-
#200 by shuttlefan on 07 Mar, 2007 01:18
-
I've noticed sometimes, that during the count, if the GLS has to insert a hold at T-5min or T-4min, for example, the clock will countdown 1 second past 5:00, to 4:59, and then count back up to 5:00 and hold there. Does anyone know why it goes back and then up one second and holds? :laugh:
-
#201 by Jim on 07 Mar, 2007 01:24
-
Quote
shuttlefan - 6/3/2007 9:18 PM
I've noticed sometimes, that during the count, if the GLS has to insert a hold at T-5min or T-4min, for example, the clock will countdown 1 second past 5:00, to 4:59, and then count back up to 5:00 and hold there. Does anyone know why it goes back and then up one second and holds? :laugh:
That is just a display clock and not the actual -
#202 by Shadow Spork on 07 Mar, 2007 02:05
-
Hi. This is my first time here, and I've read most of the questions and answers to my questions that I had.
Now here's my question. I don't know if this has been asked already, and I apologize if it already has, but after the Apollo program, I understand that they reused the towers as the FSS for the Space Shuttle program. I wonder, how did they manage to take those towers of the launch platforms and install it onto the pad? Did it take a lot of cranes just to install onto the pad, or did they had to go through the trouble of partially or fully dismantling the tower, and then put back together again onto the pad? -
#203 by BenB5150 on 07 Mar, 2007 14:25
-
I have a question about the shuttle tiles. Do they still have problems with tiles falling off during flight like the earlier flights or was the bonding problem solved long ago?
Thanks!
Ben -
#204 by kneecaps on 07 Mar, 2007 14:26
-
Quote
Antares - 7/3/2007 1:34 AM
Quotekneecaps - 6/3/2007 11:48 AM
I don't have the amount here at home, but the LOX pump can ingest a rather large amount of vapor and still survive. Watch this space for an edit if you're curious.QuoteJim - 6/3/2007 2:19 AM
Quotehmh33 - 5/3/2007 9:08 PM
I have heard in a couple of places that if an SSME ingests vapours the turbopumps will fail catastrophically and cause loss of vehicle. Is this really true? Can see it damaging/destroying the engine but is it really violent enough to take out the whole stack?
The engine exploding is what could take out the stack
My understanding is this situation causes the tubopumps to overspeed and fly apart (which is obviously very bad).
I came across this while looking for some other info:
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=10520
The HPFTP first stage turbine blades failed, unbalancing the turbine, yet the engine was still shutdown without a catastrophe.
-
#205 by Jim on 07 Mar, 2007 15:54
-
Quote
BenB5150 - 7/3/2007 10:25 AM
I have a question about the shuttle tiles. Do they still have problems with tiles falling off during flight like the earlier flights or was the bonding problem solved long ago?
Thanks!
Ben
The adhesion problem was solved before Challenger. Debris hits are the real issue -
#206 by nathan.moeller on 07 Mar, 2007 16:12
-
Quote
Shadow Spork - 6/3/2007 9:05 PM
Hi. This is my first time here, and I've read most of the questions and answers to my questions that I had.
Now here's my question. I don't know if this has been asked already, and I apologize if it already has, but after the Apollo program, I understand that they reused the towers as the FSS for the Space Shuttle program. I wonder, how did they manage to take those towers of the launch platforms and install it onto the pad? Did it take a lot of cranes just to install onto the pad, or did they had to go through the trouble of partially or fully dismantling the tower, and then put back together again onto the pad?
Welcome to the site Shadow Spork! They were dismantled and re-assembled if memory serves me right. If you look at the Saturn SUTs (service umbilical towers) and the shuttle FSS (fixed service structure), you can see they are quite different. I imagine the same will be done for the transition from shuttle to Ares I and Ares V. -
#207 by Jim on 07 Mar, 2007 16:14
-
Quote
nathan.moeller - 7/3/2007 12:12 PM
QuoteShadow Spork - 6/3/2007 9:05 PM
Hi. This is my first time here, and I've read most of the questions and answers to my questions that I had.
Now here's my question. I don't know if this has been asked already, and I apologize if it already has, but after the Apollo program, I understand that they reused the towers as the FSS for the Space Shuttle program. I wonder, how did they manage to take those towers of the launch platforms and install it onto the pad? Did it take a lot of cranes just to install onto the pad, or did they had to go through the trouble of partially or fully dismantling the tower, and then put back together again onto the pad?
Welcome to the site Shadow Spork! They were dismantled and re-assembled if memory serves me right. If you look at the Saturn SUTs (service umbilical towers) and the shuttle FSS (fixed service structure), you can see they are quite different. I imagine the same will be done for the transition from shuttle to Ares I and Ares V.
The LUTs became the FSS. Ares will not use the same towers -
#208 by nathan.moeller on 07 Mar, 2007 16:33
-
Quote
Jim - 7/3/2007 11:14 AM
Ares will not use the same towers
What will be done with the components of the FSS and RSS? Will they end up in the same metal graveyard as the Saturn LUT components that were discarded after Apollo? -
#209 by BenB5150 on 07 Mar, 2007 17:50
-
Quote
Jim - 7/3/2007 10:54 AM
QuoteBenB5150 - 7/3/2007 10:25 AM
I have a question about the shuttle tiles. Do they still have problems with tiles falling off during flight like the earlier flights or was the bonding problem solved long ago?
Thanks!
Ben
The adhesion problem was solved before Challenger. Debris hits are the real issue
I thought they had fixed the bonding issue just wasn't sure. Thanks for the Reply!
Ben -
#210 by edkyle99 on 07 Mar, 2007 18:01
-
Quote
Shadow Spork - 6/3/2007 9:05 PM
Hi. This is my first time here, and I've read most of the questions and answers to my questions that I had.
Now here's my question. I don't know if this has been asked already, and I apologize if it already has, but after the Apollo program, I understand that they reused the towers as the FSS for the Space Shuttle program. I wonder, how did they manage to take those towers of the launch platforms and install it onto the pad? Did it take a lot of cranes just to install onto the pad, or did they had to go through the trouble of partially or fully dismantling the tower, and then put back together again onto the pad?
Contractors essentially disassembled the Saturn V towers into "chunks", and used big cranes and specially-built moving equipment to relocate these pieces to either be reassembled as shuttle fixed towers or to be scrapped. Here is an image of part of the process.
http://www.capcomespace.net/dossiers/espace_US/shuttle/ksc/LC%2039%20construction%20mars%201976%20KSC-76C-0715.jpg
Note that a big derrick (I think this type is called a "breast derrick), attached to the Apollo tower, was used for this lift, rather than a standard crane.
This image is from the following web page that describes the process with more images. If you don't read French, it is worth running through a translater like Alta Vista Babel Fish. ( http://babelfish.altavista.com )
http://www.capcomespace.net/dossiers/espace_US/shuttle/ksc/LC39_chrono.htm
- Ed Kyle -
#211 by Mark Dave on 07 Mar, 2007 18:44
-
I am also curious on what will happen to the shuttle LCM. Will it all be scrapped or will one of FSS/RSS be moved and made part of a museum exhibit? IMO I'd like to see one of the FSS/RSS structures left as a museum piece to put on display.
-
#212 by astrobrian on 07 Mar, 2007 20:05
-
If kept as a display, it would not be an easy move for sure.
-
#213 by nathan.moeller on 07 Mar, 2007 22:59
-
I couldn't find LCM on the acronym list. What does it stand for?
-
#214 by Shadow Spork on 09 Mar, 2007 02:45
-
Wow, thanks! More than what I needed to know.
-
#215 by nathan.moeller on 09 Mar, 2007 03:46
-
Quote
Shadow Spork - 8/3/2007 9:45 PM
Wow, thanks! More than what I needed to know.
That's usually what you get here my friend Welcome to the greatest NASA website on the world-wide web.
-
#216 by MKremer on 10 Mar, 2007 06:17
-
Quote
nathan.moeller - 7/3/2007 11:33 AM
QuoteJim - 7/3/2007 11:14 AM
Ares will not use the same towers
What will be done with the components of the FSS and RSS? Will they end up in the same metal graveyard as the Saturn LUT components that were discarded after Apollo?
Frankly, unless folks can get their Congressperson to sponsor/pass enough appropriations (ie $$$$$$) to 'save' those structures via NASA itself, they're likely going to be scrapped.
Of course, there's the Private financing way, but that's a long haul - choosing (or creating from scratch) a responsible rescue/preservation Organization to manage/finance everything; creating/financing enough PR to raise lots of money; lobbying NASA to save the hardware (and proving you have the resources/financing to do it); creating/bidding contracts for relocation/preservation; and most importantly (assuming everything before this is done) being able to raise the money to pay for everything.
-
#217 by Austin on 10 Mar, 2007 19:55
-
Why does the crew only need their O2 on during the first two minutes or so of launch? (until the SRBs separate) I noticed that the CDR gives the okay for his/her crew to turn off the 02 after SRB sep, and open the visors on their helmets. Maximum g-loads (3) occur closer to the 8 minute mark. If anything, I would think that would be the time when additionaly oxygen would be needed, as it is harder to breath at that time.
-
#218 by Jim on 10 Mar, 2007 20:42
-
Quote
Austin - 10/3/2007 3:55 PM
Why does the crew only need their O2 on during the first two minutes or so of launch? (until the SRBs separate) I noticed that the CDR gives the okay for his/her crew to turn off the 02 after SRB sep, and open the visors on their helmets. Maximum g-loads (3) occur closer to the 8 minute mark. If anything, I would think that would be the time when additionaly oxygen would be needed, as it is harder to breath at that time.
There is another post on this else. It isn't for the "extra" oxygen, it is for safety. Search on mkirk as the author -
#219 by ANDY_WALLACEGROVE on 18 Mar, 2007 18:58
-
First, can I say what a great site! The depth of members knowledge and the availability of info is just astonishing, thanks and congratulations.
My question is, can anyone direct me to some in-depth technical detail about the operation of the GPC's? The kind of thing i'm interested in is how the units combine to operate during critical phases, and the kind of redundancy/resilience is employed to deliver fault-tolerance.
Andy
