-
#180
by
James Lowe1
on 20 Dec, 2005 02:30
-
Priceless links, especially the MCC link. There's plenty of questions answered on that page alone.
-
#181
by
psloss
on 20 Dec, 2005 12:48
-
Another quickie: William Hartenstein has a fantastic photography collection online; lots of ELV and shuttle pictures going back many years.
http://www.ktb.net/~billmeco/(I would presume that Ben has run into Mr. Hartenstein at various pad camera setups and elsewhere at the Cape.)
Philip Sloss
-
#182
by
Hotol
on 20 Dec, 2005 13:35
-
Beautiful pictures.
-
#183
by
FransonUK
on 20 Dec, 2005 14:10
-
-
#184
by
braddock
on 20 Dec, 2005 16:49
-
LOX Question.
I guess the recent SpaceX flights have made me aware of my ignorance of LOX handling, and thinking of that huge ET and the issues it must have has raised some questions.
How is LOX for the Space Shuttle generated and stored before launch? And shouldn't the ET be absolutely smoking with boiloff, or is it piped out through the ground facility arm and vented somewhere?
Am I right in my conclusion that for ground storage LOX can be held in heavy pressurized tanks that eliminate boiloff? It is only because of the light-weight requirements of the tanks in the ET (or other rocket) that the LOX needs to be at a lower pressrue, and boiloff occurs? Or do I misunderstand?
Also, is condensation on the ET ever a problem or launch weight consideration, or does the insulation largely take care of that?
Thanks.
-
#185
by
Shuttle Man
on 26 Dec, 2005 23:14
-
LOX boil off is vented through the "beanie cap", rather than through an umbilical, or vented into the open air.
The ET is constantly topped up until just prior to launch, with pressurization. Insulation stops condensation (most of) on the ET.
-
#186
by
Rocket Guy
on 27 Dec, 2005 02:47
-
It is into the open air; it's vented by the cap and then out into the air about 50 feet away from the stack, to keep ice from collecting on the top of the ET.
-
#187
by
Flightstar
on 27 Dec, 2005 17:40
-
Yes, Ben is correct. I wonder if Shuttle_Man was intending to write "AND vented into the open air." rather than OR. It's very easy for the old timers like myself and S_Man to have typos. As Ben said, the vent is away from the ET due to the ice issue. I remember at the time the ice wasn't due to debris worries as is now the buzz word, at the time it was over additional weight being added to the stack from the ice!
-
#188
by
Terrible Twosome
on 29 Dec, 2005 23:41
-
If each SRB is 3.3 million pounds of thrust, and the three SSMEs are about a milllion pounds of thrust, how does the Shuttle cope with the stress of the six times the thrust coming from below it than is produced from directly behind with the SSMEs?
Like this:
........SSMEs.........
...........1m...........
3.3m<>3.3m
It's imbalanced?
-
#189
by
Rocket Guy
on 30 Dec, 2005 02:43
-
That's ok, I never intend any rudeness; only to make sure the correct answer gets out there and that no one is confused :-)
-
#190
by
braddock
on 30 Dec, 2005 03:35
-
How do they generate and store all that LOX? Are there LOX tanks out at each of the pads? Or is it piped in from some central facility?
-
#191
by
Flightstar
on 30 Dec, 2005 03:46
-
braddock - 29/12/2005 10:35 PM
How do they generate and store all that LOX? Are there LOX tanks out at each of the pads? Or is it piped in from some central facility?
At the pads at the LC-39 Launch complex.
LOX Tank 900,000 gallons at -300F, at North West corner.
LH2 Tank 850,000 gallons at - 420F at North East corner.
-
#192
by
Flightstar
on 30 Dec, 2005 03:50
-
Here is an image to show you where they are. Obviously they are bigger than they appear on this image. They are highlighted.
-
#193
by
braddock
on 30 Dec, 2005 11:27
-
Flightstar - 29/12/2005 11:46 PM
LOX Tank 900,000 gallons at -300F, at North West corner.
LH2 Tank 850,000 gallons at - 420F at North East corner.
Wow, the scale of these things is just unbelievable. That must be one helluva refer out there.
-
#194
by
Chris Bergin
on 30 Dec, 2005 13:20
-
Nice picture there Flight.
I remember the 'steam' you see on the lines from the tanks to the pad, when tanking the ET.
-
#195
by
BenB5150
on 30 Dec, 2005 15:35
-
I've been doing research for my shuttle models and knew that Columbia had a unique tile arrangement on her wings. Does anyone know why Columbia had this and why it never changed when she went in for any of her OMDP? Also was there a reason why the crew cabin area was never redone with thermal blankets?
Ben
-
#196
by
Flightstar
on 30 Dec, 2005 16:54
-
BenB5150 - 30/12/2005 10:35 AM
I've been doing research for my shuttle models and knew that Columbia had a unique tile arrangement on her wings. Does anyone know why Columbia had this and why it never changed when she went in for any of her OMDP? Also was there a reason why the crew cabin area was never redone with thermal blankets?
Ben
The thermal issues were not fully understood until later, so she flew with the black tile configuration as their was expected to be higher than realized thermal heating on those black sections. Basically, we never got around to changing her to the configuation that you see on the other Orbiter TPS layout and she even kept her empty SILTS pod on the tail section. Changing TPS is a long process and even during an OMM period.
-
#197
by
anik
on 30 Dec, 2005 18:41
-
Flightstar is the Elite Veteran!...
Congratulations!...
-
#198
by
Flightstar
on 30 Dec, 2005 18:43
-
anik - 30/12/2005 1:41 PM
Flightstar is the Elite Veteran!... Congratulations!...
Must be my age!
-
#199
by
Firestarter
on 01 Jan, 2006 19:34
-
What are the contingencies for the following failure events on a landing?
1) Landing Gear failure (so close to actual landing. Could the orbiter just belly slide? Not great for the orbiter, but at least the crew might be ok?)
2) Paracute failure (how much extra rollout would this cause?)
3) The two parts of the tail that spread out (same as above)?
Thanks.
Congratulations!...