Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Shuttle revisited.

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 17 2013 @ 10:03 PM
link   
The damage to the left wing would have comprimised aerodynamics and the drag would increase on the left side, I have no idea how much reaction control jets are usable in the atmosphere. And the shuttle is indicated to be a glider on reentry. Trying to compensate for the drag could have caused the side way motion which seams resonable. But that is dependent on location of the video. The shuttle reenterd out over the Pacific and there is videos showing what appered to be debris even at that stage..




posted on May, 17 2013 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by jvarga390
 


The shuttle used an aircraft style flight control system once in the atmosphere. They used elevons instead of the traditional aileron/elevator configuration because of the delta shape. The RCS was only effective in orbit.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Columbia's RCSs did fire during the reentry to try to correct the orientation. spaceflightnow.com...


RCS thruster R2R fired briefly at 8:56:17 and :54 and R3R fired briefly at 8:56:17 and :52.


There were more firings of those and other thrusters in the last minutes of Columbia.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by wildespace
 


They were still fairly high in the atmosphere, where the RCS may have been effective in correcting the drag. Once they get lower, where the air is denser then the elevons take over, and the RCS becomes ineffective. In the thin atmosphere where they broke up, control surfaces become almost useless, as they need to move air to work.

They were still technically in space when the break up of the orbiter began. The first reports of debris being shed were at 230,000 feet. When they crossed into Texas they were still over 200,000 feet. Flight control surfaces generally work under 100,000 (the A-12 holds the record for air breathing powered flight, at just over 90,000 feet IIRC), but at the higher altitudes they take a little time for them to work sometimes, due to the lack of air to push out of the way to make a maneuver.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 06:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I suggest you read the reentry timeline at spaceflightnow.com...

Columbia made several controlled banks using the control surfaces before the breakup.

08:49:32 a.m. - Initial roll. Mach 24.51.
08:50:03 a.m. - MCC-Commentator: "Columbia's altitude 48 statute miles as it begins the first in a series of four banks to dissipate speed as it descends into the atmosphere, banking to the right now, a steep bank of 60 degrees and approaching the west coast of the United States. Columbia's speed 16,620 miles per hour, range to touchdown at the Kennedy Space Center runway 3,450 statute miles."
08:50:56 a.m. - MCC-Commentator: "Columbia in almost an 80-degree-bank to the right to dissipate speed, the first of four banks it performs as it approaches Florida to slow down as it descends. Altitude now 47 miles or about 248,000 feet. The shuttle's speed is 16,400 miles per hour."
08:56:55 a.m. - First roll reversal complete. H=218,817; Mach: 20.76.
08:57:11 a.m. - MCC-Commentator: It's banking now back to the left, the second in a series of four banks that dissipate speed of the spacecraft as it becomes an aircraft and descends into the atmosphere toward Florida. Wings angled about 75 degrees to the left."

As the aerodynamic drag increased due to the problems, the system applied elevon trims. So, basically, there was enough airflow to use control surfaces before the breakup. The RCSs were firing to assist elevons in counteracting the increasing aerodynamic drag.
edit on 18-5-2013 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by wildespace
 


I have read the timeline. At the point they were at the flight controls were barely effective, but the RCS was also effective. The deeper they came into the atmosphere the more effective the flight controls became, the less effective the RCS became. It was the opposite as they went higher. Flight controls are only effective if there is air for them to move. At the altitude the break up occurred there was barely air for them to move, but it was there, so they worked (although not nearly as well as they did lower down in the atmosphere).



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 07:43 AM
link   
The shuttle's re-entry, up to the point where it entirely disintegrated is known in detail. I don't see what you want to say in your post, even if we assume that the shuttle, at some point, flew "sideways". (Which I personally don't remember but it's quite possible it did at some point).



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by wildespace
I, for one, understand what the OP is asking about here. I'll rephrase: on one of the amateur videos of the Shuttle Columbia breakup, the orbiter is seen flying sideways when the camera zooms in on it, and the OP wants our thoughts on this, i.e. was the orbiter really flying sideways at least for some time before breaking up.


I don't see why it would matter really, but if I would need to know whether the Shuttle flew sideways at some point, I would use other sources than a Youtube video and some "amateur's" impressions what they think to see from a video. Since there is *extensive* reports about any detail of that final flight incl. all movements and forces there is no reason to speculate based on a Youtube video.
edit on 18-5-2013 by flexy123 because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join