-
#200
by
ugordan
on 21 Jan, 2011 08:16
-
What I don't understand is why the ROFIs don't keep it under control at the bottom of the booster.
The ROFIs are not the issue, it's the vast quantity of hydrogen and helium that's dumped out. Since this mixture isn't well-mixed with air (better
not be unless you want a detonation!), it takes quite some time for it to burn off. In the meantime the buoyancy just does its job.
Someone said after the last Delta IV launch that the BBQ thing was sorted out ages ago. Apparently not
-
#201
by
ugordan
on 21 Jan, 2011 08:35
-
-
#202
by
MATTBLAK
on 21 Jan, 2011 09:39
-
That's pretty cool! Delta IV-H is one heck of a Bird. Quick; get an Orion capsule on top of one of those things A.S.A.P!!
-
#203
by
Targeteer
on 21 Jan, 2011 11:15
-
-
#204
by
Jim
on 21 Jan, 2011 11:33
-
Wow...is the insulation actually on fire in that wide shot?
I suppose that's one way to shed a few Kg...
To my eyes, the left hand booster as seen in the image is burning and trailing smoke in a "U" shape along the body of the booster as well as the active flame between that booster and the core.
I can't believe they intended or want the vehicle in flames like that... ignition fireball not withstanding.
This reminds me of one of the technical issues with SLC-6 back in the Shuttle days, the accumulation of hydrogen gas at the base of the pad. They installed a turbine near the pad to help vent the gas, but its possible that the turbine is either gone, or not 100% effective.
The jet engines (turbines) were to keep ice off the ET. It was steam injection that was added for the H2 problem and that was to prevent detonation which it is a Delta IV issue. Anyways, one can see that the SSME duct has been filled in.
-
#205
by
apace
on 21 Jan, 2011 11:36
-
If you look at the highlight video of ULA, you will see in the first few seconds a few burning spots on the 3 CBC and one near the rocket engine... looks not really reliable, but I think, the engineers know what's allowed and what not.
-
#206
by
Downix
on 21 Jan, 2011 12:05
-
That's pretty cool! Delta IV-H is one heck of a Bird. Quick; get an Orion capsule on top of one of those things A.S.A.P!!
2013 is the date. Unmanned, but still.
-
#207
by
Ben the Space Brit
on 21 Jan, 2011 12:24
-
Two things come to mind from watching Marsavian's video:
1) There was definately fires on all the LOX tank insulation of all three CBCs after lift-off. I'm sure that wasn't a serious problem, though;
2) Watching the contrail as the rocket went supersonic, I see why there was so much confusion about that contrail seen over the Pacific recently. It was impossible to tell what direction the rocket was turning, either towards the camera or away or even to either side.
-
#208
by
Lee Jay
on 21 Jan, 2011 12:55
-
Just realized those pictures were taken by Pat Corkery. We hired Pat to take aerials of our site last year, and I took pictures of him taking pictures of us. Hi Pat! Bet you didn't know I took this shot!
-
#209
by
kevin-rf
on 21 Jan, 2011 13:07
-
I suppose that's one way to shed a few Kg...
How much of an impact does a char'd booster have on the boosters drag during atmospheric flight? You no longer have a nice "smooth" surface. It might fully negate the few kg you burned off
-
#210
by
ugordan
on 21 Jan, 2011 13:14
-
That foam is not terribly smooth in the first place.
-
#211
by
Antares
on 21 Jan, 2011 13:52
-
It's not the amount of hydrogen. It's only 25% more than the SSME. It's the lack of pad water and the pad geometry. At LC-39, the SSWS both retards combustion and entrains the hydrogen below the MLP.
-
#212
by
JosephB
on 21 Jan, 2011 14:31
-
-
#213
by
otisbow
on 21 Jan, 2011 14:39
-
Was there any satellite broadcast of the launch? My satellite TV picture went black when the telecast started. I could not watch the launch because the web was jamed.
-
#214
by
daver
on 21 Jan, 2011 14:40
-
Photo from AP.
(Has to be linked, as it's copyrighted. Can you hard link it? - Chris)
-
#215
by
Chris Bergin
on 21 Jan, 2011 15:39
-
Insider's view from NASA Mission Director Center (MDC) on south Vandenberg
HA! Check out the "OH NO!" during ignition.
-
#216
by
Lars_J
on 21 Jan, 2011 16:02
-
HA! Check out the "OH NO!" during ignition.
Funny indeed!
I really thought ULA had resolved this excessive flame/charring issue after the 1st 'heavy' launch - but perhaps it was pad mods instead of vehicle mods?
Congrats on the launch!
-
#217
by
starsilk
on 21 Jan, 2011 17:50
-
HA! Check out the "OH NO!" during ignition.
made my heart skip a couple of beats, too.
obviously somebody didn't think the 'phoenix rising out of the flames' mission patch might be a bad idea?
-
#218
by
kch
on 21 Jan, 2011 18:20
-
-
#219
by
Kim Keller
on 21 Jan, 2011 18:32
-
I'm more inclined to think that the debris releases were insulating foam, given the way it released and dispersed. Nozzle ablatives would remain entrained in the plume.
