Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Shuttle Flight Readiness Firings?  
User currently offlineLnglive1011yyz From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1608 posts, RR: 15
Posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4411 times:

Hey all,

I've been just looking at videos online of the FRF's performed back in the 80's and when Endeavour came on board, and I'm curious..

Does NASA still perform FRF's?

If no.. is there a reason why?

Thanks !

1011


Pack your bags, we're going on a sympathy trip!
7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineThorny From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4395 times:



Quoting Lnglive1011yyz (Thread starter):
Does NASA still perform FRF's?
If no.. is there a reason why?

No, they were used to verify the entirely of the Orbiter/External Tank main propulsion system before each Orbiter's first flight. Challenger's FRF indicated a leak, leading to a second FRF. Discovery performed an FRF prior to the STS-26 return to flight in 1988 primarily to exercise the launch team following the prolonged standdown. This wasn't repeated for STS-114 in 2005 because by then there had been over 100 Shuttle launches and it wasn't considered necessary anymore. Also, the downtime wasn't expected to be as long as it turned out to be, and potential ET foam shedding led NASA to limit the number of fill/drain cycles on an External Tank to only those absolutely necessary.


User currently offlineLnglive1011yyz From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1608 posts, RR: 15
Reply 2, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4316 times:



Quoting Thorny (Reply 1):
No, they were used to verify the entirely of the Orbiter/External Tank main propulsion system before each Orbiter's first flight. Challenger's FRF indicated a leak, leading to a second FRF

Thanks for the response.

The tie-down bolts on those boosters must be insanely strong.

If you look at most of the videos, it's quite cool to see the Shuttle Stack doing the 'wobble' back and forth prior to the videos ending!

1011yyz



Pack your bags, we're going on a sympathy trip!
User currently offlineBlackProjects From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2007, 756 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4307 times:

Here is one of the Launch Tie Down Explosive Bolts concerned.

http://nasatech.net/Bolt%20Catchers/images/BoosterSepHardware06a.jpg

Booster Seperation Hardware!

http://nasatech.net/Bolt%20Catchers/


User currently offlineThorny From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4305 times:



Quoting Lnglive1011yyz (Reply 2):
If you look at most of the videos, it's quite cool to see the Shuttle Stack doing the 'wobble' back and forth prior to the videos ending!

They call it the "twang". The STS-1 countdown was a little different from later ones based on experience with the twang. For STS-1, the Mains fired at T-3.8 seconds, they let the ET twang to the north and then back to vertical for SRB ignition. Later flights had the Mains fire at T-6.6 and they let the ET go through one complete cycle, twang north, through vertical to twang south, and then back to vertical for SRB ignition.


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 978 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4275 times:



Quoting Lnglive1011yyz (Reply 2):
The tie-down bolts on those boosters must be insanely strong.

The Shuttle stack has 4 hold-down bolts on each SRB that measure 28 inches long and 3.5 inches in diameter. IMO, that's nothing special in the engineering world.

Also keep in mind that the three SSME produce about 1.2 million lbs of sea level thrust while the stack weights over 4 million lbs at liftoff. The SSME aren't capable of accelerating the Shuttle vertically during a FRF or warm-up/verification.


User currently offlineLnglive1011yyz From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1608 posts, RR: 15
Reply 6, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 4260 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 5):
The Shuttle stack has 4 hold-down bolts on each SRB that measure 28 inches long and 3.5 inches in diameter. IMO, that's nothing special in the engineering world.

Also keep in mind that the three SSME produce about 1.2 million lbs of sea level thrust while the stack weights over 4 million lbs at liftoff. The SSME aren't capable of accelerating the Shuttle vertically during a FRF or warm-up/verification.

Good point. But, to the uneducated, it would appear to be amazing! (Still is, nonetheless)

Quoting Thorny (Reply 4):

They call it the "twang". The STS-1 countdown was a little different from later ones based on experience with the twang. For STS-1, the Mains fired at T-3.8 seconds, they let the ET twang to the north and then back to vertical for SRB ignition. Later flights had the Mains fire at T-6.6 and they let the ET go through one complete cycle, twang north, through vertical to twang south, and then back to vertical for SRB ignition.

Wow! Thanks for the info. I'll go back and review the vids!

Is there any functional reason why? I noticed that late in the launch, there's a call from Capcom to Columbia indicating that they were a bit high on their trajectory or something.. Is that why?


1011yyz

[Edited 2008-08-18 18:54:14]

[Edited 2008-08-18 18:54:50]


Pack your bags, we're going on a sympathy trip!
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 978 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4233 times:



Quoting Lnglive1011yyz (Reply 6):
I noticed that late in the launch, there's a call from Capcom to Columbia indicating that they were a bit high on their trajectory or something.. Is that why?

No, that call is in reference to the fact that the Columbia was performing better than expected. In one of the post mission conferences, Crippen alluded to the fact that because the Shuttle climbed faster than expected, it would allow more payload in the future.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Shuttle Flight Readiness Firings?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Space Shuttle Ferry Flight Route posted Fri Jun 29 2007 19:05:50 by Blue747
Space Shuttle Return To Flight May 15. Too Early? posted Tue Mar 1 2005 20:44:38 by UAopsMGR
SpaceX Falcon 1 Flight 3 Launch Thread posted Sat Aug 2 2008 16:05:28 by Boeing4ever
Official STS-125 Atlantis Shuttle Mission Thread posted Fri Jul 25 2008 20:21:48 by Thorny
M-346 IPA: Pictures Of The First Flight posted Tue Jul 8 2008 01:33:00 by 777
Space Shuttle Reentry Speed posted Mon Jun 23 2008 13:52:52 by Confuscius
Thunderstorm Pix From Space Shuttle posted Thu Jun 12 2008 13:12:02 by OPNLguy
Sams Flight Stewards posted Tue Jun 10 2008 10:30:59 by Samsrheinmain
Space Shuttle Landing Speed posted Sat May 24 2008 16:04:02 by Flexo
Video M. Cheli Comments His 9G Flight With EF-2000 posted Sun May 18 2008 04:10:27 by 777

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format