Author Topic: Challenger STS-51L  (Read 115870 times)

Offline Rocket Guy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1352
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #60 on: 12/13/2005 04:28 AM »
Quote
(at least as far as we know there may well be black programs today that for all practical purposes are spaceflight programs).

I'm not sure what this implies :-) There are no secret military man in space programs.

Offline psloss

  • Veteran armchair spectator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17302
  • Liked: 1774
  • Likes Given: 1014
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #61 on: 12/13/2005 01:56 PM »
Quote
Ben - 13/12/2005  12:24 AM

I don't know who made that map but it is totally inaccurate. 28 is more southerly than 39. 39 degress goes NE. Second, those SRB impact lines are WAY WAY too far out!
You can get to 39 degrees inclination with different azimuths; so both northeast and southeast would work, though in practice I think 90 degrees is the maximum launch azimuth they'd use for a shuttle launch.  For the launches northeast to 39 degrees inclination, I think the azimuth would be in the 60 degree range...

Regarding the SRB impact lines, I agree, but I was looking for something to illustrate better than text such as:
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/reference/shutref/sts/launch.html

Philip Sloss

Offline Rocket Guy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1352
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #62 on: 12/13/2005 04:03 PM »
They cannot launched to a 39 degree inc on a southeast azimuth because they will overly the Bahamas.

28 degrees is the 'southernmost' trajectory they launch into, and that launch azimuth is slightly south of east; not sure of the exact numbers. They can launch more than 90 degrees without overlying the Bahamas. Typical Delta 2 launch is about 104-105 degrees. 39 is slightly NE and anything above that is very NE.

On a couple of the DoD missions, by the way, they overflew the Outer Banks.

Offline STS Tony

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1646
  • Los Angeles
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #63 on: 12/14/2005 12:37 AM »
Quote
Ben - 12/12/2005  11:28 PM

I'm not sure what this implies :-) There are no secret military man in space programs.

Damn Ben, I was hoping there was. Now I'm a bit down about the whole thing ;)

Offline Rocket Guy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1352
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #64 on: 12/14/2005 02:50 AM »
Well there was that Shuttle launch the other day here from an underground silo, but trust me, it's not military.

Offline UK Shuttle Clan

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 244
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #65 on: 12/28/2005 06:07 PM »
One month to go until the 20th anniversary of this disaster. Can't believe it's been 20 years already.

Offline Chris Bergin

Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #66 on: 12/28/2005 10:11 PM »
Yep, Jan 28, 1986. I'm looking to see if we can do a few articles based around the anniversary.

Offline Super George

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 207
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #67 on: 12/28/2005 10:46 PM »
I hope so, this has to be marked, not on some Apollo 1, Challenger and Columbia day, which is so wrong last year by NASA I can't even begin to say how much!

Offline SimonShuttle

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1777
  • Manchester, England
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 54
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #68 on: 12/30/2005 06:04 PM »
Quote
Super George - 28/12/2005  5:46 PM

I hope so, this has to be marked, not on some Apollo 1, Challenger and Columbia day, which is so wrong last year by NASA I can't even begin to say how much!

I agree, but that was still a very respectful event.

Offline James Lowe1

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 847
  • New York City
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #69 on: 12/30/2005 10:02 PM »
We're trying to prepare some articles for the anniversary.

Offline Justin Space

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1252
  • England
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 227
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #70 on: 01/03/2006 04:21 PM »
BBC are going to do something as well, a mate who works there just told me.

Offline Jonesy STS

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 207
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #71 on: 01/06/2006 10:55 PM »
Just been reading that post about the crew. That is awful, really shocking.

Offline Hotol

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 425
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #72 on: 01/10/2006 02:05 PM »
Having watched the Challenger Documentary on BBC2 this all makes sence. This was the first time a TV documentary noted they were likely to be alive and awake on the way down. This thread says more and confirms such a terrible situation for them. RIP.

Offline Andy L

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 260
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #73 on: 01/12/2006 08:39 PM »
20 years seems like a lot less. It does seem like less than that. I hope that doesn't take away the need for rememberance.

Offline rsp1202

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1083
  • 3, 2, 1 . . . Make rocket go now
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #74 on: 01/12/2006 08:53 PM »
Well said.
And January 27 is 39th anniversary of Apollo One fire. Grissom, White, Chaffee.

Offline psloss

  • Veteran armchair spectator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17302
  • Liked: 1774
  • Likes Given: 1014
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #75 on: 01/12/2006 11:23 PM »
Quote
Hotol - 10/1/2006  10:05 AM

Having watched the Challenger Documentary on BBC2 this all makes sence. This was the first time a TV documentary noted they were likely to be alive and awake on the way down. This thread says more and confirms such a terrible situation for them. RIP.
NASA has been very reserved about this subject over the years (and I think justifiably so; the same is true with regard to the STS-107 crew); however, they did officially acknowledge that the 51-L crew survived the orbiter breakup that resulted from the explosion of the tank.  The wording is very conservative, but I think many people understood that some of the crew might have been conscious for a long time, and the press conference held to accompany this report by Joe Kerwin was covered on the evening newscasts that day (which happened to be six months to the day of the accident):
http://history.nasa.gov/kerwin.html

Offline Orbiter Obvious

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 390
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #76 on: 01/13/2006 12:58 AM »
Thanks for the link, pretty awful task having to do that investigation.

Offline Martin FL

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2251
  • Liked: 62
  • Likes Given: 191
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #77 on: 01/13/2006 02:09 AM »
Let's pray the decompression got them before anything else.

Offline Avron

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4925
  • Liked: 150
  • Likes Given: 153
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #78 on: 01/13/2006 03:52 AM »
The good news, is that we are going back to a LES

Offline SimonShuttle

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1777
  • Manchester, England
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 54
Re: Challenger STS-51L
« Reply #79 on: 01/30/2006 09:18 AM »
Why did only one booster fail if it was too cold for the o-rings? Did the rings survive on the other SRB?

Tags: