Columbia Myths? ( What if Apollo fire in orbit?

Craig Fink wrote:

IMO, the repair option most likely would have worked and has never really
been seriously explored by NASA. If NASA is getting into the contest
business, then a "Columbia Repair Contest" would be both interesting and
informative. They do have that nice arc jet facility at JSC to determine
the winner.



They had nothing on board that could have repaired a hole in the leading
edge RCC in a way that would have survived reentry- the heating and
aerodynamic stress are simply too high.
The only workable alternative would be a rescue mission of some sort.

Pat

No Pat, the repair option is not an idea by me or Craig. It was a study
by NASA on request by the CAIB and mentioned in Vol. I. The conclusion
was that a repair option with on board materials existed and had a chance
to succeed. Further, as it was mentioned here before, not in the CAIB, the
US had the secret capability to lift a considerable payload in a shuttle
orbit on very short notice...



## CrossPoint v3.12d R ##

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 06:16:03 -0700, Skylon wrote:

Question:

How much longer did Columbia have to last? That is, how much longer
would it have been seathed in plasma and in an environment that would
continue to burn away at the wing?

It was 15 minutes from home, how much longer did it need to hang in
there, to at least get the crew to a bailout point?

The interesting part I found, was just how early parts started falling
off. It was hot, but there wasn't a lot of aerodynamic or heat load before
the vehicle started coming apart.

Columbia had lots of high temperature materials onboard that served no
useful purpose during entry. The payload bay was full of fiberglass
thermal blanket insulation. They were dumping gallons and gallons of water
overboard to lighten the load for landing. They could have filled the void
in the wing with a composite structure of fiberglass and ice. Covered
the entire hole like a band-aid with a blanket wrapped around the leading
edge. The fiberglass would have melted on the outside, but the ice/water
of the composite would have kept the plasma out of the wing for a long
time. The ice/water cooling the fiberglass and the fiberglass insulating
the ice/water, slowing it consumption rate. Any melted fiberglass blown
into the wing would be cooled by the boiling water, turning it back into
solid glass. At the end of entry the fiberglass/ice composite would have
turned into a fiberglass/glass composite. I really think they would have
made it to a safe landing.

--
Craig Fink
Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @

"Craig Fink" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 06:16:03 -0700, Skylon wrote:

Question:

How much longer did Columbia have to last? That is, how much longer
would it have been seathed in plasma and in an environment that would
continue to burn away at the wing?

It was 15 minutes from home, how much longer did it need to hang in
there, to at least get the crew to a bailout point?

The interesting part I found, was just how early parts started falling
off. It was hot, but there wasn't a lot of aerodynamic or heat load before
the vehicle started coming apart.

Columbia had lots of high temperature materials onboard that served no
useful purpose during entry. The payload bay was full of fiberglass
thermal blanket insulation. They were dumping gallons and gallons of water
overboard to lighten the load for landing. They could have filled the void
in the wing with a composite structure of fiberglass and ice.

Exactly how do you stuff this insulation inside the void and get ice to form
there considering you're in vaccuum?

Covered
the entire hole like a band-aid with a blanket wrapped around the leading
edge.

Which kills your aerodynamics, and would melt and fall off pretty quickly,
given the high heating loads on the leading edge.

The fiberglass would have melted on the outside, but the ice/water
of the composite would have kept the plasma out of the wing for a long
time.

And you know all of this because you're an expert at hypersonic aerodynamics
and thermodynamics and you've created a program to simulate this?

The ice/water cooling the fiberglass and the fiberglass insulating
the ice/water, slowing it consumption rate. Any melted fiberglass blown
into the wing would be cooled by the boiling water, turning it back into
solid glass. At the end of entry the fiberglass/ice composite would have
turned into a fiberglass/glass composite. I really think they would have
made it to a safe landing.

Despite your ego, your thinking processes are no substitute for sound
engineering analysis.

Note that it's *exactly* this sort of "thinking" that lead engineers to
believe that foam impacts would never damage the RCC. It wasn't until the
analysis and testing was done after the Columbia disaster that the engineers
realized they were mistaken. And these *were* qualified engineers, unlike
you.

Jeff
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
- B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919)

"Craig Fink" wrote in message
news
They could have filled the void
in the wing with a composite structure of fiberglass and ice.

Care to provide instructions on how to accomplish that?

Covered
the entire hole like a band-aid with a blanket wrapped around the leading
edge. The fiberglass would have melted on the outside, but the ice/water
of the composite would have kept the plasma out of the wing for a long
time.

How long?

The ice/water cooling the fiberglass and the fiberglass insulating
the ice/water, slowing it consumption rate.

Until the fiberglass is pulled off the surface by the airflow.

I really think they would have
made it to a safe landing.

Let's see the math.

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 10:45:04 -0400, Scott Hedrick wrote:

"Craig Fink" wrote in message
news
They could have filled the void
in the wing with a composite structure of fiberglass and ice.

Care to provide instructions on how to accomplish that?

You mean more detailed? Why?

Covered
the entire hole like a band-aid with a blanket wrapped around the
leading edge. The fiberglass would have melted on the outside, but the
ice/water of the composite would have kept the plasma out of the wing
for a long time.

How long?

Good Question, NASA has a really nice arcjet facility at JSC.

Sounds like an interesting contest, The Annual "Columbia Memorial Heat
Shield Repair Contest". Hummm, I wounder who we could get to sponsor it?
What day should it be held on?


The ice/water cooling the fiberglass and the fiberglass insulating
the ice/water, slowing it consumption rate.

Until the fiberglass is pulled off the surface by the airflow.

Don't you think it would melt first? I do, very hot, no qbar. Also, it
would wrapped around the leading edge. Melting and becoming a very viscous
fluid, flowing slowly, blown by the airflow. Probably would have created a
glass streak down the bottom of the orbiter.

I really think they would have
made it to a safe landing.

Let's see the math.

That was done a while ago in sci.space.tech on water requirements to
handle the heat load. It's not very much water.

--
Craig Fink
Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 09:37:09 -0700, Skylon wrote:



This really doesn't answer my question. In fact I recall some surprise
that Columbia lasted as long as it did with a gaping hole in it's wing.

So, again, to the group, just how much longer would Columbia have had
to last? When would the period of significant heating to the oribter
have ended and it would have been possible for the crew to bailout?

It takes time to burn through the various aluminum parts of the wing.
Probably even longer to melt fiberglass that is being actively cooled
boiling boiling water.

Pick your point on the curve. Page 63.
http://caib.nasa.gov/events/public_h...8/present.html
6, 7, 8 minutes?


--
Craig Fink
Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @

Craig Fink wrote:


The interesting part I found, was just how early parts started falling
off. It was hot, but there wasn't a lot of aerodynamic or heat load before
the vehicle started coming apart.

Something fell off in orbit and was spotted on radar, so the hole was
probably fairly large.
NASA was quite surprised to find out that pieces were coming off pretty
much right from the beginning of reentry, as the images from California
showed.
What's really tragic is that the Air Force infrared telescope at Maui,
Hawaii got fairly clear images of the Shuttle:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...e/1282936.html
If the shuttle had been belly down as it came over the cameras, you
might well have been able to see the damage at this resolution due to
the different heat signatures of the damage and TPS.
In this visual spectrum Maui photo:
http://www.romfart.no/eRomfart/Bilde...AMOSsynlig.jpg
Significant detail is visible, but again it's not from the angle one
needs to see the damage.
BTW, why isn't the rear cargo bay door on the port side fully open?



Columbia had lots of high temperature materials onboard that served no
useful purpose during entry. The payload bay was full of fiberglass
thermal blanket insulation. They were dumping gallons and gallons of water
overboard to lighten the load for landing. They could have filled the void
in the wing with a composite structure of fiberglass and ice. Covered
the entire hole like a band-aid with a blanket wrapped around the leading
edge.


First off that means getting the water to the leading edge; the water
flashes into vapor or ice crystals on contact with space if everything
is working right (remember the danger the time the toilet grew the
icicle on its dump port, and they had to use the RMA to knock it free?).
Then, presuming you had a hose to do that with that you could attach to
the water dump vent, you'd have to get the patch aerodynamically smooth,
as otherwise the airflow over the wing wouldn't be laminar during
reentry and you'd end up with the same sort of excessive heating that
the hole led to, and still lose the vehicle.
That degree of smoothness needed for repairs has always been the major
bugaboo in any on-orbit repair scheme.
If the ice/fiberglass patch fell off during reentry it would wreak havoc
on the belly tiles, and you would again lose the vehicle.


The fiberglass would have melted on the outside, but the ice/water
of the composite would have kept the plasma out of the wing for a long
time. The ice/water cooling the fiberglass and the fiberglass insulating
the ice/water, slowing it consumption rate. Any melted fiberglass blown
into the wing would be cooled by the boiling water, turning it back into
solid glass. At the end of entry the fiberglass/ice composite would have
turned into a fiberglass/glass composite. I really think they would have
made it to a safe landing.



At the very best they would have probably ended up lower and slower in a
severally aerodynamically compromised vehicle.
I think you can write off a normal landing in any case; the higher drag
during reentry caused by the patch might mean they never would get as
far as The Cape to land.

Pat

In message .com,
Skylon writes


This really doesn't answer my question. In fact I recall some surprise
that Columbia lasted as long as it did with a gaping hole in it's wing.

So, again, to the group, just how much longer would Columbia have had
to last? When would the period of significant heating to the oribter
have ended and it would have been possible for the crew to bailout?

Back in 2003, James Oberg said or posted (can't remember if it was here
or on some TV programme) something to the effect that the crew were
probably still strapped into their seats inside the crew compartment,
hoping it would last long enough for them to get out after Columbia
broke up, .
I don't know if he had second thoughts, but I found that idea horrifying
and very depressing.

"Craig Fink" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 10:45:04 -0400, Scott Hedrick wrote:
Let's see the math.

That was done a while ago in sci.space.tech on water requirements to
handle the heat load. It's not very much water.

Then let's run a hose from the urine dump to the hole from inside, and open
the valve just a crack so the water will boil and carry away the heat.

If they survive, cleaning the wing would be a blessing.

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 13:43:49 GMT, Craig Fink
wrote:

At the end of entry the fiberglass/ice composite would have
turned into a fiberglass/glass composite. I really think they would have
made it to a safe landing.

....Ok, I give. Which episode of "MacGuyver" did you steal this one
from, Craig?

OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[