Foam separation

Just a couple of days ago "The New York Times" mentioned that NASA
still not has an answer to the question why foam separates from ET. I
am sure, it is easy to verify co-incidents of foam separations and
trajectory correction jerks. NASA has as time synchronized video as
telemetry. If foam separates immediately after jerk, then we have an
answer to the mystery.

Ziny Flikop

On 14 Aug 2005 03:45:55 -0700, wrote:

Just a couple of days ago "The New York Times" mentioned that NASA
still not has an answer to the question why foam separates from ET. I
am sure, it is easy to verify co-incidents of foam separations and
trajectory correction jerks. NASA has as time synchronized video as
telemetry. If foam separates immediately after jerk, then we have an
answer to the mystery.

I don't think there are any "trajectory correction jerks". But if you mean
that the PAL ramp foam was lost after SRB separation, I'm sure they're
looking at that as a possible cause. It would be nice if it was the cause,
as at that point in ascent a foam hit would be more benign than it would
be earlier. Isolating that as the cause would make the foam repair less
critical, though still necessary. But I doubt SRB sep will be linked clearly
enough to give them that luxury. Better just to labor under the principle
that sizeable chunks of foam shouldn't come off, period.

Dale

Do you mean that immediately after shuttle complex left launch pad it
is always on the ideal predefined flight trajectory and does not need
any trajectory correction?

wrote in message
ups.com...
Do you mean that immediately after shuttle complex left launch pad it
is always on the ideal predefined flight trajectory and does not need
any trajectory correction?


No, but that the trajectory corrections are not nearly as violent as you
make them out to be.

How many G's?

Yes, if you don't know the mechanism, then you cannot link it to an event.
its pretty obvious, I'd have thought.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Dale" wrote in message
...
On 14 Aug 2005 03:45:55 -0700, wrote:

Just a couple of days ago "The New York Times" mentioned that NASA
still not has an answer to the question why foam separates from ET. I
am sure, it is easy to verify co-incidents of foam separations and
trajectory correction jerks. NASA has as time synchronized video as
telemetry. If foam separates immediately after jerk, then we have an
answer to the mystery.

I don't think there are any "trajectory correction jerks". But if you mean
that the PAL ramp foam was lost after SRB separation, I'm sure they're
looking at that as a possible cause. It would be nice if it was the cause,
as at that point in ascent a foam hit would be more benign than it would
be earlier. Isolating that as the cause would make the foam repair less
critical, though still necessary. But I doubt SRB sep will be linked
clearly
enough to give them that luxury. Better just to labor under the principle
that sizeable chunks of foam shouldn't come off, period.

Dale

wrote in message
oups.com...
How many G's?

How many G's what?

Can you please try to NOT snip all context from your messages.

If you mean trajectory corrections, you do realize that they're done by
gimballing the engines?

I am trying to clarify correspondence.


wrote in message

Do you mean that immediately after shuttle complex left launch pad it
is always on the ideal predefined flight trajectory and does not need
any trajectory correction?


Greg D. Moore (Strider) Aug 14, 12:04 pm

No, but that the trajectory corrections are not nearly as violent as you
make them out to be.

Aug 14, 12:13 pm


How many G's?

wrote in message
oups.com...


I am trying to clarify correspondence.


It's not working.

Also please don't top-post.


wrote in message

Do you mean that immediately after shuttle complex left launch pad it
is always on the ideal predefined flight trajectory and does not need
any trajectory correction?


Greg D. Moore (Strider) Aug 14, 12:04 pm

No, but that the trajectory corrections are not nearly as violent as you
make them out to be.

Aug 14, 12:13 pm


How many G's?

wrote:
How many G's?


Essentially 0.
Google
ssme gimbal