This paper documents some of the evolutionary steps in developing a rigorous Space Shuttle launch abort capability. The paper addresses the abort strategy during the design and development and how it evolved during Shuttle flight operations. The Space Shuttle Program made numerous adjustments in both the flight hardware and software as the knowledge of the actual flight environment grew. When failures occurred, corrections and improvements were made to avoid a reoccurrence and to provide added capability for crew survival. Finally some lessons learned are summarized for future human launch vehicle designers to consider.http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110015564_2011016321.pdf
an ISS mission would have at least considered the joint underspeed recovery prosedure (JURe), wouldn't it?
I never understood why this wasn't focused on more during design.
Several of the final-round Shuttle proposals (e.g. Lockheed comes to mind) had solid abort motors on top of the wing root. North American Rockwell won out, despite not having the abort rockets.
I have just tried to access the link given in the first posting of this thread, and it no longer exists.
Did anyone else notice (page 3) that the Orbiter has "evelons", NOT elevons?At least they did not list the body falp, or wigns, or speed barke..okay i'll stop.