|
Posted by on May 18, 2006, 10:14 am
Please log in for more thread options
In the event of an RTLS abort, are there shut off values on the
umbilical lines to prevent remainning fuel to leak out of the tank once
the orbiter separates? I could see leaking fuel being a danger at that
moment, not to mention pollution in the water. Also, when the tank hits
the water, would it remain intact or break apart?
Thanks.
|
|
Posted by Bob Haller on May 18, 2006, 11:09 am
Please log in for more thread options
tank will disengrate, good news it fuels are hydrogen and oxygen so it
doesnt matter...
|
|
Posted by Jeff Findley on May 18, 2006, 11:19 am
Please log in for more thread options
show/hide quoted text
> In the event of an RTLS abort, are there shut off values on the
> umbilical lines to prevent remainning fuel to leak out of the tank once
> the orbiter separates? I could see leaking fuel being a danger at that
> moment, not to mention pollution in the water.
What pollution? The ET contains cryogenic iquid oxygen and cryogenic liquid
hydrogen.
show/hide quoted text
> Also, when the tank hits
> the water, would it remain intact or break apart?
I'd think it would be squashed a bit on impact. ;-)
Seriously though, I think if you're performing an RTLS, you end up burning
most (all?) of the fuel in the ET in order to do the powered turn around
maneuver, but there are others here that know better than I.
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)
|
|
Posted by on May 18, 2006, 12:04 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Jeff Findley wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> > In the event of an RTLS abort, are there shut off values on the
> > umbilical lines to prevent remainning fuel to leak out of the tank once
> > the orbiter separates? I could see leaking fuel being a danger at that
> > moment, not to mention pollution in the water.
> What pollution? The ET contains cryogenic iquid oxygen and cryogenic liquid
> hydrogen.
> > Also, when the tank hits
> > the water, would it remain intact or break apart?
> I'd think it would be squashed a bit on impact. ;-)
> Seriously though, I think if you're performing an RTLS, you end up burning
> most (all?) of the fuel in the ET in order to do the powered turn around
> maneuver, but there are others here that know better than I.
> 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)
Stupid me...what happens to super-chilled liquid hydrogen and oxygen
when it warms up. Duh! I do wonder how long after SRB SEP that the
shuttle stays with the tank. Maybe most of the fuel is indeed burned
off?
|
|
Posted by Bob Haller on May 18, 2006, 12:08 pm
Please log in for more thread options the srbs cant seperate till they burn out, at just over 2 minutes
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | RTLS Contingency | December 12, 2006, 5:01 pm |
| RTLS Story | May 12, 2007, 10:22 pm |
| A "real" RTLS test | March 23, 2008, 6:42 pm |
| Return To Launch Site (RTLS) foam debris solution | August 10, 2005, 4:34 am |
| to abort or not to abort | July 28, 2005, 9:09 pm |
| abort or not to abort | July 29, 2005, 1:31 pm |
| STS-51-F (the ATO abort).. | April 23, 2008, 2:39 pm |
| TAL abort questions | July 16, 2005, 11:56 pm |
| 41-D abort video | June 17, 2006, 8:10 am |
| STS-51F Pad Abort video? | November 24, 2008, 10:38 am |
|
XML Sitemap
> umbilical lines to prevent remainning fuel to leak out of the tank once
> the orbiter separates? I could see leaking fuel being a danger at that
> moment, not to mention pollution in the water.