vulkan: Games & Space Atlas is not chinese :/ Atlas is made by america not china THAT CINA ROCKET IS SMALL THAN ATLAS IF YOU MEAN

  • Zoomer30
    Zoomer30 2 years ago

    What basically happened was the jolt of the airlit solids igniting caused a short circuit in the computer and it shut the engines down.

  • Zoomer30
    Zoomer30 2 years ago +7

    86 was just not a good year for NASA. This happened just a few months after Challenger.

  • cottagechskitty
    cottagechskitty 2 years ago +1

    Yeah that is one very obvious flameout

  • Greg Rix
    Greg Rix 2 years ago

    The rocket exploding was intended, once the main engine malfunctions and the rocket veers off course in order to protect property and people that are outside the launch corridor a UHF blast from the main controls detonates charges in the cases of the solid boosters and main rocket body, detonating the fuel at altitude as opposed to when it hits the ground. Although spectacular, it's much safer.

    • Josias Rivera
      Josias Rivera 6 months ago

      Greg Rix did you see the vehicle begin to lean prior to termination? I wonder why it did that?

  • Zoomer30
    Zoomer30 2 years ago +5

    The PR announcer generally does not have a video feed to look at (at least in 1986) so they can seem to be behind the loop. You could see a change in the plume as the engine shutdown. Amazing that the rocket remained intact even after it flipped around backwards. Until the RSO terminated flight.

  • Obed
    Obed 3 years ago +2

    American have had more rocket explosion than I can count. I wonder why so many?

    • Zoomer30
      Zoomer30 11 months ago

      Obed The USSR blew up way way more rockets than NASA. Heck, the nickname for the Proton was "Soon to be flaming wreckage" it blew up so much.

    • David n
      David n 2 years ago +2

      +Godismylife1 Because NASA doesn't classify failures and erase them from history like a certain USSR did. And SpaceX could launch astronauts today. It would certainly have a much higher chance of success than Gagarin's flight, which was launched a rocket that had a 1 in 4 chance of failing.

    • N75911
      N75911 2 years ago

      +Kyle Denny Technically NASA never "had" any rockets, few things are ever built in house, JPL and Stennis Space Center are where a lot of NASA's workers are contracted to build their tech, so technically all the rockets from there count, even the Space Shuttle was built by Boeing/Rockwell, U.S.A and Lockheed Martin. But the rockets are serviced and maintained by NASA engineers, same goes for the Atlas V and Delta series, the Delta II that exploded was under control of the USAF. But it still stands, ULA is still 100% effective, and working closer to NASA than SpaceX.

    • Kyle Denny
      Kyle Denny 2 years ago

      +Timmy G Since 1986 it was NASA's only rocket. I'm well aware of the Saturn.

    • PatisserieBoy
      PatisserieBoy 2 years ago

      +Kyle Denny NASA's only rocket was the Space Shuttle? Are you high or just ignorant?

  • Ineke Mateman
    Ineke Mateman 3 years ago

    It was a shot down!

  • 52cccc
    52cccc 3 years ago


  • BitGridTV
    BitGridTV 3 years ago +8

    "we have a main engine shutdown"
    :D AFTER the explosion LOL

    • Zoomer30
      Zoomer30 Year ago +1

      The PAO is really just reading off a script. They don't have a data feed. It's like how during thr Challenger accident the PAO reads off speed and location data well after the breakup. Before the long pause and the "obviously a major malfunction." statement.

    • Obed
      Obed 3 years ago

      oh noo!!

  • Guardian Observer
    Guardian Observer 3 years ago

    Premature engine shutdown. Ooops!

  • cloud0123
    cloud0123 3 years ago

    phase conjugated scalar EM wave used to destroy some of the key systems of this...but shhhh never happened.

    • Amy
      Amy 6 months ago

      With that kind of extraordinary claim, I'm certain you have some extraordinary evidence to go with it. Like say, a spectrogram readout? A collect from said EM wave? Maybe even a data file you can cite?

  • fs10inator
    fs10inator 3 years ago

    She did the last Atlas-G Centaur-D1AR launch carrying the final FLTSATCOM.

  • Gabriel Berg
    Gabriel Berg 4 years ago

    You can clearly see the rocket exploding at 2:13.

  • Matthew Picou
    Matthew Picou 4 years ago

    Go to my videos if you want to see an awesome rocket

  • ethaneatscookies
    ethaneatscookies 4 years ago

    Thats called smart people talk, maybe they should dumb it down for people like you

  • 3210andLiftoff
    3210andLiftoff  4 years ago

    A lightning strike took out an Atlas launch in 1987.

  • RealGalactic70
    RealGalactic70 4 years ago

    Wasn't that one a Delta rocket from 1977?

  • griv2000
    griv2000 4 years ago

    You can see the central engine shutting down at 1:54, then, the autodestruction system was triggered to prevent the rocket crashing on populated area

  • Pavel ER
    Pavel ER 4 years ago

    americans should be banned from space exploration .. no nazis in space

  • Sputnik
    Sputnik 4 years ago

    No, takie są te Wasze rakiety.

  • Liam Jay
    Liam Jay 4 years ago

    a main engine can be shutdown, I think you are thinking of SRB's which cannot be shutdown.

  • MarsFKA
    MarsFKA 4 years ago

    A year ago today, I watched the launch of the Opportunity Mars Rover, also with a Delta 2. During the pre-launch chatter, we heard that NASA will not launch if there is lightning within ten miles of the pad.

  • Itchono
    Itchono 4 years ago

    my bad, delta 1

  • Itchono
    Itchono 4 years ago

    It's weird how the challenger, titan 34D, and this delta 2 all failed that year

  • hoghogwild
    hoghogwild 4 years ago

    That's all that they see at their controllers is the engine shutdoiwn, they cannot report what they don't know.

  • sambowman91
    sambowman91 4 years ago

    If all the solid boosters were ignited at liftoff, the vehicle (and satellite inside) would experience very high accelerations. Carrying the booster allows for a more constant static acceleration profile through the flight.

  • danthemanzizle
    danthemanzizle 4 years ago

    air ignited solids? doesn't seem very efficient to me to carry low specific impulse boosters strapped to the side from lift off through max Q

  • TheConman656
    TheConman656 4 years ago

    Should have switched SCE to AUX.

  • 3210andLiftoff
    3210andLiftoff  4 years ago


  • 3210andLiftoff
    3210andLiftoff  4 years ago

    You are thinking of another mission

  • kuki5050
    kuki5050 4 years ago

    It was "Delta 178"!!!!

  • Andy Gilbert
    Andy Gilbert 5 years ago

    1986 was definitely a bad year for NASA.

  • Ferrariman601
    Ferrariman601 5 years ago

    The SRBs didn't have nozzle gimbal capability if I'm correct. That's why all control was lost after the stage 1 engine shut down?

  • vincent7520
    vincent7520 5 years ago

    where my taxes go …

  • R5H4D0W
    R5H4D0W 5 years ago says the electrical fault was caused by a lightning strike, but they are the only source that speaks of this, can anyone confirm thats what it was?

  • fyadcorp
    fyadcorp 5 years ago

    Heh heh... "strap ons"

  • lestef23
    lestef23 5 years ago

    @reknas78 You're absolutly right.

  • mkp823
    mkp823 5 years ago

    @reknas78 You're correct. It IS better to just be silent. Take your own advise, dimwit.

  • VirginianHighlander
    VirginianHighlander 6 years ago

    Supersonic flight over Cape Canaveral in early 1986 was not recommended....
    ....a little too late.

  • Clarinerd617
    Clarinerd617 6 years ago

    @reknas78 You do realize that it is the height of scientific heresy to do as you just suggested?

  • RavenBomb123
    RavenBomb123 6 years ago

    action at 2:00

  • Igotnogod
    Igotnogod 6 years ago

    @MoarLurk LOL

  • blablubb12345
    blablubb12345 6 years ago

    Ok, looks like the 1993 Titan IVA crash was caused by it's SRB. Didn't have that one on my list.

  • blablubb12345
    blablubb12345 6 years ago

    Neither the Ariane 5 nor the Titan IVA explosion had anything to do with their solid boosters. Both were caused by a guidance failure, a short circuit on the Titan and a software glitch on the Ariane. The last two Taurus failures were caused by the payload fairing which did not seperate. FYI, the Delta 4 uses up to 4 SRBs.

  • Chad Snow
    Chad Snow 6 years ago

    @blablubb12345 Good track record unless you are an Indian National rocket, Space Shuttle, Titan IV, or a Delta II, Orbital Taurus, or any solid rocket fueled system created after 1985. The Ariane 5 is not bad with only one major explosion. Most catastrophic solid failures are about 1/60 with 90% success. Delta rockets have scientifically scaled back the use of SRB's. Out of 4 systems only 2 use SRB's and not more than 2 on each rocket. Luckily, their heavy lift system has no SRB's.

  • blablubb12345
    blablubb12345 6 years ago

    That's not true by both accounts as solids have a rather good track record and even the Delta 4 uses them. Btw. this launch failed because the liquid fueled main engine shut down early, leaving the rocket with no steering capability.

  • swimfeared
    swimfeared 6 years ago

    @reknas78 or thats exactly what caused the rocket to fail.

  • Chad Snow
    Chad Snow 6 years ago

    I am glad for the sake of Delta rockets that the next generation will not be using solid rocket boosters. SRB's have killed the reputation of most modern rockets that have used them.

  • Manuel Huber
    Manuel Huber 6 years ago

    skip to 1:50 (: you are welcome ^^

  • Keinlicht
    Keinlicht 6 years ago

    @Knepperify1 Yeah, I know. Thanks for nothing.

  • 3210andLiftoff
    3210andLiftoff  6 years ago

    @DirkDiggler1711 The information is correct. Not sure what reknas78 means.

  • 3210andLiftoff
    3210andLiftoff  6 years ago

    @reknas78 I'm not sure what you mean, the vehicle did have a premature main engine shutdown. And yes, it has a main engine, the core engine on the first stage of the Delta vehicle. The first stage has nine strap-on SRBs surrounding it.

  • krazykhrisya
    krazykhrisya 6 years ago

    "and we have main engine shutdown" yeah, that's an understatement. xD

  • Keinlicht
    Keinlicht 6 years ago

    @soylentgreenb Ah kay it makes more sense if they're just looking at the telemetry data

  • soylentgreenb
    soylentgreenb 6 years ago

    @Keinlicht You fool; they're not looking at footage of the rocket, they're doing their job. If the rocket explodes there is no means of recovery, obviously, hence they're looking for anomalies they may be able to fix.

  • Keinlicht
    Keinlicht 6 years ago

    I never understand why they keep commenting without describing anything, "main engine shut down"? Really?
    How about "vehicle offcourse, rocket breaking up"? that's pretty evident from the footage. If not that then just offer a "Shit!" at the beginning and be silent!

  • reknas78
    reknas78 6 years ago

    Ah...a premature engine shutdown...??? Try an explosion and there is no main engine. Look at you monitors and see the explosion. Embarrassing when you say " Premature engine shutdow" or "We have an anomaly" it's better just to be silent.

  • FalconKPD
    FalconKPD 6 years ago

    At least no one died.

  • dhbiza
    dhbiza 6 years ago

    Thats what happens when you let women run things, even as announcers.

  • MattTheSaiyan
    MattTheSaiyan 6 years ago

    Considering how reliable this rocket usually is/was/whatever, this disaster must have come as an extra huge shock...even more so coming within months of Challenger.

  • altfactor
    altfactor 6 years ago

    I believe CNN also showed the launch live, given that it was the first NASA launch since Challenger.

  • jetfreak4
    jetfreak4 6 years ago

    1986 was a bad year for NASA, that's for sure.

  • Bram Nauta
    Bram Nauta 6 years ago

    "We have a main engine shutdown"
    Erm...what main engine?

  • altfactor
    altfactor 7 years ago

    @RJY4356 CNN also carried the launch live, given it was the first U.S. launch of any kind since Challenger.

  • Victor_D
    Victor_D 7 years ago

    All right, but saying that AFTER the rocket just exploded is a bit... redundant, if you catch my drift.

  • blablubb12345
    blablubb12345 7 years ago

    The rocket veered off course and finally exploded BECAUSE the main engine shut down permaturely. You can see this at 1:55.

  • Victor_D
    Victor_D 7 years ago

    I love the euphemisms they use when their rockets blow up: "we show a premature main engine shutdown" - yeah, I guess you can say that when your main engine has just been pulverized by an explosion :-D Or the "we have had an anomaly" in another Delta-III explosion, after which fire and debris literally rained down all around the launch pad. That was epic.

  • NorthsideRecords613
    NorthsideRecords613 7 years ago

    Good news is it didn't have people inside

  • blablubb12345
    blablubb12345 7 years ago

    Only the main engine is steerable on a Delta II, the boosters have fixed nozzles. With the loss of the main engine, the rocket also lost all steering capabilities.

  • QuattroStig
    QuattroStig 7 years ago

    Yes. The initial break up is aerodynamic @ 1:58. It seems that the only imbalance that caused the rotation would be caused by an uneven burn by the outboard solid boosters. I would assume the main engine would be in the center. How would shutting this down cause a spin? The only way this would be possible is if the center of gravity was behind the center of pressure.

  • Pai0near
    Pai0near 7 years ago

    the rocket turned! something mustve happened in one of them air start srb's

  • lithiumdeuteride
    lithiumdeuteride 7 years ago

    I guess "parking orbit" doesn't roll off the tongue as automatically as "parking lot".

  • ugowar
    ugowar 8 years ago

    Looks like the payload and 2nd stage were ripped off while the 1st stage was left more or less intact, though apparently ruptured judging by violent venting that quickly stopped.

  • 3210andLiftoff
    3210andLiftoff  8 years ago

    You can see when the RSO detonates the remainder, but the initial breakup is aerodynamic.

  • 3210andLiftoff
    3210andLiftoff  8 years ago

    I did not realize that, thanks.

  • RJY4356
    RJY4356 8 years ago

    Well, yes, among the firsts...I know she did an Atlas-Centaur launch (AC-63) in 1985, a year before this.

  • RJY4356
    RJY4356 8 years ago

    Also this was one of Lisa Malone's first launches she did in 1985-1986 before she started doing shuttle launches in 1989.

  • RJY4356
    RJY4356 8 years ago

    I remember watching this LIVE on The Weather Channel of all places...wheneevr there was a NOAA satellite launch they'd show it live. This was at 6:18 p.m. on a Saturday evening. I remember the weather channel guys didn't realize what happened at first and it took them a moment to replay it and realize the RSO destroyed it after they lost control form the engine shutdown.