A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

[UPDATE] Photos of RCC hole made during 7/7/03 test now online



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 8th 03, 12:55 AM
Rusty Barton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [UPDATE] Photos of RCC hole made during 7/7/03 test now online

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 18:41:56 -0600, OM
[email protected]_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org
wrote:

...From CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/0....ap/index.html

...Tom Wheeler take note: Now *that* is a hole.

OM



When the foam problem is solved, there still might be a question of
bird strikes.

If a 1.5-lb piece of foam going 500-mph does this kind of damage, what
would a 3-lb to 7-lb bird struck at 200-mph or 300-mph do? KSC is a
wildlife refuge. They've never hit one yet, but there's always a first
time.



Rusty Barton - Antelope, California
--
--
Rusty Barton - Antelope, California

Visit my Titan 1 ICBM Website at:
http://www.geocities.com/titan_1_missile

"I aim for the stars, but sometimes I hit London."
- Mort Sahl speaking of Werner Von Braun
Ads
  #2  
Old July 8th 03, 01:24 AM
Doug...
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [UPDATE] Photos of RCC hole made during 7/7/03 test now online

In article ,
says...
On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 18:41:56 -0600, OM
[email protected]_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org
wrote:

...From CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/0....ap/index.html

...Tom Wheeler take note: Now *that* is a hole.

OM



When the foam problem is solved, there still might be a question of
bird strikes.

If a 1.5-lb piece of foam going 500-mph does this kind of damage, what
would a 3-lb to 7-lb bird struck at 200-mph or 300-mph do? KSC is a
wildlife refuge. They've never hit one yet, but there's always a first
time.


I don't think *any* manned spacecraft has ever hit a bird upon launch
(although I could be wrong). They tend to flee the noise and vibration.
And by the time the vehicle is moving at significant speed, you're above
the flight level of a majority of the birds in the area, I would think...

Yes, it's still something of a risk, but doesn't seem to be as big a risk
as foam shedding from the ET.

--

It's not the pace of life I mind; | Doug Van Dorn
it's the sudden stop at the end... |
  #3  
Old July 8th 03, 01:31 AM
Lynndel Humphreys
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [UPDATE] Photos of RCC hole made during 7/7/03 test now online



Yes, it's still something of a risk, but doesn't seem to be as big a risk
as foam shedding from the ET.


So with the bird and foam problem removed they can return to flight? Lots of
space debris too.







-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
  #4  
Old July 8th 03, 01:38 AM
Cyberia
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [UPDATE] Photos of RCC hole made during 7/7/03 test now online

OM wrote:
...From CNN:


http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/0...estigation.ap/
index.html

...Tom Wheeler take note: Now *that* is a hole.

OM


The foam in the test appeared to exit the impact intact. How does this jive
with the near total disintegration into dust seen during Columbia's launch?
Wouldn't that disintegration consume a lot of the impact energy, thus
preventing so much wing damage?

--
---------------
SeeYa !
--------------
Hello....... Is this thing on ?



  #5  
Old July 8th 03, 01:41 AM
OM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [UPDATE] Photos of RCC hole made during 7/7/03 test now online

....From CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/0....ap/index.html

....Tom Wheeler take note: Now *that* is a hole.

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr
  #6  
Old July 8th 03, 04:32 AM
Jorge R. Frank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [UPDATE] Photos of RCC hole made during 7/7/03 test now online

"Cyberia" wrote in
:

OM wrote:
...From CNN:


http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/0...e.investigatio
n.ap/ index.html

...Tom Wheeler take note: Now *that* is a hole.

OM


The foam in the test appeared to exit the impact intact. How does this
jive with the near total disintegration into dust seen during
Columbia's launch? Wouldn't that disintegration consume a lot of the
impact energy, thus preventing so much wing damage?


The first impact test against real RCC was a "corner" impact, and caused
only a small crack in the RCC, but completely disintegrated the foam in a
manner similar to that seen on STS-107.

Today's test was a full-side impact, and caused a massive hole in the RCC,
while leaving the foam more intact. Both tests used the same foam mass and
speed.

The aerothermal evidence suggests that the actual size of the hole in
Columbia was on the order of 6-10 inches, rather than the 16 inches seen in
today's test.

Taken together, the above facts suggest 1) a correlation between angle of
impact and energy transfer; i.e. a corner hit results in the foam absorbing
more energy and disintegrating while causing only minor RCC damage, while a
full-side hit transfers more energy to the RCC and causes more damage, and
2) that the foam tests have successfully "bracketed" the probable damage
seen on the actual flight, and that the foam that hit STS-107 struck at an
angle somewhere in between a "corner-only" hit and a full-side hit.

Just my opinion, of course.

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.
  #7  
Old July 8th 03, 05:10 AM
Doug...
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [UPDATE] Photos of RCC hole made during 7/7/03 test now online

In article ,
says...
OM wrote:

...From CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/0....ap/index.html

...Tom Wheeler take note: Now *that* is a hole.

OM


Wouldn't a hole this big cause a noticeable trajectory anomoly on ascent?


Well, from what I understand, the actual damage to Columbia was probably
more like 6-10 inches in its greatest dimension, and possibly much
smaller in its smallest dimension. (This comes from the analysis of the
internal heating that I've seen referenced -- it would seem to indicate a
breach of the above-stated size.)

Now, at 81 seconds, you're well past maximum aerodynamic pressure and the
air is thinning rapidly. I doubt that a hole the size that was likely
created would have caused any detectable trajectory deviations. (Of
course, I'm just speaking from a gestalt sense, there are engineers here
who can give you a much more authoritative answer.)

--

It's not the pace of life I mind; | Doug Van Dorn
it's the sudden stop at the end... |
  #8  
Old July 8th 03, 05:12 AM
larry
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [UPDATE] Photos of RCC hole made during 7/7/03 test now online

OM wrote:

...From CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/0....ap/index.html

...Tom Wheeler take note: Now *that* is a hole.



I was wondering if anyone knows why the panels in the test were
gray colored while those on the shuttles are black? They said
that the hole would probably not be seen because the black interior of
the hole would not be noticeable against the black panel.
Larry



OM



  #9  
Old July 8th 03, 05:22 AM
Doug...
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [UPDATE] Photos of RCC hole made during 7/7/03 test now online

In article , says...
OM wrote:

...From CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/0....ap/index.html

...Tom Wheeler take note: Now *that* is a hole.



I was wondering if anyone knows why the panels in the test were
gray colored while those on the shuttles are black? They said
that the hole would probably not be seen because the black interior of
the hole would not be noticeable against the black panel.


I'm not sure who the "they" are that you're referring to, but "they" may
have been discussing the problem of tile damage back when it seemed that
damaged tiles and not RCC panels were the cause of the catastrophe. The
RCC panels are, and have always been, a darkish gray.

A hole the size that was made in the test today *would* probably have
been visible in the best imagery we could have gotten of Columbia on-
orbit. It's hard to say whether or not the actual damage to Columbia was
that large, though. It was definitely enough to cause the destruction of
the vehicle, of course... *sigh*...

--

It's not the pace of life I mind; | Doug Van Dorn
it's the sudden stop at the end... |
  #10  
Old July 8th 03, 05:50 AM
larry
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default [UPDATE] Photos of RCC hole made during 7/7/03 test now online

Doug... wrote:

In article , says...

OM wrote:


...From CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/0....ap/index.html

...Tom Wheeler take note: Now *that* is a hole.


I was wondering if anyone knows why the panels in the test were
gray colored while those on the shuttles are black? They said
that the hole would probably not be seen because the black interior of
the hole would not be noticeable against the black panel.


I'm not sure who the "they" are that you're referring to, but "they" may
have been discussing the problem of tile damage back when it seemed that
damaged tiles and not RCC panels were the cause of the catastrophe. The
RCC panels are, and have always been, a darkish gray.



A quote from the above URL:
"Hubbard said it is questionable whether the best set of cameras
trained on the shuttle during liftoff would have detected such a large
hole, if they had been in focus, and they were not. He declined to say
whether spy satellites would have observed such damage, but he noted
that it was a black hole in a black piece of reinforced carbon."

Also I recall seeing photos of Columbia when it was being readied
for flight. The Panels were black not the gray of the test panels.
Larry



A hole the size that was made in the test today *would* probably have
been visible in the best imagery we could have gotten of Columbia on-
orbit. It's hard to say whether or not the actual damage to Columbia was
that large, though. It was definitely enough to cause the destruction of
the vehicle, of course... *sigh*...



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Shuttle Foam Test Yields Hole in Wing - Associated Press Rusty B Space Shuttle 29 August 12th 03 03:30 AM
[UPDATE] Photos of RCC hole made during 7/7/03 test now online Rusty Barton Space Shuttle 23 July 13th 03 06:10 PM
[UPDATE] Photos of RCC hole made during 7/7/03 test now online Rusty Barton Policy 20 July 13th 03 06:10 PM
Shuttle Foam Test Yields Hole in Wing - Associated Press Rusty B History 8 July 10th 03 12:05 AM
Shuttle Foam Test Yields Hole in Wing - Associated Press Rusty B Policy 3 July 8th 03 12:36 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.