A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

Orion Max Q abort test



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 2nd 19, 12:51 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default Orion Max Q abort test

Apparently the Boeing Starliner is the only manned capsule not being
required to do a full up Max Q abort test. I just saw that the test
for Orion is scheduled for TODAY. The test isn't using an SLS (which,
honestly, wouldn't seem to be a requirement) but will launch on old
ICBM solid motors to get the capsule up to Max Q speed and altitude,
at which point the LM abort system will fire to demonstrate its
performance in that aerodynamic regime.


--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw
  #2  
Old July 2nd 19, 02:02 PM posted to sci.space.policy
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Orion Max Q abort test

On 7/2/2019 7:51 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Apparently the Boeing Starliner is the only manned capsule not being
required to do a full up Max Q abort test. I just saw that the test
for Orion is scheduled for TODAY. The test isn't using an SLS (which,
honestly, wouldn't seem to be a requirement) but will launch on old
ICBM solid motors to get the capsule up to Max Q speed and altitude,
at which point the LM abort system will fire to demonstrate its
performance in that aerodynamic regime.

Fred is this happening at the Cape?


Dave

  #3  
Old July 2nd 19, 02:12 PM posted to sci.space.policy
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Orion Max Q abort test

On 7/2/2019 9:02 AM, David Spain wrote:
On 7/2/2019 7:51 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Apparently the Boeing Starliner is the only manned capsule not being
required to do a full up Max Q abort test.Â* I just saw that the test
for Orion is scheduled for TODAY.Â* The test isn't using an SLS (which,
honestly, wouldn't seem to be a requirement) but will launch on old
ICBM solid motors to get the capsule up to Max Q speed and altitude,
at which point the LM abort system will fire to demonstrate its
performance in that aerodynamic regime.

Fred is this happening at the Cape?


Dave

Answered my own question. Yes it was at the Cape, LC-46 and yes it
already took place at 7am EDT (1100 UTC) this morning. You needed to be
an early(ier) bird for this one.

Details available on the NASAspaceflight.com website he

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2019...t-test-launch/

According to the article they used a modified Peacekeeper missile using
the SR-118 solid motor. According to Wikipedia this is the first stage
motor from the old MX system. A 500,000 lbf (2.2 MN thrust) Thiokol SR 118.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-118_Peacekeeper

Dave
  #4  
Old July 2nd 19, 02:33 PM posted to sci.space.policy
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Orion Max Q abort test

After having skimmed the article, it'd be more fair to characterize this
test as a test of the SLS/Orion Launch Abort System (LAS) minus the
Orion capsule.

Test recorders were placed abort a "test vehicle" designed to duplicate
the Orion capsule on the outside but minus anything on the inside except
for data recorders which are to be ejected during post abort free fall.
The test article has no parachutes and was designed to free fall into
the ocean and not be recoverable only the data recorders.

The objective of the test is to characterize the performance of the LAS
under load conditions similar to what would be experienced by SLS/Orion
at near MAX Q.

IMHO: I'd characterize it as kind of a piece-wise method of testing
rather than an "all-up" scenario. Given the cost of SLS I can understand
the approach. Understand doesn't necessarily mean I agree. I'd need more
data.

Dave



  #5  
Old July 2nd 19, 02:43 PM posted to sci.space.policy
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Orion Max Q abort test

Some photos:

Test article return attitude:
https://twitter.com/ChrisG_NSF/statu...304896/photo/1

Water contact...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D-eWgOKWkAEfiBj.jpg:large

Dave
  #7  
Old July 5th 19, 11:28 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default Orion Max Q abort test

JF Mezei wrote on Fri, 5 Jul 2019
14:58:50 -0400:

On 2019-07-02 09:33, David Spain wrote:

IMHO: I'd characterize it as kind of a piece-wise method of testing
rather than an "all-up" scenario. Given the cost of SLS I can understand
the approach. Understand doesn't necessarily mean I agree. I'd need more
data.


Is Max-Q defioned by the topmost component? aka, maximum aerodynamic
pressure on Orion?


Well, the front bit IS where you get peak aerodynamic pressure. I
would have thought that was so obvious as to not need clarification.
Note that this is why Max Q for Falcon 9 with a capsule is different
from Falcon 9 with a payload fairing.


If you substitude the booster, is it realitively easy to get the capsule
to reach the Max-Q speed at the right altitude to reproduce the Max Q it
would experience with an SLS ?


Depends on what you substituted the booster with.


If they can get Orion to same speed/altitude as the MaxQ would bve
experienced with SLS, doesn t the abort test then properly reprodiuce
the Orion's ability to "take off" from its booster ?


Except nothing was 'real' on that test except the escape system
itself. The booster was obviously different and the capsule was
instrumented boilerplate and not a real Orion capsule. They didn't
even test that the parachute system would work on such an abort
because there was no parachute system installed.


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
  #8  
Old July 6th 19, 04:03 AM posted to sci.space.policy
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Orion Max Q abort test

On 7/5/2019 2:58 PM, JF Mezei wrote:
On 2019-07-02 09:33, David Spain wrote:

IMHO: I'd characterize it as kind of a piece-wise method of testing
rather than an "all-up" scenario. Given the cost of SLS I can understand
the approach. Understand doesn't necessarily mean I agree. I'd need more
data.


Is Max-Q defioned by the topmost component? aka, maximum aerodynamic
pressure on Orion?


Already answered by Fred.


If you substitude the booster, is it realitively easy to get the capsule
to reach the Max-Q speed at the right altitude to reproduce the Max Q it
would experience with an SLS ?



Well yes. I think they would have designed the test so that the SR118
engine would get the test article within that regime.

If they can get Orion to same speed/altitude as the MaxQ would bve
experienced with SLS, doesn t the abort test then properly reprodiuce
the Orion's ability to "take off" from its booster ?


Yes this was the point of this test. To that end I'm assuming the "test
article" aka the capsule replica was a mass equivalent to the Orion. It
was a shape equivalent on the exterior according to what I've read. But
object of the test was the LAS itself. Not the recovery mechanisms for
the Orion, since this was not an Orion that was flown.

Dave

 




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
Pad Abort Test 1 success Damon Hill[_3_] Policy 5 May 9th 10 03:38 PM
Pad Abort Test 1 success [email protected] Space Shuttle 0 May 7th 10 07:03 PM
Ares I fratricide on Orion during abort Pat Flannery Policy 75 July 22nd 09 01:34 AM
Orion Max Launch Abort test vehicle Pat Flannery History 11 June 15th 09 02:04 PM
CEV abort test booster Pat Flannery History 25 October 4th 06 07:07 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.