|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
STS total burn rate/mass
At http://www.cdli.ca/CITE/sts_ascent.htm , Jim Cornish writes:
"By the end of the eighth second, the shuttle has traveled only twice it own length in distance [and] has already accelerated to 161 kilometers per hour (100 mph.) During this short time, the orbiter's three main engines and two solid rocket boosters have consumed more than 680,000 kilograms (1.5 million pounds) of fuel." That's 1/3 of GLOW, and can't be correct. The 2 SRBs are about 2.6M pounds at ignition and a bit under 400K pounds empty, so the back of my envelope says they must average (yes, I know it's not constant) aa bit less than ten tons a second over their 2-minute burn period. And ISTR the SSMEs go through about half a ton a second. That would suggest the stack actually gets down to 3M pounds (2/3 of GLOW) at about 70 seconds. Is that in the right ballpark? And when would it be at 1.5M pounds (~1/3 of GLOW) -- presumably after SRB separation, but at roughly what time, velocity and altitude? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
STS total burn rate/mass
On Aug 9, 2:42 pm, Monte Davis wrote:
Athttp://www.cdli.ca/CITE/sts_ascent.htm, Jim Cornish writes: "By the end of the eighth second, the shuttle has traveled only twice it own length in distance [and] has already accelerated to 161 kilometers per hour (100 mph.) During this short time, the orbiter's three main engines and two solid rocket boosters have consumed more than 680,000 kilograms (1.5 million pounds) of fuel." That's 1/3 of GLOW, and can't be correct. The 2 SRBs are about 2.6M pounds at ignition and a bit under 400K pounds empty, so the back of my envelope says they must average (yes, I know it's not constant) aa bit less than ten tons a second over their 2-minute burn period. And ISTR the SSMEs go through about half a ton a second. That would suggest the stack actually gets down to 3M pounds (2/3 of GLOW) at about 70 seconds. Is that in the right ballpark? And when would it be at 1.5M pounds (~1/3 of GLOW) -- presumably after SRB separation, but at roughly what time, velocity and altitude? WHOOOOAAAA . . .. on topic thread . . . *S* |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
STS total burn rate/mass
John wrote:
That would suggest the stack actually gets down to 3M pounds (2/3 of GLOW) at about 70 seconds. Is that in the right ballpark? And when would it be at 1.5M pounds (~1/3 of GLOW) -- presumably after SRB separation, but at roughly what time, velocity and altitude? WHOOOOAAAA . . .. on topic thread . . . *S* Thanks. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How Total is a Total Solar Eclipse ?? | G=EMC^2 Glazier | Misc | 26 | September 12th 06 12:53 PM |
Yes, REAL suspected Black Holes can RiP you APART.!! But NOT in GR gtr Tivity.!! Because in GR Tivity you would be a POiNT ..and if you COULD have a mass, in GR, you would be a POiNT-mass. POiNT-mass CANNOT *STRETCH* with TOP & BOTTOM ROCKETs att | brian a m stuckless | Astronomy Misc | 0 | October 16th 05 08:54 AM |
Yes, REAL suspected Black Holes can RiP you APART.!! But NOT in GR gtr Tivity.!! Because in GR Tivity you would be a POiNT ..and if you COULD have a mass, in GR, you would be a POiNT-mass. POiNT-mass CANNOT *STRETCH* with TOP & BOTTOM ROCKETs attache | brian a m stuckless | Astronomy Misc | 0 | October 15th 05 12:22 PM |
Causation - A problem with negative mass. Negastive mass implies imaginary mass | brian a m stuckless | Astronomy Misc | 0 | October 1st 05 08:36 PM |
a first rate, second-rate composer | Mike | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | March 16th 05 10:08 AM |