-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Solution for 99% of shuttle foam problems: Move launch base to CA
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
The reason they always have Florida as a launch pad is that it is closest to the equator. By being close the to the equator, the space shuttle gets an extra boost in speed. The land at the equator has to cover more distance in 24 hours than say Alaska, which means you travel faster at the equator. If you look at all space launches, they all will have launching very near the equator in common. I'm sure being next to ocean for collection of the rocket boosters also helps.
iamaelephant
Diamond Member
How insecure are Californians? Stop with these threads FFS.
sao123
Lifer
The reason for the launch scrubs isnt because of the rain... its because of lightning danger.
The reason for the foam is to stop ice from forming on the tank from water vapor in the air...and The reason it breaks is... when the water hits the tank (which contains liquid hydrogen & oxygen) at extremely cold temps.... it gets in the smallest cracks and freezes. Freezing causes it to expand causing the foam to crack and break during take off.... This is simply highway pothole physics....
California is no better than florida for launches because of the cool moist air flowing in from the pacific.
A better palce to launch might be the desert in new mexico or arizona because of the extremely low humidity. Though dust storms would pose different problems alltogether....
HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
Then let's annex Ecuador and everything between here and there. We'll call it........New Carolina.
shortylickens
No Lifer
I'm in Ridgecrest, where you at?
CaptnKirk
Lifer
Basically, as I read in the NYTs, rain hits the tank and causes the foam to break off.
Correction - the shuttle is not transported through a rainstorm, as the impact of the falling drops
will cause the Shuttle Protective Tiles to crack and break-up, serial shedding causes additional damage.
Ice, ice, baby:
When we built the SLC-6 Launch Complec for the Shuttle operation at Vandenberg, icing was more of a problem that at KSC.
When filled with the cryogenic fuels - Liquid Ozygen (LOX) & Liquid Hydrogen it ices up adding several hundred pounds
per hour of frost and then compacted ice rind buildup.
The Western Range hasd to build a stationaty launch mount where hot high speed airflow was directed upwards
to keep a dry-flow barrier between the external tank & the ambient atmosphere.
The ISS (Ice Supression System) was a pair of B-52 class jet engines running in a containment vault
& mixing the exhaust gasses with de-humidified air and feed into the launchmount base where it
would flow upward at a rate to keep the local ambient air containting moisture off the tank.
SLC-6
<Within>
Several other operation issues remained unresolved. Because it appeared that tank icing would be much more severe at VAFB than at Kennedy, an additional $12.8 million was spent on ET Area icing-protection.(41) The Air Force added two jet engines near the launch mounts, hoping that the warm exhaust flowing through ducts will sufficiently warm the tanks. But as one Air Force Officer reported, "We don't know if it will work or not."(42) A 1986 Senate report warned that the icing problem remained "very significant."(43)
Correction - the shuttle is not transported through a rainstorm, as the impact of the falling drops
will cause the Shuttle Protective Tiles to crack and break-up, serial shedding causes additional damage.
Ice, ice, baby:
When we built the SLC-6 Launch Complec for the Shuttle operation at Vandenberg, icing was more of a problem that at KSC.
When filled with the cryogenic fuels - Liquid Ozygen (LOX) & Liquid Hydrogen it ices up adding several hundred pounds
per hour of frost and then compacted ice rind buildup.
The Western Range hasd to build a stationaty launch mount where hot high speed airflow was directed upwards
to keep a dry-flow barrier between the external tank & the ambient atmosphere.
The ISS (Ice Supression System) was a pair of B-52 class jet engines running in a containment vault
& mixing the exhaust gasses with de-humidified air and feed into the launchmount base where it
would flow upward at a rate to keep the local ambient air containting moisture off the tank.
SLC-6
<Within>
Several other operation issues remained unresolved. Because it appeared that tank icing would be much more severe at VAFB than at Kennedy, an additional $12.8 million was spent on ET Area icing-protection.(41) The Air Force added two jet engines near the launch mounts, hoping that the warm exhaust flowing through ducts will sufficiently warm the tanks. But as one Air Force Officer reported, "We don't know if it will work or not."(42) A 1986 Senate report warned that the icing problem remained "very significant."(43)
LordMorpheus
Diamond Member
yeah, shuttle gets launched east, with the earth's rotation. Rather have it go south over the ocean than over inhabited soil.
When the location for the space program was selected they picked Florida for many reasons. Relatively remote location, equatorial proximity, and logistics. Reason that we dont have it in California is, that we lauch east due to the rotation of the earth and any problems would land in Nevada. Also the External Fuel tank is shipped by barge from New Orleans to the Cape. It would suck to have to take that around Mexico. Also the boosters are shipped in sections on trains and the train tracks dont really make it to Hawaii ;-)
Oh as for the guy that mentioned the 747. We do have one that carries the shuttle when it has to land on an alternate site. Yes it could fly to Hawaii. But nothing else could.
Oh as for the guy that mentioned the 747. We do have one that carries the shuttle when it has to land on an alternate site. Yes it could fly to Hawaii. But nothing else could.
LegendKiller
Lifer
Texas is the alternate facility. Primary landing is in Florida. They have a massive runway there.
CaptnKirk
Lifer
Easier solution: They could just start painting the stupid fuel tank again. When the shuttle was designed, the fuel tank was supposed to be painted after the foam insulation was applied. This design was specifically called for because of the weather in Florida. After the first couple of launches NASA just stopped painting the tank, to save 1000lbs, even though the paint was part of the original design.
The bottom line is that you can't reach the orbits that NASA is interested in for manned space flight from the west coast. Due to launch azimuth restrictions, you can only reach polar & retrograde orbits. Back in the early 80s when it was mandated that all government payloads fly on the shuttle the Air Force spent an enormous amount of money on SLC-6 and associated infrastructure at Vandenberg to launch shuttles. After the Challenger accident the Air Force went back to expendables and that was the end of planned west coast shuttle operations.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
