e-FTW
New electron smell
Yes, three of them.
I'll see myself out...
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I'll see myself out...
They will. The individual engines will be fired in a staggered pattern to avoid improper and damaging vibration. From what I've heard the staggering will all happen in a fraction of a second though. The FH static fire will only be a few seconds because the hold downs cannot withstand any more than that.
e-FTW
New electron smell
Starting to wonder if FH will actually make it through the static fire...
Fingers crossed!
With computer/ software monitoring, the systems will autoshutdown the moment anything goes out of range. Although, can't stop a turbopump instantly..
They may do multiple partial ignition tests to validate the structural links.
Are the hold downs in the exhaust path? I thought the flame trench was the limiting factor (or am I thinking of 40?).
Most testing was single engine at Stennis Space Center, there was also a 20 second test fire February 20, 1981 before the first launch of Columbia on April 12th.
(regurgitation of Wikipedia)
Space Shuttle engines were fired before the solid side boosters. The Shuttle engines could be shut off if they read an anomaly. Once the side boosters were lit then the rocket had to launch. I believe there was a number of Space Shuttle launches stopped after the Shuttle engines lit but the boosters had not. Yes. There is a list of incidents here:
Space Shuttle main engine - Wikipedia
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Mike1080i
Member
There was also MPTA-098, basically the aft end of an orbiter with all three SSMEs used for flight certification testing at Stennis. All the flight orbiters had at least one Flight Readiness Firing on the pad prior to their first flight. Here's a YT link to Challenger's FRF, which actually uncovered a serious issue, a buildup of gaseous hydrogen in the orbiter’s aft compartment. They last a little bit longer than F9 static firings.
Last edited:
While we are deviating a bit towards SRBs.. and with the earlier discussion of hold-down clamps... the Shuttle SRB's were bolted to the platform using 3.5" diameter studs and a "frangible nut" that was split in half by detonation of a pyro charge contained within it at launch time.
Should the nut fail to split and release the SRB, the booster generated enough thrust that it simply snapped the 3.5" stud and lifted off anyway!
Should the nut fail to split and release the SRB, the booster generated enough thrust that it simply snapped the 3.5" stud and lifted off anyway!
Mike1080i
Member
My last drifting off topic post on this...
That reminds me, in a earlier thread I mentioned a video that had clips like this, but at the time I couldn't find them on YT. I recently found them. At 6:27 in you can see the nuts do their thing to release the SRBs.
Wow, that is a fantastic video! Thanks so much.
Oh my God I am the biggest nerd ever!!
So cool to see the slow-mo!!
Yuri_G
Member
Wow! Finally, we get to see just how incredible the FH is going to look.
Interesting that the grid fins on the center core are painted, those are the old style, and I believe the side cores are the new titanium fins.
Yes, the interconnection pieces seem modest in size, especially at the base.
I want to see better photos of the transport vehicles. Are they locked together in some way? And why is one labeled AFT BOOSTER Y and the other AFT BOOSTER?
Interesting that the grid fins on the center core are painted, those are the old style, and I believe the side cores are the new titanium fins.
Yes, the interconnection pieces seem modest in size, especially at the base.
I want to see better photos of the transport vehicles. Are they locked together in some way? And why is one labeled AFT BOOSTER Y and the other AFT BOOSTER?
Whoa!
Start launching several of these guys per week and you could really accomplish something!
RT
MacGreiner
5YJ
Similar threads
- Article
