-
#1980
by
Skylab
on 01 Jun, 2011 14:58
-
-
#1981
by
mcdavis941
on 01 Jun, 2011 18:33
-
-
#1982
by
Naito
on 01 Jun, 2011 18:46
-
-
#1983
by
wedge
on 01 Jun, 2011 19:31
-
Why was the AFRSI portion changed on the final 3 orbiters? For example you compare Discovery, Endeavour, and Atlantis from when the first flew to today, you notice the amount of AFRSI is less than what was there before. Why?
Well, the AFRSI did not perform so well in some locations, so we went back to tile in those areas.
-
#1984
by
Ronsmytheiii
on 02 Jun, 2011 00:03
-
Just out of curiosity, why did the orbiters land at Edwards for their first flights? I understand that for Columbia and Challenger KSC was not open to landings yet, for Discovery only one KSC landing had taken place before, and for Atlantis there were still issues with the Tires/brakes, but by the time Endeavour flew KSC landings were a regular occurrence, yet she still landed at Edwards. Is there any special reason?
-
#1985
by
Jim
on 02 Jun, 2011 00:08
-
Just out of curiosity, why did the orbiters land at Edwards for their first flights? I understand that for Columbia and Challenger KSC was not open to landings yet, for Discovery only one KSC landing had taken place before, and for Atlantis there were still issues with the Tires/brakes, but by the time Endeavour flew KSC landings were a regular occurrence, yet she still landed at Edwards. Is there any special reason?
Just being conservative with a new orbiter, it was a program rule.
BTW, KSC was available for Columbia and Challenger, again just being cautious.
-
#1986
by
Danny Dot
on 02 Jun, 2011 02:11
-
The redesigned brakes and wheels as well as the drag chute made KSC a better option. Those old brakes gave NASA lots of problems.
And KSC was an option for STS-1. It was needed for RTLS.
-
#1987
by
shuttlefanatic
on 02 Jun, 2011 03:26
-
Just out of curiosity, why did the orbiters land at Edwards for their first flights? I understand that for Columbia and Challenger KSC was not open to landings yet, for Discovery only one KSC landing had taken place before, and for Atlantis there were still issues with the Tires/brakes, but by the time Endeavour flew KSC landings were a regular occurrence, yet she still landed at Edwards. Is there any special reason?
Just being conservative with a new orbiter, it was a program rule.
BTW, KSC was available for Columbia and Challenger, again just being cautious.
For comparison, the runway at the SLF is 15000' long.
The lakebed runway (17/35) they used at Edwards is currently charted as 39097' long, and I think was even a little longer back when the shuttle was using it. Plus, it didn't really much matter if you wound up a little short or long or off to one side
(I think there's mention in Wayne Hale's blog, or somewhere here, of a lakebed shuttle landing that technically came in a tad bit short of the threshold.)
-
#1988
by
sitharus
on 02 Jun, 2011 04:41
-
For comparison, the runway at the SLF is 15000' long.
The lakebed runway (17/35) they used at Edwards is currently charted as 39097' long, and I think was even a little longer back when the shuttle was using it. Plus, it didn't really much matter if you wound up a little short or long or off to one side (I think there's mention in Wayne Hale's blog, or somewhere here, of a lakebed shuttle landing that technically came in a tad bit short of the threshold.)
I think this is the post you're thinking of:
http://blogs.nasa.gov/cm/blog/waynehalesblog/posts/post_1216755480398.html
-
#1989
by
psloss
on 02 Jun, 2011 13:05
-
Endeavour's first landing was also the first use of the drag chute.
-
#1990
by
oxford750
on 02 Jun, 2011 15:44
-
Thanks Jim and Jorge.
oxford750
-
#1991
by
Mark Dave
on 03 Jun, 2011 23:25
-
Why are Challenger's tiles around the crew hatch different from the other orbiters?
-
#1992
by
Jim
on 04 Jun, 2011 10:56
-
Why are Challenger's tiles around the crew hatch different from the other orbiters?
AFRSI was added to the other orbiters.
-
#1993
by
Mark Dave
on 04 Jun, 2011 14:10
-
I was asking on the tile pattern of the hatch, not the AFRSI.
Here is a decal sheet for shuttle models that shows both hatch tile patterns. The one on the left is with all the orbiters except Challenger, the one on the right is what Challenger has. She has extra black tiles.
http://www.ninfinger.org/models/pix/rsmdecal.jpg Why?
-
#1994
by
JayP
on 04 Jun, 2011 16:14
-
I was asking on the tile pattern of the hatch, not the AFRSI.
Here is a decal sheet for shuttle models that shows both hatch tile patterns. The one on the left is with all the orbiters except Challenger, the one on the right is what Challenger has. She has extra black tiles. http://www.ninfinger.org/models/pix/rsmdecal.jpg
Why?
Just a guess, but I would say there was some concern about thermal conditions around the hatch tunnel. It is the one place where the crew cabin structure approaches the outer mold line. Challenger's structure was somewhat different from the later vehicles.
-
#1995
by
Mark Dave
on 04 Jun, 2011 17:13
-
-
#1996
by
JayP
on 05 Jun, 2011 16:22
-
Why does the left SRB have additional stiffeners added to it?...
Why does the left booster have these extra straps on parts of it? Above shows the left SRB compared to the right SRB.
The SRBs don't have "stiffeners" on the segments except for the lower segment. The rings are the joints between the various segments.
As far as the extras on the left SRB, those are covers over linear strain guage sensors used to measure bending and hoop stress'es in the segment cases durring firing. They are a lot fhinner than the segment joints themselves. I have included photos of the various items. The black ones are the factory segment joints and the thicker white ones are the field joints.
-
#1997
by
Mark Dave
on 05 Jun, 2011 18:46
-
I see. Though I do wonder why the left booster has more of these than the right one? Does the left booster being closer to the FSS get more strain from the shockwaves at launch?
-
#1998
by
JAFO
on 05 Jun, 2011 20:29
-
Is it true that one of the limitations of the Shuttle's wingspan design was the ability to fit through the transfer aisle during Lift/Mate??
TIA,
Steve
-
#1999
by
Jim
on 05 Jun, 2011 20:33
-
Is it true that one of the limitations of the Shuttle's wingspan design was the ability to fit through the transfer aisle during Lift/Mate??
TIA,
Steve
It turns sideways or the lift
(I think there's mention in Wayne Hale's blog, or somewhere here, of a lakebed shuttle landing that technically came in a tad bit short of the threshold.)