-
#1060 by Lee Jay on 04 Oct, 2007 19:34
-
Quote
Jorge - 4/10/2007 1:06 PM
Quotepad rat - 4/10/2007 9:22 AM
The T-0 umbilicals are mounted on a sturdy steel carrier plate that engages latches on the orbiter's fuselage. It's likely that failure of a carrier plate to separate would result in significant structural damage to the area around the T-0 panel. Since there are wiring and plumbing runs on the inside wall of that area, there would likely be electrical faults, possibly a bus drop, pneumatic leaks, and hydraulic leaks. There would be so many strikes against the vehicle/crew that I'd venture to say a successful RTLS would be out of the question.
I would think the exterior umbilicals would be the weak point, and would rip loose long before the carrier plate. So you would wind up with the shuttle lifting off with the carrier plate still firmly latched to the orbiter, trailing a bunch of torn umbilicals.
I'm surprised. I would think the latches on the orbiter would be the weak point and if the vehicle tried to leave the pad still attached that they would fracture and the plate would pull away without causing damage to anything but the latches themselves. But of course, I don't know how this thing is designed. -
#1061 by bholt on 04 Oct, 2007 23:22
-
Why can't the APUs be shut down & then quickly restarted?
Brent -
#1062 by Jim on 05 Oct, 2007 00:03
-
Need a cool off period
-
#1063 by jeff122670 on 05 Oct, 2007 01:07
-
regarding the T-0 umbilicals.....has anyone ever noticed a light that appears to come on around T-13 seconds or so. it seems to come from inside the tail service mast and shines right on the umbilical. it is almost as though they are using the light for a better camera image. i have looked at it several times and it is NOT a reflection of the hydrogen burn ignitors....furthermore it comes on around t-13 or t-14 seconds....
anyone have any idea what that is???
thanks!
Jeff
-
#1064 by psloss on 05 Oct, 2007 01:27
-
Quote
jeff122670 - 4/10/2007 9:07 PM
Someone asked about it in a thread here (maybe L2) during one of the last two launches, but I don't remember what the answer was...
regarding the T-0 umbilicals.....has anyone ever noticed a light that appears to come on around T-13 seconds or so. it seems to come from inside the tail service mast and shines right on the umbilical. it is almost as though they are using the light for a better camera image. i have looked at it several times and it is NOT a reflection of the hydrogen burn ignitors....furthermore it comes on around t-13 or t-14 seconds....
anyone have any idea what that is???
-
#1065 by BigKiai on 05 Oct, 2007 16:58
-
Thank you everyone for the replies, this has been very informative.
-
#1066 by shuttlefan on 06 Oct, 2007 16:23
-
During the APU hotfire test, set for Thurs. next week for STS-120, does the Orbiter Access Arm retract?
-
#1067 by Jim on 06 Oct, 2007 16:24
-
I don't believe so
-
#1068 by hyper_snyper on 07 Oct, 2007 00:37
-
Is it true that the SSME destroys its turbines after every flight? Maybe destroy is too strong a word...
Anyway, what kind of maintenance is need for the engines after flying? -
#1069 by Lee Jay on 07 Oct, 2007 01:02
-
Quote
hyper_snyper - 6/10/2007 6:37 PM
Is it true that the SSME destroys its turbines after every flight?
No. I don't know the answer to the rest of your question but at least some turbine parts (including blades) get used again. -
#1070 by GLS on 07 Oct, 2007 11:37
-
Quote
jeff122670 - 5/10/2007 2:07 AM
regarding the T-0 umbilicals.....has anyone ever noticed a light that appears to come on around T-13 seconds or so. it seems to come from inside the tail service mast and shines right on the umbilical. it is almost as though they are using the light for a better camera image. i have looked at it several times and it is NOT a reflection of the hydrogen burn ignitors....furthermore it comes on around t-13 or t-14 seconds....
anyone have any idea what that is???
thanks!
Jeff
There's a camera inside the TSMs looking at the plates (I've seen a diagram somewhere...) The light has to be for a better image as the plate comes off the OV and the TSM door closes... -
#1071 by brahmanknight on 07 Oct, 2007 14:47
-
I remember reading the answer to my question a long time ago, but I don't remember where. Why is the nose landing gear shorter than the main landing gear?
-
#1072 by Jim on 07 Oct, 2007 14:58
-
define "shorter"
-
#1073 by ShuttleDiscovery on 07 Oct, 2007 15:02
-
Quote
Jim - 7/10/2007 3:58 PM
define "shorter"
I think he means why the shuttle's nose is lower than the back (not level) during landing.. -
#1074 by brahmanknight on 07 Oct, 2007 15:20
-
Yes, that is what I mean, ShuttleDiscovery
-
#1075 by Jim on 07 Oct, 2007 16:39
-
The aft gear had to be long enough to allow rotation from the landing flare. The fwd gear just had to be long enough for the max strut compression. There is no requirement for a level attitude like a airliner
-
#1076 by jeff122670 on 07 Oct, 2007 21:04
-
i would also imagine that they wanted to establish a negative angle of attack on the vehicle to prevent either a bounce or a rotation again (unlike sts-3)....
my guess at least...
jeff
-
#1077 by MKremer on 07 Oct, 2007 21:34
-
Jim's reply is probably correct - no real reason since it wasn't designed to gain lift and take off from a horizontal runway. The only reason I can think of to have the nose gear a bit longer is to make for a bit gentler touchdown at the front end before the control surfaces lose most of their effect and drop the nose onto the runway.
-
#1078 by brahmanknight on 08 Oct, 2007 15:38
-
How is propellent loaded into the FRCS?
-
#1079 by jok on 08 Oct, 2007 15:49
-
Hypergolic Umbilical System
http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/nasafact/count4rss.htm
jok