-
#200
by
Jim
on 23 Apr, 2010 02:19
-
hopefully that isn't a centaur feed line leaking H2 or O2
It's a centaur vent line intentionally leaking H2.
Really? I was under the impression it was just a quick disconnect that didn't pop off.
It is the GH2 vent fin.
-
#201
by
WHAP
on 23 Apr, 2010 02:22
-
This is probably a stupid question, but I can't shake the feeling the video cutoff just before PLF sep was on purpose.
Is there some reason to prevent people from seeing the event- ITAR type stuff, maybe?
If not, why cut the feed? Could there have been another payload inside, or unannounced mods to the spacecraft that we aren't supposed to know about?
Thanks for your patience,
Jeff
Answers:
Yes, it was on purpose.
Unlikely that it's an ITAR reason.
Because they don't want you to see it.
Unlikely that there was another payload inside - you saw pictures of encapsulation - not much else would fit.
If there were mods to the spacecraft, how would you know?
-
#202
by
jcm
on 23 Apr, 2010 02:49
-
This is probably a stupid question, but I can't shake the feeling the video cutoff just before PLF sep was on purpose.
Is there some reason to prevent people from seeing the event- ITAR type stuff, maybe?
If not, why cut the feed? Could there have been another payload inside, or unannounced mods to the spacecraft that we aren't supposed to know about?
Thanks for your patience,
Jeff
Answers:
Yes, it was on purpose.
Unlikely that it's an ITAR reason.
Because they don't want you to see it.
Unlikely that there was another payload inside - you saw pictures of encapsulation - not much else would fit.
If there were mods to the spacecraft, how would you know?
I don't really understand why they don't want us to see it... we've already seen it at encapsulation. I wonder if it is just part of a standard package of agreements between USAF and ULA, for a mission of secrecy category such-and-such you (1) cut off the video at PLF sep (2) don't release orbital elements (3) don't do this that and the other. They are being cagey about the orbital elements (for no very good reason perhaps but that's another argument) and so they categorized the mission that way, the video cutoff came as part of that package rather than being something they really cared about...
I don't insist on this interpretation, but just to bear in mind the way organizations work, sometimes stuff is done without there being a deeply thought through reason.
-
#203
by
dks13827
on 23 Apr, 2010 03:04
-
Beautiful time of evening for a launch. Atlas is a good looking vehicle, compared to Delta IVs.
Kind of looks like Ares, dont it ? Delta IV heavy has a certain 'spacey' look to it, IMO. I like them all.
-
#204
by
TrueBlueWitt
on 23 Apr, 2010 03:12
-
Very stately acceleration at lift-off without solids.. reminds me of Saturn V..
Especially compared to the way shuttle bolts off the pad with the solids lit.
-
#205
by
Jester
on 23 Apr, 2010 07:07
-
so, nothing on space-track.org yet, any TLE's floating around ?
-
#206
by
northanger
on 23 Apr, 2010 07:18
-
Congratulations Shuttle Mini-Me!
-
#207
by
ugordan
on 23 Apr, 2010 08:42
-
hopefully that isn't a centaur feed line leaking H2 or O2
It's a centaur vent line intentionally leaking H2.
Really? I was under the impression it was just a quick disconnect that didn't pop off.
It is the GH2 vent fin.
And this is the first time I've seen it venting visible from the ground in the launch footage, starting at about T+2 min 40 s.
-
#208
by
Chris Bergin
on 23 Apr, 2010 09:35
-
-
#209
by
northanger
on 23 Apr, 2010 09:39
-
-
#210
by
Ben the Space Brit
on 23 Apr, 2010 10:52
-
FWIW, I've never seen an Atlas-V launch where the ground tracking camera has continued to PLF jettison. I don't think that there is anything sinister about that.
The sudden cut-off of the coverage before the alleged s/c seperation is another matter. Hypothetically - would the USAF be allowed to instruct ULA to falsify data on the ELV portal as to the time of s/c seperation on the grounds of operational security? Frankly, that Centaur was an
awfully powerful upper stage to throw a relatively small cargo into LEO. I can see a scenario where the USAF wouldn't want X-37's final inclination and insertion apogee known. China
does have ASAT capability after all, and accidents
can happen, especially because of excitable and easily-silenced junior officers who were acting without authorisation or the knowledge of their superiors.
Gee... I sound like a Tom Clancy novel, don't I?
More seriously, I wonder if we will eventually get some redacted imagry of the later stages of the flight. If I were in the USAF testing team I'd want cameras on board, both to take stills of various systems in action and to allow live video to assist trouble-shooting if required. Once sansitive information is redacted, videos of the ascent and orbital operations might become available in a few years' time.
-
#211
by
Jim
on 23 Apr, 2010 11:58
-
1. Hypothetically - would the USAF be allowed to instruct ULA to falsify data on the ELV portal as to the time of s/c seperation on the grounds of operational security?
2. More seriously, I wonder if we will eventually get some redacted imagry of the later stages of the flight. If I were in the USAF testing team I'd want cameras on board, both to take stills of various systems in action and to allow live video to assist trouble-shooting if required. Once sansitive information is redacted, videos of the ascent and orbital operations might become available in a few years' time.
The ELV portal is run by NASA. They would not falsify the info, they just would not release the info
2. Imagery from where? Onboard cameras? Hundreds of spacecraft are flown without cameras and they work fine without them. It is not worth the effort or bandwith.
-
#212
by
Space Pete
on 23 Apr, 2010 12:51
-
Has anyone seen this amazing X-37 landing test video (sshh, it's Top Secret)!
-
#213
by
Antares
on 23 Apr, 2010 13:14
-
-
#214
by
ugordan
on 23 Apr, 2010 13:23
-
FWIW, I've never seen an Atlas-V launch where the ground tracking camera has continued to PLF jettison. I don't think that there is anything sinister about that.
New Horizons launch showed it clearly. 5X1 launches jett the PLF during boost phase, not after Centaur MES. The rest of the 4X1 launches are just too far down range to see anything, they barely resolve the vehicle at BECO.
-
#215
by
Antares
on 23 Apr, 2010 13:33
-
No, launches jettison the PLF based on the free molecular heating requirement. Get rid of it ASAP. Pluto could do it early because the payload was so light that it got to that FMH level faster and maybe, brain is fuzzy on this, because the FMH requirement was slightly high.
-
#216
by
ugordan
on 23 Apr, 2010 14:07
-
No, launches jettison the PLF based on the free molecular heating requirement. Get rid of it ASAP. Pluto could do it early because the payload was so light that it got to that FMH level faster and maybe, brain is fuzzy on this, because the FMH requirement was slightly high.
Weren't we over this once already? Isn't the very fact the Centaur is encapsulated in the 5m fairing a requirement to drop the PLF before MES? Hence the (more lofted?) trajectories to accomodate FMH constraints to enable that early enough?
-
#217
by
kevin-rf
on 23 Apr, 2010 15:40
-
Considering the X-37 has a TPS, is there a FMH constraint? or do you just drop the shroud as soon as aero load constraints allow one to?
-
#218
by
ugordan
on 23 Apr, 2010 16:03
-
Aero loads for reentry wouldn't be the same as when going uphill. It would orient itself properly to expose the strong TPS into the stream, while this would not be the case on the booster.
-
#219
by
JimO
on 23 Apr, 2010 16:20
-
Guesstimated orbital elements, anybody??
32 inc, 450 km circ?
