How to MODIFY the Space Shuttle to fly SAFELY in the next 15+ years!

[spacebatman]

.

I think that retire the Shuttles in 2010 and use only some SMALL (and POOR) crew/cargo capsules is a BAD idea

the Space Shuttle is an old machine but its main problem (compared with past and future capsules) is that it has NO ESCAPE SYSTEM so, if something goes wrong after lift-off (like in the Challenger accident) the crew has no way to survive

in my new article (with animation) "The SAFE Space Shuttle (http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/015safeShuttle.html)" I suggest to MODIFY the Shuttles to fly WITH a crew but SAFELY (to fill the gap between the Shuttles' retirement in 2010 and the first Orion flight in 2015 + delays)

.

[polo_pro]

Ok, I'll be the first to say it. I think Mr_Laurenzano has a run for his money to get his 2006 award, eh? 8^) 8^) 8^)

ps - One good thing is this thread is in Science & Technology where almost anything goes. I'm not trying to censor anyone with the above comments.

[spacebatman]

...this thread is in Off Topic...
the section's title means Science & Technology "in general" (I suppose)
.

[Cody2526]

you mean like Escape Pods?

everything in space should have them, or anything that can launch them to the nearest planet with land on it.

[spacebatman]

you mean like Escape Pods?

escape pods (seats?) like used in military fighters may be a good and cheaper solution (that was already used in first few Shuttle's flights) but it can work only between lift-off and 5-15 km. altitude (that, however, is the most dangerous part of a flight) while, beyond it (in the vacuum) they need a pressurized lifeboat (with its own thermal shield)

.

[macgeek]

you mean like Escape Pods?

everything in space should have them, or anything that can launch them to the nearest planet with land on it.


I think The lawyers at apple would object to that name!

;)

Jonathan

[pam]

They'd have to go back and sue a TON of SF writers, if they object. That term has been around for ages.
Pam

[KSagal]

I thought that the shuttle has a cockpit that can eject from the rest of the craft shortly after launch or booster rocket problems. Must be that 5 to 15 KM issue... That is where the majority of previous problems have been...

Heat shields are needed for high speed re-entry into the atmosphere. Would a non-powered, in atmosphere (Thin at that altitude, but still in atmosphere) decent need one?

I know of skydiver records above 40,000 feet (And I thought one near 100,000 feet) and the cold was a far greater factor than the heat...

[BillPaxton]

I thought that the shuttle has a cockpit that can eject from the rest of the craft shortly after launch or booster rocket problems. Must be that 5 to 15 KM issue... That is where the majority of previous problems have been...

Heat shields are needed for high speed re-entry into the atmosphere. Would a non-powered, in atmosphere (Thin at that altitude, but still in atmosphere) decent need one?

I know of skydiver records above 40,000 feet (And I thought one near 100,000 feet) and the cold was a far greater factor than the heat...

Yeah I read that in OMNI and saw the thing on discovery channel about some guy who bailed out of a weather balloon at 19 or 20 miles up (so around 100,000 feet is right on target). But I'm thinking if they could drop and entire 4200lb reentry module from all the way out there and stop it with parachutes, you could make the entire cabin pop right out like a bagel from a toaster at the slightest hint of danger.

Bet those astronaut suites wouldn't smell so good on landing tho!

+B

[polo_pro]

I thought that the shuttle has a cockpit that can eject from the rest of the craft shortly after launch or booster rocket problems. Must be that 5 to 15 KM issue... That is where the majority of previous problems have been...

Heat shields are needed for high speed re-entry into the atmosphere. Would a non-powered, in atmosphere (Thin at that altitude, but still in atmosphere) decent need one?

I know of skydiver records above 40,000 feet (And I thought one near 100,000 feet) and the cold was a far greater factor than the heat...

Now Karl, please don't introduce any ugly facts into his flight of fancy.

But since, we're on the topic, what about the complexity of deploying parachutes from a dissentigrating vehicle travelling thousands of miles per hour possibly in a parabolic tragectory (on the way up). I'm not saying that this is an insurmountable problem (ie. balistic chutes and strong materials), but given the payload weights involved...it'd be challenging to say the least.

ps - My understanding was that the shuttles crew cabin does not eject. This was not part of the design due to the weight and volume requirements (and in the space lift industry it's all about how much you can toss up there for the obscene amounts of money that are spent).

I thought the best escape plan they've come up with stick a pole out the top of the crew cabin to guide the departing astronauts (probably with his own parachute, insulation and breathing system) around things like the tail as they depart the vehicle travelling at outrageous speeds. Needless to say few people really consider this to be a realistic escape plan given the high altitudes involved, the amount of time needed to execute it and the circumstances it'd be executed in!

[DaveA]

I thought that the shuttle has a cockpit that can eject from the rest of the craft

Only Columbia had ejection seats, and then only for its first few flights. From an article at SPACE.COM:

When shuttle Columbia first launched on April 12, 1981, commander John Young and pilot Robert Crippen were the only crewmembers aboard. They wore pressure suits and sat in ejection seats based on the SR-71 supersonic spy plane.

If anything went wrong during the first few moments of flight, the crew could eject. After the solid rocket boosters separated, any emergency would result in the crew attempting a landing back at Kennedy Space Center, overseas in Europe, or in California or New Mexico after nearly circling the planet.

The next three shuttle missions also featured two-man crews and the availability of ejection seats. But for STS-5 the crew size increased to four. So while commander Vance Brand and pilot Robert Overmyer sat in Columbia's ejection seats, the seats were disabled so as not to leave behind mission specialists Joe Allen and Bill Lenoir.

Columbia's ejection seats were removed during its first overhaul back at the Palmdale, Calif., factory where it was assembled. Challenger, Discovery, Atlantis and Endeavour never were equipped with ejection seats.

[KSagal]

Man, that would be a bummer... "Houston, we have a problem...!" and then the pilot and co pilot leave in their ejection seats, and you are left with a rather large hole in front of you and a real bad situation....

[drmarty]

OK look at this. You bail out IN SPACE!!!! and ride an inflatable heat shield down. A one man reentry vehicle. Here it is:

MOOSE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Other Designations: Man Out Of Space, Easiest. Class: Manned. Type: Bailout. Destination: Space Station Orbit. Nation: USA. Manufacturer: General Electric.
MOOSE was perhaps the most celebrated bail-out from orbit system of the early 1960’s. The suited astronaut would strap the MOOSE to his back, and jump out of the spacecraft or station into free space. Pulling a ripcord would fill an inflatable heat shield with polyurethane. The astronaut would use a small hand-held gas to orient himself for retro-fire, and then fire a solid rocket motor strapped to his chest to return to earth.

The MOOSE consisted of a chest-mounted parachute, a flexible, folded 1.8 m diameter elastomeric heat shield, and a canister of polyurethane foam. Pulling the deployment cord would fill the shield into shape and encase the back of the astronaut in perfectly form-fitting polyurethane. The astronaut would use a small hand-held gas get device to orient himself for retro-fire, and then fire a solid rocket motor mounted in the device. After aligning himself for re-entry and putting the MOOSE into a slow roll, he would throw the gas gun away. After a ballistic re-entry, the astronaut would pull the ripcord of the chest-parachute, which would pull him away from the heat shield for a parachute landing.

There was also the choice of staying with the shield for a landing on land or water./ The buoyant polyurethane crushable structure would absorb the landing shock, and encased in the foam was a survival kit, SOFAR bomb, radar chaff, altitude flare, and food and water.

General Electric conducted a number of technology proving tests. A heat shield was manufactured and folded. Test subjects were foamed into place with various formulae of polyurethane (it was found necessary to add a little castor oil to the formula to allow the pilot to extract himself from the foam). In a final test the test pilot jumped six metres from a bridge in Massachusetts and successfully survived water impact and floated downstream (a competitor claimed there was a little bit of a difference between 6 m and 500 km).

The foam tests showed the heat (exceeding 100 degrees C at the core) that the foam generated during the exothermic deployment reaction was not transferred to the subject and was not uncomfortable. Tests of the ablative materials were conducted in the General Electric supersonic air arc tunnel and verified the heat of ablation of the flexible shield material. Studies of heat transfer during re-entry showed it was well within the limits that could be handled by a standard space suit backpack.

The General Electric team felt they had a real winner - a lightweight system (215 kg, including the astronaut) that avoided the deployment problems of inflatables. But with the cancellation of the X-20 Dynasoar and military space stations, such concepts were shelved and faded into obscurity.

Crew Size: 1. Length: 0.87 m (2.85 ft). Maximum Diameter: 1.83 m (6.00 ft). Span: 1.83 m (6.00 ft). Mass: 215 kg (473 lb)."





Yeah Right, I'll just get out with a rocket on my chest and blast myself out of orbit. What do I look like? A cinder?

Marty

[drmarty]

This NASA site will rock your socks. It is a history of various methods to get home. It is where I saw MOOSE a long time ago. So when I saw this thread I looked around and Voila! It is pretty interesting.

http://www.astronautix.com/craftfam/rescue.htm

Marty