Deltadude8 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 569 posts, RR: 6 Reply 3, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 14450 times:
well it goes up but at an angle...its not a straight up angle of attack
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26967 posts, RR: 83 Reply 4, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 14417 times:
It should arc eastward towards Spain, I imagine, since Marone [sic] is the first abort return site after KSC.
Checksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 999 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 14249 times:
Quoting Thorny (Reply 5): Sorry... northeast paralleling the east coast of the United States.
Wow! That information is nowhere near correct...check your facts. I don't remember the last time Moron, Spain was located up the East Coast of the United States!
Bobster2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 14202 times:
I drew a straight line from the launch site to the location at 520 seconds. It doesn't represent the actual flight path. But it shows that the Shuttle does go roughly parallel to the North American coast, and you can see how it gets to Spain.
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4459 posts, RR: 22 Reply 11, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 14174 times:
Quoting Deltadude8 (Reply 3): well it goes up but at an angle...its not a straight up angle of attack
No, it sure isn't...(never heard of a "straight up" AOA anyway )
Angle of Attack isn't the right term you're looking for here. That would be the angle between the chord line of an airplane's wing and the relative wind.
For a further geeky discussion, I'm not sure if the AoA of the Shuttle stack at liftoff is based on the actual angle of attack of the wings of the Orbiter or if it isn't some other line of reference on the stack.
For most of the Orbiter's flight through the atmosphere, the "angle of attack" in the conventional sense would be pretty close to zero (maybe plus or minus ten degrees)
To answer the original poster's question:
To reach the orbit of the International Space Station, the vehicle launches toward a 51.6 degree inclination (meaning that the Orbiter will "peak" at crossing 51.6 degrees north and 51.6 degrees south of the Equator). This takes the Shuttle on a northeasterly trajectory. I believe most Shuttle launches prior to the ISS were done with the vehicle heading roughly due east, for about a 39 degree inclination (about the same distance above the Equator as KSC). This is a pretty simplistic explanation since I have a really rudimentary understanding of orbital dynamics, but I think it covers the bases.
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 14146 times:
Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 11): I believe most Shuttle launches prior to the ISS were done with the vehicle heading roughly due east, for about a 39 degree inclination (about the same distance above the Equator as KSC)
Depends on the mission, of course. The due east launch trajectory was common for the non-station missions that involved space science missions and the like.
The inclination for such a launch is about 28.5 degrees.
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4459 posts, RR: 22 Reply 13, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 14135 times:
Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 12): Depends on the mission, of course. The due east launch trajectory was common for the non-station missions that involved space science missions and the like.
1. sorry, replace 39 with 28.5 (thou shalt not post when tired)
2. My point was that the remaining Shuttle flights will (barring a possible Hubble repair mission) launch to the 51.6 degree inclination to rendezvous with space station. For that matter, just about all Shuttle launches for the past few years have been dedicated to the ISS, with STS-107 and all the recent Columbia missions being the exception, launching to whatever inclination was appropriate for the mission.
Another geeky thought...I think Columbia was due to have the external airlock/docking adapter installed and make its first mission to the ISS not long after STS-107. IIRC its first mission to the ISS was to have Barbara Morgan (of TISP fame) on board. Don't know if it would've done much of the construction work as it was significantly heavier than the other Orbiters.
Thorny From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 14067 times:
Quoting Checksixx (Reply 6): Wow! That information is nowhere near correct...check your facts. I don't remember the last time Moron, Spain was located up the East Coast of the United States!
Ahem. It is wise to look before you leap...
See Bobster's groundtrack image, which is faily accurate. High-inclination launches like the Station missions (51.6 degrees inclination to the equator) go up along the east coast. The first abort landing option is Return to Launch Site (turn around and go back to Cape Canaveral), the second is East Coast Abort Landing, which I think is aimed for Westover ARB, Massachusetts.
Thorny From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 14059 times:
Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 13): Another geeky thought...I think Columbia was due to have the external airlock/docking adapter installed and make its first mission to the ISS not long after STS-107. IIRC its first mission to the ISS was to have Barbara Morgan (of TISP fame) on board. Don't know if it would've done much of the construction work as it was significantly heavier than the other Orbiters.
There were also a lot of rumors about NASA retiring Columbia, since she didn't appear on the Shuttle manifest except for one Station resupply mission and one more Hubble mission. That's why so many of the "how will they finish the station now with only three Orbiters left" question is not taken seriously.
Barbara Morgan (now a full-fledged astronaut) is scheduled to fly on STS-118 next summer.
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4459 posts, RR: 22 Reply 17, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 14015 times:
I realize it has to do with the engine-out abort capabilities, but what is the difference between an OPS-3 scenario versus a TAL abort?
I'm no Thorny but I'll take a stab at what I know.
OPS 3 is the PASS software mode for entry. I think even when a TAL abort is selected (single engine TAL, select Zaragoza) OPS 3 is selected after single-engine MECO. Before that I think a TAL TRAJ page is shown on a display and the orbiter flies a trajectory for TAL. Perhaps this OPS 3 call means to mode directly into OPS 3 and forgo switching to TAL?
Checksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 999 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 13967 times:
Quoting Thorny (Reply 14): Ahem. It is wise to look before you leap...
See Bobster's groundtrack image, which is faily accurate. High-inclination launches like the Station missions (51.6 degrees inclination to the equator) go up along the east coast. The first abort landing option is Return to Launch Site (turn around and go back to Cape Canaveral), the second is East Coast Abort Landing, which I think is aimed for Westover ARB, Massachusetts.
Ahem...maybe you should heed your own advice...as someone pointed out to me (for some unknown reason) the Earth is not flat. The groundtrack image is NOT accurate as it does not take into account a 3rd dimension. The shuttle did NOT parallel the east coast no matter how you look at it...unless you think the world is flat. There was not any East Coast Abort Landing briefed only the Return to Launch Site the Trans-Oceanic Abort Sites in Spain and ATO.
Nosedive From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 13954 times:
Ok, here's a great circle image of the shuttle's path and the direct parth from KTTS to LEMO, the shuttle landing facility in FL and the Morón airbase in Spain.
Red dots on the shuttle's path indiciate 200, 300, 400, and 520 second intervals from launch.
Funny thing is, the shuttle was blazing a path for LHR!
I wonder if the Bermuda II would allow for shuttle landings... what about the landing fees and slots!?
I'd post the think, but great circle is being a punk ass...
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4459 posts, RR: 22 Reply 20, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 13954 times:
Quoting Checksixx (Reply 18): There was not any East Coast Abort Landing briefed only the Return to Launch Site the Trans-Oceanic Abort Sites in Spain and ATO.
ECALs are contingency abort only--meaning there's little more than a snowball's chance down under that that may happen. ECAL wouldn't happen in a "normal" abort mode like RTLS or TAL. ATO doesn't resort in a landing, at least as part of the abort. Any decision on a contingency abort would be made in a matter of seconds and the Orbiter could head anywhere from Myrtle Beach to Nova Scotia. ECAL's aren't generally briefed much, I believe, because it's hard to target toward a specific one and consistently monitor its weather (after all, weather wouldn't really be much of a concern at that point).
Quoting Checksixx (Reply 18): Ahem...maybe you should heed your own advice...as someone pointed out to me (for some unknown reason) the Earth is not flat. The groundtrack image is NOT accurate as it does not take into account a 3rd dimension. The shuttle did NOT parallel the east coast no matter how you look at it...unless you think the world is flat.
I don't think you understand how orbit works. I'm not saying you CAN'T, I'm just saying that often times it goes beyond the realm of common sense. The Earth isn't perfectly round, either--it's pear-shaped, and this creates its own problems.
Checksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 999 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 13918 times:
Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 20): I don't think you understand how orbit works. I'm not saying you CAN'T, I'm just saying that often times it goes beyond the realm of common sense. The Earth isn't perfectly round, either--it's pear-shaped, and this creates its own problems.
Dude, are you serious?? I have a very clear understanding. Maybe you should read my post.
Thorny From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 13908 times:
Quoting Checksixx (Reply 18): Ahem...maybe you should heed your own advice...as someone pointed out to me (for some unknown reason) the Earth is not flat. The groundtrack image is NOT accurate as it does not take into account a 3rd dimension. The shuttle did NOT parallel the east coast no matter how you look at it...unless you think the world is flat.
No, the Earth is not flat. You might want to look at some of the plots of the Great Circle routes airliners follow. The Shuttle adheres to that principal.
Yes, the Shuttle paralleled the East Coast of the United States. The Shuttle, like the Space Station is in an orbit inclined 51.6 degrees to the equator, that means the most northerly point in its orbit is 51.6 degrees North Latitude, about the latitude of Juneau, Alaska. The most southerly point in the orbit is 51.6 South, or about Johannesberg, South Africa. The two points are 180 degrees apart.
To get into that orbit from Cape Canaveral, the Shuttle headed northeast, with the SRBs coming down off the coast of Jacksonville, Florida. Discovery passed only about 200 miles east of Cape Hatteras on the way up. Main Engine Cutoff was off the coast of Cape Cod or so. (Night launches have been seen as far north as Nova Scotia.)
The natural flight path then carried them over Central Europe, heading southeast. To get to Moron or Istres, they would have needed to use a lot of their 1,000 mile crossrange capability. That's what the delta wing and its crossrange is most useful for.
Quoting Thorny (Reply 22): The two points are 180 degrees apart.
Actually, the difference in latitude between the northernmost and southernmost points of the orbit is only 103.2 degrees. What you meant to say was that the orbit of the Space Station (or Shuttle in this case) describes a plane that is tilted to the Equator by 51.6 degrees. The plane is, of course, flat, and therefore there is an angle of 180 degrees from one of its sides to the other. The link provided by JBirdAV8r shows this nicely.
Thorny From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 13874 times:
Quoting SABE (Reply 23): Johannesburg is only at 26 degrees southern latitude. Maybe you were thinking about Cape Horn (South America) rather than Cape Hope (South Africa)?
D'oh! Yep. Johannesburg is about the southern limit for a 28.5 degree orbit like the Shuttle used to fly all the time. Got South Africa and South America mixed up.
Quoting SABE (Reply 23): The plane is, of course, flat, and therefore there is an angle of 180 degrees from one of its sides to the other.
Didn't I say that? The most northerly and most southerly points in the orbit are 180 degrees apart.
25 JBirdAV8r: Absolutely! Chill out. I think that you think you do. I did, in fact. I read this: and this: and drew my conclusion. I think you're confused. The gro
26 Bobster2: Cape Canaveral is actually in a pretty bad location for launches to the ISS. That's why you see the odd flightpath to the northeast. The ISS orbit was
27 Thorny: SkyLab was in nearly the same orbit... 50 degrees. Oh, to have the throw-weight of a Saturn V today... Space Station Freedom was going to be at 28.5
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 569 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Feb 2004, 8810 posts, 
From Bahrain, joined Jul 2005, 1033 posts, 
From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5448 posts, 
From Argentina, joined Jun 2005, 156 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
