-
#1520
by
JayP
on 14 Jan, 2011 00:04
-
There wouldn't be some kind of map as to which tiles are still "original" would there? or a "statistically this area has needed more replacement than other areas" map? I imagine the tiles on the underside that get chewed up the most, particularly near the landing gear due to landing debris.
If you look at photos of the underside of the Orbiter, the most common places for replaced tiles are around the edges of the landing gear and ET umbilical well doors, over the various antenas and the body flap.
-
#1521
by
DaveS
on 18 Jan, 2011 07:36
-
What does the "landing count" mean? Here's the context:
"Your A/G is enabled for the landing count". It is a call made by GC to FLIGHT during entry and landing.
-
#1522
by
brodo
on 19 Jan, 2011 16:11
-
Do all Mission Specialists get training to be a Flight Engineer?
-
#1523
by
sivodave
on 19 Jan, 2011 21:09
-
Hi all.
do you know if during the development of the structure of the orbiter engineers had to overcome some particular difficulty? or if during construction they had some kind of problem that forced to change the design of the structure (i.e. a given structural component made bigger or with a different size)?
thanks.
Davide
-
#1524
by
Danny Dot
on 20 Jan, 2011 18:55
-
Do all Mission Specialists get training to be a Flight Engineer?
No. MS-2 is the "Flight Engineer" and there is only one per flight. Most of the MS's are not flight engineers.
Danny Deger
-
#1525
by
agman25
on 25 Jan, 2011 19:52
-
What were the abort modes like for the planned shuttle launches from VAFB ? What would the equivalent of a TAL be?
-
#1526
by
Jim
on 25 Jan, 2011 20:15
-
What were the abort modes like for the planned shuttle launches from VAFB ? What would the equivalent of a TAL be?
They are the same, except the down range abort was initially called TPL. NASA later changed TAL to mean Transoceanic Abort Landing. The AOA drove the crossrange requirement. NASA was looking for other airfields in Washington and Alaska to reduce the range.
-
#1527
by
agman25
on 25 Jan, 2011 20:21
-
What were the abort modes like for the planned shuttle launches from VAFB ? What would the equivalent of a TAL be?
They are the same, except the down range abort was initially called TPL. NASA later changed TAL to mean Transoceanic Abort Landing. The AOA drove the crossrange requirement. NASA was looking for other airfields in Washington and Alaska to reduce the range.
I was always under the impression that downrange was south. Thanks for clearing that up.
-
#1528
by
Jim
on 25 Jan, 2011 20:39
-
What were the abort modes like for the planned shuttle launches from VAFB ? What would the equivalent of a TAL be?
They are the same, except the down range abort was initially called TPL. NASA later changed TAL to mean Transoceanic Abort Landing. The AOA drove the crossrange requirement. NASA was looking for other airfields in Washington and Alaska to reduce the range.
I was always under the impression that downrange was south. Thanks for clearing that up.
It is, Washington and Alaska were for AOA. Christmas Islands were looked at for TAL. There would have been SCA range problem with getting an orbiter off these islands.
It is.
-
#1529
by
Danny Dot
on 25 Jan, 2011 21:55
-
Hi all.
do you know if during the development of the structure of the orbiter engineers had to overcome some particular difficulty? or if during construction they had some kind of problem that forced to change the design of the structure (i.e. a given structural component made bigger or with a different size)?
thanks.
Davide
Every time one blew up on the test stand, they changed designs
For example I think the helium purge between the tubine section and the pump section on one of the two turbopumps was the result of a test stand failure.
Danny Deger
-
#1530
by
Nittany Lion
on 25 Jan, 2011 22:09
-
What were the abort modes like for the planned shuttle launches from VAFB ? What would the equivalent of a TAL be?
They are the same, except the down range abort was initially called TPL. NASA later changed TAL to mean Transoceanic Abort Landing. The AOA drove the crossrange requirement. NASA was looking for other airfields in Washington and Alaska to reduce the range.
I was always under the impression that downrange was south. Thanks for clearing that up.
It is, Washington and Alaska were for AOA. Christmas Islands were looked at for TAL. There would have been SCA range problem with getting an orbiter off these islands.
It is.
Wrong holiday. Christmas Island is in the Indian Ocean.
The shuttle TAL site in the Pacific was Mataveri International Airport on Easter Island.
-
#1531
by
Jim
on 25 Jan, 2011 23:06
-
Wrong holiday. Christmas Island is in the Indian Ocean.
The shuttle TAL site in the Pacific was Mataveri International Airport on Easter Island.
I beg to differ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiritimatibut you are right, it was Easter Island
-
#1532
by
alexw
on 25 Jan, 2011 23:09
-
The shuttle TAL site in the Pacific was Mataveri International Airport on Easter Island.
"Shuttle Down"
-
#1533
by
MarsMethanogen
on 26 Jan, 2011 02:38
-
The shuttle TAL site in the Pacific was Mataveri International Airport on Easter Island.
"Shuttle Down"
Yes, by G. Harry Stein, I believe. I remember reading that originally serialized in Analog SF magazine about three decades back.
-
#1534
by
arkaska
on 26 Jan, 2011 04:37
-
I beg to differ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiritimati
but you are right, it was Easter Island
There are actually several Islands called Christmas Island and one of them is located in the Indian Ocean so I can see the confusion.
-
#1535
by
Fequalsma
on 26 Jan, 2011 11:11
-
Danny - I think Dave is asking about the airframe here...
F=ma
Hi all.
do you know if during the development of the structure of the orbiter engineers had to overcome some particular difficulty? or if during construction they had some kind of problem that forced to change the design of the structure (i.e. a given structural component made bigger or with a different size)?
thanks.
Davide
Every time one blew up on the test stand, they changed designs
For example I think the helium purge between the tubine section and the pump section on one of the two turbopumps was the result of a test stand failure.
Danny Deger
-
#1536
by
GoForTLI
on 26 Jan, 2011 12:15
-
Hi all.
do you know if during the development of the structure of the orbiter engineers had to overcome some particular difficulty? or if during construction they had some kind of problem that forced to change the design of the structure (i.e. a given structural component made bigger or with a different size)?
thanks.
Davide
Early on, there was wind tunnel data that resulted in the lightweight delta wing, which decreased weight. Work in the wind tunnel also resulted in moving the relative placement of the SRBs, and changed the shape of the LO2 section of the ET.
I think you're asking about later, once the design was more mature. There was a problem in the aft compartment with the placement of the RGAs located in areas where the vibration or bending loads (someone please clarify) were too high. There may have been some structural changes to the aft compartment, but I believe the fix was to relocate the RGAs within the aft compartment.
-
#1537
by
Danny Dot
on 26 Jan, 2011 18:38
-
On changes to shuttle, some of the white tiles were replaced with the lighter weight blankets based on test data showing the temps were lower than expected.
Danny Deger
-
#1538
by
Sarah
on 29 Jan, 2011 03:44
-
This has been driving me crazy for years. Why do SSME's 2 and 3 move closer together at about T-2 seconds?
-
#1539
by
Jim
on 29 Jan, 2011 12:42
-
This has been driving me crazy for years. Why do SSME's 2 and 3 move closer together at about T-2 seconds?
All three move closer. They are spaced far apart for engine start so that they don't hit each other from start transients. Once they have settled down, they are moved into flight positions.
