Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
A very sad day indeed :-(. Our thoughts are with you, especially relatives and those connected to the Shuttle. Tony wrote: I find it a little hard to believe that a piece of insulation could have such an effect. Those tiles are designed to be impact tolerant and it seemed clear from the press conference that this sort of thing has occurred several times before. I did not see the press conference, but I think that in the past only single tiles went missing. If the impact has removed several neighbouring tiles, I would guess the heat will get to the metal underneath... Jon Bye bye, Wolfram. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003 22:47:00 -0600, Jon Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Dunno, prpbably their energy wasn't enough, but couldn't they try to make it to the IIS and use a Progress (IIRC) to make it back, if they figured out that this shuttle wasn't save enough to return? ..assuming the orbits were close enough, would it work for 10 people? They were in the wrong orbit - and not nearly enough fuel to change inclinations. And Progress isn't made for people - only cargo. The Soyuz on which it is based *shoehorns* in only 3 people (barely). ..and we still talk about the IIS re-entry lifeboat? -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
For those of you who may not have heard, the Space Shuttle Columbia appears to have broken up on entry as it passed south of Dallas while at a speed of mach 10+. smime.p7s Description: application/pkcs7-signature
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
On Sat, 2003-02-01 at 06:42, Jon Berndt wrote: For those of you who may not have heard, the Space Shuttle Columbia appears to have broken up on entry as it passed south of Dallas while at a speed of mach 10+. Oh my God :(. No other words I am afraid... Any thoughts on what may have happened? Matt ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
Once upon a time, you were sitting and writing: For those of you who may not have heard, the Space Shuttle Columbia appears to have broken up on entry as it passed south of Dallas while at a speed of mach 10+. Sad day for all of us. From the Israeli POV, it is especially sad, as the first Israeli astronaut has been on the Columbia. I really don't know what to say... ~ ___ Elad (elady)_@__ ___ ( \ J. Yarkoni .-'`-. / ) ( \_ / (O O) \ _/ ) (`-( ) )-') ( _\ \/ /_ ) (__/ `-..-' \__) Elady for friends or Oh my God... - It's Him ! for fans (or turbofans). [EMAIL PROTECTED]| http://www.ee.bgu.ac.il/~elady| .---. ECE. BGU, Beer-Sheva,Israel' ___ ' 972-8-6472417 84105-' .-. '- _' '-' '_ ''-|---|/ \==][^',_m_,'^][==/ \|---|-'' \__/~\__/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
Jon Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: During ascent there was some ice that broke loose and impacted the left wing underside near the elevon and the ice chunk disintegrated on impact. There was some concern that the protective tiles that cover the surfaces which are exposed to the most heat during reentry might have been damaged. That concern was addressed and dismissed by NASA before entry. However, in hindsight, perhaps that might end up being viewed as premature. There are other criticality 1 items that could have played into this, though. No doubt now that the focus will be on the left wing. But I'm wondering, is there anything that could have been done had the assessment gone the other way? ..heavy sigh... Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
No doubt now that the focus will be on the left wing. But I'm wondering, is there anything that could have been done had the assessment gone the other way? ..heavy sigh... I do not believe so. Perhaps there ought to be, though. The focus probably will be more on preventing insulation shedding, though. Jon smime.p7s Description: application/pkcs7-signature
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003 22:07:48 -, Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Jon Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: During ascent there was some ice that broke loose and impacted the left wing underside near the elevon and the ice chunk disintegrated on impact. There was some concern that the protective tiles that cover the surfaces which are exposed to the most heat during reentry might have been damaged. That concern was addressed and dismissed by NASA before entry. However, in hindsight, perhaps that might end up being viewed as premature. There are other criticality 1 items that could have played into this, though. No doubt now that the focus will be on the left wing. But I'm wondering, is there anything that could have been done had the assessment gone the other way? ..heavy sigh... ..I don't know, but we could try model it right now, to see if there _are_ viable options, such as abandoning the launch, jettisoning the tank and boosters somewhere (out towards the sea) and return for a rather prompt landing, it would have prevented re-entry heat loads to the airframe. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Sat, 1 Feb 2003 22:07:48 -, Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Jon Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: During ascent there was some ice that broke loose and impacted the left wing underside near the elevon and the ice chunk disintegrated on impact. There was some concern that the protective tiles that cover the surfaces which are exposed to the most heat during reentry might have been damaged. That concern was addressed and dismissed by NASA before entry. However, in hindsight, perhaps that might end up being viewed as premature. There are other criticality 1 items that could have played into this, though. No doubt now that the focus will be on the left wing. But I'm wondering, is there anything that could have been done had the assessment gone the other way? ..heavy sigh... ..I don't know, but we could try model it right now, to see if there _are_ viable options, such as abandoning the launch, jettisoning the tank and boosters somewhere (out towards the sea) and return for a rather prompt landing, it would have prevented re-entry heat loads to the airframe. Dunno, prpbably their energy wasn't enough, but couldn't they try to make it to the IIS and use a Progress (IIRC) to make it back, if they figured out that this shuttle wasn't save enough to return? CU, Christian -- The idea is to die young as late as possible.-- Ashley Montague ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
On Sat, 2003-02-01 at 14:56, Jon Berndt wrote: No doubt now that the focus will be on the left wing. But I'm wondering, is there anything that could have been done had the assessment gone the other way? ..heavy sigh... I do not believe so. Perhaps there ought to be, though. The focus probably will be more on preventing insulation shedding, though. I find it a little hard to believe that a piece of insulation could have such an effect. Those tiles are designed to be impact tolerant and it seemed clear from the press conference that this sort of thing has occurred several times before. Jon -- Tony Peden [EMAIL PROTECTED] We all know Linux is great ... it does infinite loops in 5 seconds. -- attributed to Linus Torvalds ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
On 1 Feb 2003, Tony Peden wrote: On Sat, 2003-02-01 at 14:56, Jon Berndt wrote: No doubt now that the focus will be on the left wing. But I'm wondering, is there anything that could have been done had the assessment gone the other way? ..heavy sigh... I do not believe so. Perhaps there ought to be, though. The focus probably will be more on preventing insulation shedding, though. I find it a little hard to believe that a piece of insulation could have such an effect. Those tiles are designed to be impact tolerant and it seemed clear from the press conference that this sort of thing has occurred several times before. I'm going to wait until they actually find out what went wrong. I assume they are capable of this? Considering the speed and height of the breakup. Matt ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
On Sat, 2003-02-01 at 16:51, Matthew Johnson wrote: On 1 Feb 2003, Tony Peden wrote: On Sat, 2003-02-01 at 14:56, Jon Berndt wrote: No doubt now that the focus will be on the left wing. But I'm wondering, is there anything that could have been done had the assessment gone the other way? ..heavy sigh... I do not believe so. Perhaps there ought to be, though. The focus probably will be more on preventing insulation shedding, though. I find it a little hard to believe that a piece of insulation could have such an effect. Those tiles are designed to be impact tolerant and it seemed clear from the press conference that this sort of thing has occurred several times before. I'm going to wait until they actually find out what went wrong. I assume they are capable of this? Considering the speed and height of the breakup. It doesn't sound like they'll have a whole lot to go on. It may come down to playing out what-if scenarios. Matt ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Tony Peden [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
On Sun, 02 Feb 2003 00:59:04 +0100, Christian Mayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Sat, 1 Feb 2003 22:07:48 -, Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Jon Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: During ascent there was some ice that broke loose and impacted the left wing underside near the elevon and the ice chunk disintegrated on impact. There was some concern that the protective tiles that cover the surfaces which are exposed to the most heat during reentry might have been damaged. That concern was addressed and dismissed by NASA before entry. However, in hindsight, perhaps that might end up being viewed as premature. There are other criticality 1 items that could have played into this, though. No doubt now that the focus will be on the left wing. But I'm wondering, is there anything that could have been done had the assessment gone the other way? ..heavy sigh... ..I don't know, but we could try model it right now, to see if there _are_ viable options, such as abandoning the launch, jettisoning the tank and boosters somewhere (out towards the sea) and return for a rather prompt landing, it would have prevented re-entry heat loads to the airframe. Dunno, prpbably their energy wasn't enough, but couldn't they try to make it to the IIS and use a Progress (IIRC) to make it back, if they figured out that this shuttle wasn't save enough to return? ..assuming the orbits were close enough, would it work for 10 people? ..I'm talking about modelling the _launch_, we _have_ the re-entry (tentatively) modelled. Then, it would be possible to play the what-if games, such as aborting the launch, jettison the boosters and fuel tank, and possibly shoot touch-and-go's with the onboard fuel meant for leaving the athmosphaere and initial re-entry. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Shuttle breaks up
Dunno, prpbably their energy wasn't enough, but couldn't they try to make it to the IIS and use a Progress (IIRC) to make it back, if they figured out that this shuttle wasn't save enough to return? ..assuming the orbits were close enough, would it work for 10 people? They were in the wrong orbit - and not nearly enough fuel to change inclinations. And Progress isn't made for people - only cargo. The Soyuz on which it is based *shoehorns* in only 3 people (barely). Jon smime.p7s Description: application/pkcs7-signature
