cdaf@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Charles Daffinger) (03/21/89)
What are the contingencies for a shuttle which while it is in orbit, is
determined not to be able to withstand reentry for some reason, say
major tile damage in critical areas? Could a crew survive long enough
for a second shuttle launch (probably a month distant)? Is MIR an
official alternative?
-charles
--
Charles Daffinger >Take me to the river, Drop me in the water< (812) 339-7354
cdaf@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu {pur-ee,rutgers,pyramid,ames}!iuvax!cdaf
Home of the Whitewater mailing list: whitewater-request@iuvax.cs.indiana.eduhenry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (03/22/89)
In article <18730@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> cdaf@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Charles Daffinger) writes: >What are the contingencies for a shuttle which while it is in orbit, is >determined not to be able to withstand reentry for some reason, say >major tile damage in critical areas? There aren't any. >Could a crew survive long enough >for a second shuttle launch (probably a month distant)? No; normal stay-time limits are something like 7-10 days. >Is MIR an official alternative? I don't think it's even a possible alternative -- the orbit is too far away from the normal shuttle ones. -- Welcome to Mars! Your | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology passport and visa, comrade? | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
nak@cbnews.ATT.COM (Neil A. Kirby) (03/22/89)
In article <1989Mar21.183948.1174@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <18730@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> cdaf@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Charles Daffinger) writes: >>What are the contingencies for a shuttle which while it is in orbit, is >>determined not to be able to withstand reentry for some reason, say >>major tile damage in critical areas? > [Henry explains that we couldn't get a shuttle up in time, and that Mir is too far away] What you *might* see is a Soyouz [sp] launch. Or whatever it is that the Soviets use as their people taxi. They have been launching those things since the late sixties, I think. I don't know what their turn around time is, though. I also can't remember how many people they hold for re-entry, but if memory serves they could stay up for a while using both sections for space. It'd be cramped for sure. Henry what do you think? I'm certain that the net is curious; this is the premise for the book 'Marooned'. Neil Kirby ...cbsck!nak
bob@etive.ed.ac.uk (Bob Gray) (03/24/89)
In article <5042@cbnews.ATT.COM> nak@cbnews.ATT.COM (Neil A. Kirby) writes: >[Henry explains that we couldn't get a shuttle up in time, and that Mir >is too far away] > > What you *might* see is a Soyouz [sp] launch. Or whatever it is that > the Soviets use as their people taxi. It wouldn't surprise me is there wasn't a set of plans somewhere in the soviet space centres dealing with exactly this possibility. They have enough launchers at different stages of assembly that diverting one and launching a spare re-entry capsule on it would at least be feasible. It would also be a big propaganda victory for the soviets. Even more so when they produce the bill. Five tickets at $10 Million each.... Plus service charge... Plus callout fee... Bob.
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (03/24/89)
In article <5042@cbnews.ATT.COM> nak@cbnews.ATT.COM (Neil A. Kirby) writes: > What you *might* see is a Soyouz [sp] launch... On most shuttle missions this couldn't be done, because the orbits the shuttle uses are not ones the Soviets can reach easily. The maximum- payload orbit for the shuttle never passes over the Soviet Union at all, so they can't launch into it without a horrendously fuel-expensive dogleg maneuver. It might be possible for the occasional high-inclination missions, like the last Atlantis mission. "While you're rescuing the crew, comrade, get us a few dozen pictures of the military satellite they deployed..." -- Welcome to Mars! Your | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology passport and visa, comrade? | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
dkrause@orion.cf.uci.edu (Doug Krause) (03/24/89)
In article <1627@etive.ed.ac.uk> bob@etive.ed.ac.uk (Bob Gray) writes: >It would also be a big propaganda victory for the soviets. Sounds like "2010" (the movie) where "we bring along a few helpless Americans." :-) Douglas Krause "You can't legislate morality" -George Bush --------------------------------------------------------------------- University of California, Irvine ARPANET: dkrause@orion.cf.uci.edu Welcome to Irvine, Yuppieland USA BITNET: DJKrause@ucivmsa
thomas@mvac.UUCP (Thomas Lapp) (03/25/89)
> From: nak@cbnews.ATT.COM (Neil A. Kirby) > In article <1989Mar21.183948.1174@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: > >In article <18730@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> cdaf@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Charles Daffinger) writes: > > What you *might* see is a Soyouz [sp] launch. Or whatever it is that > the Soviets use as their people taxi. They have been launching those > things since the late sixties, I think. I don't know what their turn I don't think so. There is no way that the two craft could dock. Even if the astronauts did an EVA to get to the Soyuz craft, there wouldn't be enough room for a Soviet pilot plus astronauts. Don't the Soyuz craft only hold two people? - tom ============================================================================== (Nope, Reply will *not* work. Choose one from below to use for replying to me). ------------------------------------- uucp: ...!udel!mvac!thomas ! "..so when the machine truncates Internet: mvac!thomas@udel.edu ! excess bits, it throws them under or ! the raised floor." -- Fred Felber thomas%mvac.uucp@udel.edu ! (so THAT's why there are raised ! floors in computer rooms...) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (03/26/89)
In article <15.UUL1.3#5131@mvac.UUCP> mvac!thomas@udel.edu writes: >> What you *might* see is a Soyouz [sp] launch... >I don't think so. There is no way that the two craft could dock. Even if >the astronauts did an EVA to get to the Soyuz craft, there wouldn't be >enough room for a Soviet pilot plus astronauts. Don't the Soyuz craft >only hold two people? No, the Soyuz is routinely used to hold three, and in a serious emergency doubtless could hold more, albeit uncomfortably and with some risk of injury in the event of a rough landing. Besides, who says the Soviets can't launch more than one? As for the docking problem, that's a problem with any rescue mission, since a normally-equipped shuttle isn't set up to dock with *anything*. This is why the "rescue ball" exists -- the shuttle doesn't carry spacesuits for everybody, but there are enough balls for the rest of the crew. -- Welcome to Mars! Your | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology passport and visa, comrade? | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
rcj@killer.Dallas.TX.US (Robert Johnson) (03/26/89)
In article <1989Mar25.222108.9060@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <15.UUL1.3#5131@mvac.UUCP> mvac!thomas@udel.edu writes: >As for the docking problem, that's a problem with any rescue mission, >since a normally-equipped shuttle isn't set up to dock with *anything*. >This is why the "rescue ball" exists -- the shuttle doesn't carry >spacesuits for everybody, but there are enough balls for the rest of >passport and visa, comrade? | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu A few weeks ago I was looking through a book at a bookstore (yes, I'm one of those people who read books in bookstores but don't buy them!) and noticed that the rescue balls had no way to control the tempurature inside of them. This brings up a question that I've been wondering about- What is the ambient tempurature of space? I imagine that the tempurature without an atmosphere would have massive swings...How long could an astronaut stay alive in one of those things? Also: Do the laws of piracy still apply to crafts in orbit? Has this ever been questioned? -- | Robert C. Johnson | "Minds are like parachutes. | | rcj@killer.dallas.tx.us | They only function when they are | | (214) 357-5306 | Open." -Sir James Dewar |
ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.EDU (Matthew T. DeLuca) (03/27/89)
In article <7648@killer.Dallas.TX.US> rcj@killer.Dallas.TX.US (Robert Johnson) writes: >What is the ambient tempurature of space? I imagine that the tempurature >without an atmosphere would have massive swings...How long could an >astronaut stay alive in one of those things? > >-- >| Robert C. Johnson | "Minds are like parachutes. | >| rcj@killer.dallas.tx.us | They only function when they are | >| (214) 357-5306 | Open." -Sir James Dewar | > Space has no real 'ambient temperature', since space is not composed of matter, and temperature is a property of matter. In Earth orbit, the temperature of your craft is either very cold or very hot, depending on whether or not it is in the sun. Many spacecraft rotate, to distribute the heating more evenly. It is of note that while space is often thought of as 'cold', spacecraft never have problems with maintaining warmth; rather, one of the more common problems in space is that of overheating. While in a rescue bubble, the astonaut (I believe) uses what is called a Personal Oxygen System (POS) which is good for (at most) two hours or so. Matthew DeLuca Georgia Tech
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (03/27/89)
In article <7648@killer.Dallas.TX.US> rcj@killer.Dallas.TX.US (Robert Johnson) writes: >... noticed that the rescue balls had no way to control the tempurature >inside of them... Well, they undoubtedly get some degree of temperature control from the flow of air through them, but it's true they don't have anything else. They aren't meant for long exposure to space, and for that matter they aren't meant for comfort. >This brings up a question that I've been wondering about- >What is the ambient tempurature of space?... It has none. Temperature is a property of matter; space is the absence of matter. Of course, in practice there is a bit of matter there, but it's so thin that its temperature is irrelevant. The temperature of an object in space is dominated by sunlight, internal heat generation, and heat radiation. Big spacecraft, especially manned ones, generally have to make specific efforts to get rid of heat. Small ones can usually keep temperature under control by careful design. >...How long could an astronaut stay alive in one of those things? The limiting factor is almost certainly air supply, not cooling. -- Welcome to Mars! Your | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology passport and visa, comrade? | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
news@venera.isi.edu (News Service) (03/28/89)
<1989Mar25.222108.9060@utzoo.uucp> <7648@killer.Dallas.TX.US>
Sender:
Reply-To: rogers@wlf.isi.edu ()
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Organization: ISI, University of So. Calif
Keywords:
From: rogers@wlf.isi.edu (Craig Milo Rogers)
Path: wlf.isi.edu!rogers
Well, let's not go overboard and say, "Space has no temperature
'cause it isn't matter". Here are a few approaches to the problem, ordered
by decreasing responsiveness to the original question:
1) Say that space is like a giant thermos bottle (of course, not
everyone knows how they work). Approximate temperature change with
time by comparing human base metabolism rate to blackbody radiation
rate.
2) Note that black body "temperature" in earth orbit is, essentially,
thermal equilibrium with radiation from the Sun. Look up (or
calculate) solar flux density and take it from there. (Refine
the estimates, if you wish, by allowing for eclipse periods.)
3) Generalize the question to mean, "What is the temperature of
the universe?" Answer using the cosmic ray background temperature.
4) Note that energy is matter. Gravitational energy across otherwise
empty space assigns it a non-zero temperature, which may, for example,
be indicated by virtual pair production rate. Calculate the
gravitational field strength in the vicinity of the Earth.
So much for handwaving; numeric answers for the above approaches
are left as an exercise for the reader who's been practicing their mental
aerobics more regularly than I. And, as pointed out already, a realistic
answer combines approaches (1) and (2) with the observation that space rescue
balls probably aren't black bodies to a significant extent.
Craig Milo Rogersnak@cbnews.ATT.COM (Neil A. Kirby) (03/28/89)
In article <15.UUL1.3#5131@mvac.UUCP> mvac!thomas@udel.edu writes: [ double >> are mine, single are Tom's ] >> What you *might* see is a Soyouz [sp] launch. Or whatever it is that >> the Soviets use as their people taxi. They have been launching those >I don't think so. There is no way that the two craft could dock. Even if >the astronauts did an EVA to get to the Soyuz craft, there wouldn't be >enough room for a Soviet pilot plus astronauts. Don't the Soyuz craft >only hold two people? It can re-enter with three. That's just the re-entry part. The orbital part can hold some others, but it would be a crowd. Once aboard the Soviets fire up another a few weeks later and take the crews down separately after some resupply. As Henry said, orbital mechanics are the hard part. I think the EVA could be done if the Soviets brought spare suits with them. They lost three cosmonaughts in the seventies, as I recall, when a hatch didn't seal. Neil Kirby ...cbsck!nak
hogg@db.toronto.edu (John Hogg) (03/28/89)
In article <7726@pyr.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@pyr.UUCP (Matthew T. DeLuca) writes: > Space has no real 'ambient temperature', since space is not composed >of matter, and temperature is a property of matter. In Earth orbit, >the temperature of your craft is either very cold or very hot, depending on >whether or not it is in the sun. Many spacecraft rotate, to distribute the >heating more evenly. It is of note that while space is often thought of as >'cold', spacecraft never have problems with maintaining warmth; rather, >one of the more common problems in space is that of overheating. A good description, but that should be *almost* never. A large craft with a small heat output may run into problems. Apollo 13 was quite chilly on the way home. There was not enough heat output (since all non-essential systems were shut down) and too much surface area, all of it the wrong colour. -- John Hogg hogg@csri.utoronto.ca Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
jwm@stdc.jhuapl.edu (Jim Meritt) (03/30/89)
In article <7726@pyr.gatech.EDU> ccoprmd@pyr.UUCP (Matthew T. DeLuca) writes: } Space has no real 'ambient temperature', since space is not composed }of matter, and temperature is a property of matter. In Earth orbit, }the temperature of your craft is either very cold or very hot, depending on }whether or not it is in the sun. Many spacecraft rotate, to distribute the }heating more evenly. It is of note that while space is often thought of as }'cold', spacecraft never have problems with maintaining warmth; rather, }one of the more common problems in space is that of overheating. I love inconsistent samples! MIR was freezing over when the Russian cosmonauts went back up - so cold that it was below the temp gauges. They spat on the walls and timed how long it took to freeze to get an idea of the temperature. The SKYLAB was cooking until the astronauts deployed an umbrella to keep the sun off. Two sample points, opposite signs... :-) The above was test data, and not the responsibility of any organization.
larson@unix.SRI.COM (Alan Larson) (03/30/89)
In article <18730@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> cdaf@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Charles Daffinger) writes: >What are the contingencies for a shuttle which while it is in orbit, is >determined not to be able to withstand reentry for some reason, say >major tile damage in critical areas? Could a crew survive long enough >for a second shuttle launch (probably a month distant)? Is MIR an >official alternative? While there are other reasons for becoming non-airworthy while in orbit, loss of tiles seems strange. After all, the areas with the tiles are not normally viewed during flight. Alan
news@garcon.cso.uiuc.edu ( Paul Pomes) (03/31/89)
<7726@pyr.gatech.EDU> Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign From: ahiggins@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Andrew Higgins) Path: pequod.cso.uiuc.edu!ahiggins From: jwm@stdc.jhuapl.edu (Jim Meritt) >MIR was freezing over when the Russian cosmonauts went back up - so cold that >it was below the temp gauges. They spat on the walls and timed how long it >took to freeze to get an idea of the temperature. Sorry. Right story, wrong space station. The 'spit on the wall' story was from the June 1985 re-activation of Salyut 7, which had lost electrical power and began tumbling about six months earlier. Since the cosmonauts' thermometers only went to zero Celsius, the temperature was estimated by timing the freezing of saliva. All the water storage tanks were also frozen, so the cosmonauts were prepared to drink the coolant from their space suits. Some other interesting things happened in the re-activation of Salyut 7. Since the ventilators were shut down, carbon dioxide pockets would build up around the working cosmonauts like clouds. When the station was finally reactivated, the humidity shot up, making the station uncomfortable for months. -- Andrew J. Higgins | Illini Space Development Society ahiggins@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu | a chapter of the National Space Society phone: (217) 359-0056 | at the University of Illinois P.O. Box 2255 - Station A, Champaign, IL 61825 "We are all tired of being stuck on this cosmical speck with its monotonous ocean, leaden sky and single moon that is half useless....so it seems to me that the future glory of the human race lies in the exploration of at least the solar system!" - John Jacob Astor, 1894
dsm@prism.gatech.EDU (Daniel McGurl) (03/31/89)
>In article <18730@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> cdaf@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Charles Daffinger) writes: > >>What are the contingencies for a shuttle which while it is in orbit, is >>determined not to be able to withstand reentry for some reason, say >>major tile damage in critical areas? Could a crew survive long enough >>for a second shuttle launch (probably a month distant)? Is MIR an >>official alternative? I seem to recall talk of a tile repair kit on board (this was not true in the early days of the shuttle flights, I beleive they started carrying it later) if that weren't enough, I think that the the crew have little to no chance for survival. Hopefully, however, massive tile damage might be caught in time to do a once around abort. -- Daniel Sean McGurl "He's got to make his own mistakes, Office of Computing Services and learn to mend the mess he makes." Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 ARPA: dsm@prism.gatech.edu
ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.EDU (Matthew T. DeLuca) (03/31/89)
In article <379@hydra.gatech.EDU> dsm@prism.gatech.EDU (Daniel McGurl) writes: > >I seem to recall talk of a tile repair kit on board (this was not true in the >early days of the shuttle flights, I beleive they started carrying it later) >if that weren't enough, I think that the the crew have little to no chance for >survival. Hopefully, however, massive tile damage might be caught in time to >do a once around abort. >-- As a matter of fact, the tile repair kit was carried from day one. The tiles were one of the big worries with the shuttle in it's early days (My God! That was eight years ago...), and so the shuttle was (and still is) equipped with a signifigant supply of ablative goop (re: Apollo heat shield) that can be applied to any areas that have lost tiles. As a matter of fact, the concern over the tiles was great enough to convince the powers that be to use a KH-11 Keyhole spysat to come along and photograph the underside of Columbia to look for tile damage. As for catching the damage early, I'm not sure how that would be done. The most critical area is the underside of the shuttle, which is concealed by the external tank until T+8.5 minutes, and when that's gone, the shuttle is moving awfully fast; who or what would look for damage? And Daniel: why haven't you answered my mail? :-) -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Matthew DeLuca : Georgia Institute of Technology : Remember, wherever you go, there you are. ARPA: ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.edu :
sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (Stuart Warmink) (04/01/89)
In article <379@hydra.gatech.EDU>, dsm@prism.gatech.EDU (Daniel McGurl) writes: > [.......] Hopefully, however, massive tile damage might be caught in time to > do a once around abort. That wouldn't help, re-entry would still be at (nearly) orbital velocity. I think you mean "transatlantic abort". I wonder if that contingency (i.e detection of critical tile loss) has been planned for during launch? I hope it will never come to that... -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "PENTAGON OFFICIALS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT | Stuart Warmink, Whippany, NJ, USA AN ANTIMATTER SHORTAGE" ("WHAT'S NEW") | sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (att!cbnewsl!sw) -----------> My opinions are not necessarily those of my employer <-----------
sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (Stuart Warmink) (04/01/89)
In article <7786@pyr.gatech.EDU>, ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.EDU (Matthew T. DeLuca) writes: > As a matter of fact, the tile repair kit was carried from day one. [...] The tile kit was not on board the first flight, and I'm not sure it was ever carried on board at all. The problem with the first few flight was that there were only two crew members (they always have EVA in pairs for safety), and the space suits had not been flight-tested anyway. Also, without the Canadarm or MMU, how would the astronauts reach the affected area? Also, if the kit was carried on board, why has it never been used? There have been plenty of flights with tile loss or damage, the recent Atlantis flight even had a missing tile in one of the hottest areas, just behind the nose cone. Also, the images of Columbia on that first flight were taken by an Air Force telescope in Hawaii, I believe. It would be quite an achievement to point one satellite at another, but then again, what do I know about SDI... ;-) -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "PENTAGON OFFICIALS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT | Stuart Warmink, Whippany, NJ, USA AN ANTIMATTER SHORTAGE" ("WHAT'S NEW") | sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (att!cbnewsl!sw) -----------> My opinions are not necessarily those of my employer <-----------
ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.EDU (Matthew T. DeLuca) (04/02/89)
In article <369@cbnewsl.ATT.COM> sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (Stuart Warmink) writes: >In article <7786@pyr.gatech.EDU>, ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.EDU (Matthew T. DeLuca) writes: >> As a matter of fact, the tile repair kit was carried from day one. [...] > >The tile kit was not on board the first flight, and I'm not sure it was ever >carried on board at all. The problem with the first few flight was that there >were only two crew members (they always have EVA in pairs for safety), and >the space suits had not been flight-tested anyway. >Also, without the Canadarm or MMU, how would the astronauts reach the affected >area? Also, if the kit was carried on board, why has it never been used? >There have been plenty of flights with tile loss or damage, the recent >Atlantis flight even had a missing tile in one of the hottest areas, just >behind the nose cone. > >Also, the images of Columbia on that first flight were taken by an >Air Force telescope in Hawaii, I believe. It would be quite an achievement >to point one satellite at another, but then again, what do I know >about SDI... ;-) >-- Are you sure about this? I checked on this last night, and according to the article (Nat'l Geographic, March 1981), there was a kit, and it showed a picture of Truly (STS-2, I believe) in a water tank, practicing its use. It looked like a huge caulk gun with a flat nozzle. I couldn't find the magazine I was looking for (NG, May, 1981), which had a detailed account of the first flight, and included info on the tile kit. Considering the difficulties with the tiles at first, I find it inconceiveable that there would not be a tile kit on board. As to applying the stuff, all you do is step outside and put it on. The mechanical arm has been on board since day one, although it was not tested until the second mission, I believe. However, had there been a need for the arm, to apply goop, they would have used it. If it was on the far underside of the craft, they could have used tethers, like the old days :-) True, walks today are carried out in pairs, for safety, but that`s a luxury you have when you have half a dozen crewmembers. On the first flights, they would just have stepped outside anyway. If you drift away from the shuttle, the person inside just flies over and grabs you. There's a set of maneuvering controls on the mid-deck work station, so the pilot can fly over and then use the arm to give you a grip. That's one of the neat things about the shuttle. Finally, it is true the Air Force used a Hawaii telescope to photograph the shuttle, but the Powers That Be (NSA?) wanted to see about photographing spacecraft in orbit, so they flew a Keyhole over and did the job. IN William Burroughs' book, Deep Black, he goes into the use of the KH satellites for space photography. *Very* interesting, what they've been up to. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Matthew DeLuca : Georgia Institute of Technology : Remember, wherever you go, there you are. ARPA: ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.edu :
sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (Stuart Warmink) (04/03/89)
In article <7802@pyr.gatech.EDU>, ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.EDU (Matthew T. DeLuca) writes: > In article <369@cbnewsl.ATT.COM> sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (Stuart Warmink) writes: > >[stuff by me about why tile kit wasn't carried or used] > > [stuff by Matthew about using tile kit in water tank] > [...] Considering the difficulties with the tiles at first, I find it > inconceiveable that there would not be a tile kit on board. But there *were* problems with the tiles (front of OMS pod), and the tile kit *was not* used; the same for later flights. I remember (from TV coverage) that the whole tile situation was quite an unknown factor for re-entry; and that I was amazed that the tile kit was not on that flight. > [stuff about going solo EVA without MMU to repair tiles] Without handholds on the outside of the Shuttle, it would be impossible to do any repairs outside the reach of the robot arm (Newton's 1st and 2nd laws). -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Captain, I see no reason to stand here | Stuart Warmink, Whippany, NJ, USA and be insulted" - Spock | sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (att!cbnewsl!sw) -------------------------> My opinions are just that <------------------------
ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.EDU (Matthew T. DeLuca) (04/04/89)
In article <376@cbnewsl.ATT.COM> sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (Stuart Warmink) writes: > >But there *were* problems with the tiles (front of OMS pod), and the tile >kit *was not* used; the same for later flights. I remember (from TV coverage) >that the whole tile situation was quite an unknown factor for re-entry; and >that I was amazed that the tile kit was not on that flight. > >Without handholds on the outside of the Shuttle, it would be impossible to >do any repairs outside the reach of the robot arm (Newton's 1st and 2nd laws). I don't have my thermogram handy (it's 40 miles away), so I can't supply exact temperatures, but the OMS pods are fairly low-temperature areas of the Shuttle during re-entry. In addition, the bonding compound was still on the orbiter, and this compound can take up to 900 degrees Farenheit with no problem.Ergo, the kit was not used. Hmmm, the underside might be a real trick, that's true. There are holds all along the sides of the bay, but I have no clue as to how to fix the bottom. Fortunately, there were no problems. The Teal Blue telescope/camera setup in Hawaii looked at the ship, and I'm fairly sure (I'm still tracking down references) that a KH-11 took pics of Columbia, too. Since these are both fairly secret installations (as far as imaging capability goes), the results were not released immediately. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Matthew DeLuca : Georgia Institute of Technology : Remember, wherever you go, there you are. ARPA: ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.edu :
sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (Stuart Warmink) (04/05/89)
In article <7833@pyr.gatech.EDU>, ccoprmd@pyr.gatech.EDU (Matthew T. DeLuca) writes: > I don't have my thermogram handy (it's 40 miles away), so I can't supply > exact temperatures, but the OMS pods are fairly low-temperature areas of the > Shuttle during re-entry. [...] Why guess? Later flights have additional black tiles on the front of the OMS pods, so the temperature must have been higher than expected. Matthew: I think this is as far as we should go without using e-mail... I've stated the facts, that is all I can do. ;-) -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Captain, I see no reason to stand here | Stuart Warmink, Whippany, NJ, USA and be insulted" - Spock | sw@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (att!cbnewsl!sw) -------------------------> My opinions are just that <------------------------