Author Topic: Gemini Crew Rescue/Abort System  (Read 6500 times)

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7952
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2157
  • Likes Given: 5101
« Last Edit: 02/15/2014 06:17 PM by Rocket Science »
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob, Physics instructor, aviator, vintage auto racer

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31294
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9574
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: Gemini Crew Rescue/Abort System
« Reply #21 on: 02/15/2014 07:13 PM »
Gemini's use of ejections seats for crew rescue is well known. What is not so well known is the Gemini system for crew rescue after the launch vehicle had propelled the capsule beyond the limits of the ejection seat system. For example, if the first stage had malfunctioned at 150,000 feet, how would the capsule get off the stack?

The available documentation claims that the Gemini thrusters would be used for this maneuver, but did they really have the required impulse to get away from an exploding launch vehicle?



It would use the retro rockets and not the thrusters

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5156
  • Liked: 783
  • Likes Given: 542
Re: Gemini Crew Rescue/Abort System
« Reply #22 on: 02/16/2014 11:14 AM »
Remember reading something about blowing the top of the SRM in an emergency?

I believe the original Titan III-C design called for thrust-termination ports near the forward end of each SRM, but these were deleted after the payload which gave rise to the rocket, Dyna-Soar, was canceled.  I'm not aware of such ports being included in the SRMs of the Titan III-M that was to have boosted MOL.

I wonder whether the light-colored dots on the nosecones of the SRMs in this picture of the first Titan III-C might be the ports.
« Last Edit: 02/16/2014 11:22 AM by Proponent »

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5156
  • Liked: 783
  • Likes Given: 542
Re: Gemini Crew Rescue/Abort System
« Reply #23 on: 02/16/2014 11:27 AM »
Remember reading something about blowing the top of the SRM in an emergency?

Without a launch escape system, any attempt to separate from an exploding SRM with ejection seats would be a very unlikely chance to survive.

Surviving the explosion of any stage without adequate warning is an iffy proposition, regardless of whether ejection seats or capsule escape is used.  I'll grant you, though, that ejection seats are probably riskier in this scenario.

Offline RIB

  • Member
  • Posts: 32
  • USA
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 58
Re: Gemini Crew Rescue/Abort System
« Reply #24 on: 08/28/2016 08:57 PM »
The astronauts in the Gemini capsule were  in a pure oxygen environment for a fairly long time. Even on the pad, their spacesuits would have been soaked in 100 % oxygen since the hatches were dogged. Wouldn't the ignition of the motors of their ejection seats turn them in 'Stros On A Stick?"

Offline the_other_Doug

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2490
  • Minneapolis, MN
  • Liked: 1519
  • Likes Given: 2687
Re: Gemini Crew Rescue/Abort System
« Reply #25 on: 08/28/2016 09:46 PM »
The astronauts in the Gemini capsule were  in a pure oxygen environment for a fairly long time. Even on the pad, their spacesuits would have been soaked in 100 % oxygen since the hatches were dogged. Wouldn't the ignition of the motors of their ejection seats turn them in 'Stros On A Stick?"

The ejection sequence was so fast it would have made little difference.  And remember, the hatches flew off just before ignition of the seat motors, so some air mixing would already be happening.

And any fires that might have thought they were about to consider the idea of starting would immediately be put out by the airstream.  It's not like the material of the seats or suits would somehow be holding on to excess oxygen.

Even if something did start, it would be in a self-extinguishing environment very, very quickly...
-Doug  (With my shield, not yet upon it)

Tags: