-
#160
by
oxford750
on 14 Jul, 2009 10:43
-
If the crew has to be so carefull when they enter the shuttle, how fast can they exit,if the need arises?
Thanks
Oxford750
-
#161
by
wizard
on 14 Jul, 2009 14:01
-
OK this one is off the wall, saw it on the NasaKSC Facebook.
Would VAFB launches to ISS been feasible?
No,The shuttle can't get to 51.8 degrees from there
The shuttle can't get there, but some LVs can access that orbit from VAFB.
Edit: disregard my question, I just realized the SRBs and ET impact points would likely be the problem for a VAFB launch to ISS. Coffee hasn't kicked in yet this morning
-
#162
by
smith5se
on 14 Jul, 2009 19:09
-
Reguarding the tyvek covers, are they disposed of as the shuttle reaches orbit, or what happens to them during a launch?
-
#163
by
Jim
on 14 Jul, 2009 19:11
-
Reguarding the tyvek covers, are they disposed of as the shuttle reaches orbit, or what happens to them during a launch?
fall off or burn off.
-
#164
by
oxford750
on 14 Jul, 2009 20:11
-
Hi folks:
What are the objects I have circled, in these pictures?
Where can I find out more about the launch/entry suits the astronauts wear? (i.e. What is the white wheel hanging from the neck)
Thanks
Oxford750
-
#165
by
DaveS
on 14 Jul, 2009 20:15
-
Hi folks:
What are the objects I have circled, in these pictures?
First image: The GOX Vent Hood maintenance access platform.
Second image: One of the vernier FRCS jets.
-
#166
by
Jim
on 14 Jul, 2009 20:16
-
1. is the access platform to work on the GOX vent hood while it is retracted
2. is vernier thruster
3. The wheel with the strap keeps the neck ring from rising up while the suit is under pressure.
-
#167
by
smith5se
on 14 Jul, 2009 20:16
-
Reguarding the tyvek covers, are they disposed of as the shuttle reaches orbit, or what happens to them during a launch?
fall off or burn off.
Thanks for the answer! As a follow up question, has there ever been a case where one of the covers did not come off???
Also what are they made out of, lightweight material of some type I'd imagine and how are they attatched?? (sorry for the boat load of questions)
-
#168
by
Jim
on 14 Jul, 2009 20:18
-
Reguarding the tyvek covers, are they disposed of as the shuttle reaches orbit, or what happens to them during a launch?
fall off or burn off.
Thanks for the answer! As a follow up question, has there ever been a case where one of the covers did not come off???
Also what are they made out of, lightweight material of some type I'd imagine and how are they attatched?? (sorry for the boat load of questions)
It burns off from the thruster firing
They are attached by RTV.
They are made of tyvek
There is an article about the covers
-
#169
by
mdo
on 14 Jul, 2009 22:49
-
How accurately is the Shuttle launch mass known and how is it determined?
What limits the accuracy of this figure? Maybe ice build up or... ?
-
#170
by
DaveS
on 14 Jul, 2009 23:54
-
MDMoery: The propellant in the storages spheres isn't sufficient to keep replenishing what boils off every second for those 24 hrs. And going too low isn't a good thing. It's only something you would do during a major pad mod period.
-
#171
by
padrat
on 15 Jul, 2009 01:36
-
From what I've been told our storage tanks in LH2 have never been completely drained since they were first chilled during Apollo. Now over on LOX, there was the flexhose rupture that drained the tank and damaged it as well.
-
#172
by
Jim
on 15 Jul, 2009 01:41
-
How accurately is the Shuttle launch mass known and how is it determined?
What limits the accuracy of this figure? Maybe ice build up or... ?
The orbiter is weighed. Not all the other components are (like SRB's). But pieces parts are weighed. The amount of propellants in the ET is known. Knowing the weight of the whole stack within .1% (not saying that this is the accuracy) means that they could be off by 6000 lbs. Most of this is going to be in the SRB's so it doesn't affect payload to orbit by that much (around 12 to 1 ratio or so)
-
#173
by
Lee Jay
on 15 Jul, 2009 01:43
-
I think I know where he might be coming from.
On a 24 hour turnaround, it seems like they get the tank drained and then fill it again just a few hours later. Why not keep the External Tank fueled and just keep it in stable replenish for the next attempt the next day?
Ice accumulation is probably a part of it too.
-
#174
by
oxford750
on 15 Jul, 2009 02:02
-
Thanks Dave and Jim.
Oxford750
-
#175
by
mdo
on 15 Jul, 2009 05:35
-
How accurately is the Shuttle launch mass known and how is it determined?
What limits the accuracy of this figure? Maybe ice build up or... ?
The orbiter is weighed. Not all the other components are (like SRB's). But pieces parts are weighed. The amount of propellants in the ET is known. Knowing the weight of the whole stack within .1% (not saying that this is the accuracy) means that they could be off by 6000 lbs. Most of this is going to be in the SRB's so it doesn't affect payload to orbit by that much (around 12 to 1 ratio or so)
Most interesting. Thanks a bunch!
-
#176
by
psloss
on 15 Jul, 2009 13:31
-
Is there a certain percentage of "no-go" for weather where they do not even try to launch? Because Tuesday there was a 60% change no-go. With the open Tyvek cover in mind, wouldn't it have been wiser to immediatly put the launch to Wednesday and repair the tyvek cover on Tuesday? I'm a newbie, so just kick me if I'm wrong.
No percentage. Have you ever been to Florida? Weather changes often by the minute there. They have launched on 90% no-go days before.
Analyst
Point taken -- especially in the summer time -- but can't think of a launch with a 90% WX violation forecast going into tanking. I believe they have tanked with that forecast and scrubbed. And they have launched with a 70% chance of violation going in (I believe STS-116 was the most recent example). Not sure about launches with a 80% chance of violation at tanking.
Analyst pointed me to STS-94, which launched with a 90% forecast going into tanking -- even with a 2 hour, 30 minute launch window; reference:
http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/status/stsstat/1997/jun/6-30-97s.htmIt's also worth noting that in that situation (Spacelab mission), they were able to move the targeted T-0 up by one hour to improve their chances.
The launch ended up being delayed for about 12 minutes due to a shower in the RTLS radius:
http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/status/stsstat/1997/jul/7-01-97t.htm
-
#177
by
Frankfordewinne
on 15 Jul, 2009 17:15
-
Why does the SRB on the left have a black ribbon around the top? Is it to indicate which SRB (left or right side) it is?
-
#178
by
rdale
on 15 Jul, 2009 17:16
-
Yes
-
#179
by
rdale
on 15 Jul, 2009 17:43
-
In plotting my radar over the KSC complex, I realized the SLF runway source I have is not NW/SE but more N/S and not near the actual observation site. Leads me to believe the lat/long coordinates of the runway ends are not correct.
Any source of the actual coordinates of each end of the SLF runway?
