[net.space] Shuttle

piermarini@pisces.DEC (01/30/86)

          It seems that when the space program is running smoothly
 people have all good things to say about it but when disaster strikes
 all I here is criticism ! I for one am all for the space program!
 There is the potential there for a lot of good that can be done
 for humanity. I have to laugh when all this talk about canceling
the program because they have an accident. I feel great sorrow for the
 lives lost but do we stop the manufacture of automobiles when theres
 an accident?

dietz@SLB-DOLL.CSNET (Paul Dietz) (01/31/86)

I hear on CNN that there is some evidence that the far SRB (the one
behind the shuttle in the videotapes) split a seam, causing 6000 degree
F gas to slice into the ET.  Apparently NASA has some photos from other
angles showing this.  If so, there should be evidence in the guidance
telemetry, as this should have caused anomalous accelerations on the
vehicle in the seconds before the end.  Too bad the SRB's were exploded,
although perhaps pieces of the casings can be recovered.

If I'm not mistaken these SRB's had filament wound composite casings.
There was a test failure recently in the composite casings to be used
with Atlantis from Vandenburg (the casing failed at 120% rather than
140% of maximum pressure).  Was this the same kind of casing?

If the SRB was at fault then NASA will be in good shape.  The SRB's can
be strengthened with some loss of payload capacity.  DOD will be upset,
though, since lighter SRB's are needed for getting into polar orbit
with payload.  Morton Thiokol will be in deep trouble.

To test damage to the external tank NASA may want to fly one into orbit
for inspection.  This might be a backdoor route to a tank farm (I'm
trying to be optimistic).

dietz@SLB-DOLL.CSNET (Paul Dietz) (01/31/86)

TDRS has a solid fuel orbital transfer motor; it uses hydrazine for
maneuvering in oribt.

I suggested the shuttle may be militarized because DOD has first dibs
on shuttle capacity, and because traditionally military pilots are
subjected to more risks than civilians.  Also, NASA may not be able to
justify risking astronauts' lives just for commercial satellite
launches.

CNN's report on the SRB is apparently premature.  What NASA has found,
according to the NY Times, is a white hot spot on the ET in enhanced
images.  This could be an SRB jet, or could be a hydrogen flame on the
ET.  If it is a hydrogen flame then I would think the likely failure
mechanism would be progressive melting of the tank structure leading
to a run-away fuel leak and eventual failure.

carroll@uiucdcsb.CS.UIUC.EDU (02/04/86)

I disagree. Most (if not all) of what I have heard is positive, of the vein
"This is indeed terrible, but we must push forward. All things have their
price". RR said it, Garn/Nelson/Glenn said it, most of the new casters said it,
in fact I haven't heard ANYONE say "This is too high a price". I don't think
it is; sign me up for the next flight.