| General > General Technical Chat |
| Starship/SuperHeavy orbital Flight Test LIVE |
| << < (17/22) > >> |
| Sal Ammoniac:
--- Quote from: wraper on April 26, 2023, 10:53:52 pm ---Also this segmented construction is the reason why Challenger exploded. --- End quote --- The segmented construction was a contributor to the Challenger explosion, but the real cause was the poorly designed joints between the segments that would flex under load. That wasn't a major issue at the usual ambient temperatures at KSC, but when Challenger was launched the temperature was around 30F, and the rubber o-rings lacked resiliency and failed to contain the hot gases inside the segment. The joints were redesigned to prevent the issue that doomed Challenger and no further issues were encountered in over 100 subsequent flights. The SRBs were segmented because it was impractical to transport full-length boosters from the Utah plant to KSC. |
| tszaboo:
There is a lot of comparison to Nasa in this thread. I believe Nasa was first testing the launch abort systems for the Saturn V even before they launched it suborbital. Is there any abort systems on the Starship, other than the one we just saw demonstrated? |
| David Hess:
--- Quote from: Sal Ammoniac on April 26, 2023, 11:18:40 pm --- --- Quote from: wraper on April 26, 2023, 10:53:52 pm ---Also this segmented construction is the reason why Challenger exploded. --- End quote --- The segmented construction was a contributor to the Challenger explosion, but the real cause was the poorly designed joints between the segments that would flex under load. That wasn't a major issue at the usual ambient temperatures at KSC, but when Challenger was launched the temperature was around 30F, and the rubber o-rings lacked resiliency and failed to contain the hot gases inside the segment. The joints were redesigned to prevent the issue that doomed Challenger and no further issues were encountered in over 100 subsequent flights. The SRBs were segmented because it was impractical to transport full-length boosters from the Utah plant to KSC. --- End quote --- The ultimate cause has always been disputed, and NASA directed the blame elsewhere: https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/382045main_19%20-%2020090730.11.STS%20Problem%202003.pdf |
| asmi:
--- Quote from: Sal Ammoniac on April 26, 2023, 11:18:40 pm ---The SRBs were segmented because it was impractical to transport full-length boosters from the Utah plant to KSC. --- End quote --- I would imagine that the safety aspect was also important as SRB is basically a LOT of highly-explosive material with some moderator to control burning, and so if something goes sideways during transportation, it will be one hell of explosion. Splitting it in segments limits potential damage. |
| coppice:
--- Quote from: asmi on April 27, 2023, 03:03:51 pm --- --- Quote from: Sal Ammoniac on April 26, 2023, 11:18:40 pm ---The SRBs were segmented because it was impractical to transport full-length boosters from the Utah plant to KSC. --- End quote --- I would imagine that the safety aspect was also important as SRB is basically a LOT of highly-explosive material with some moderator to control burning, and so if something goes sideways during transportation, it will be one hell of explosion. Splitting it in segments limits potential damage. --- End quote --- The fuel is solid. Its not volatile. It burns ferociously once ignited, but like many high energy combustible or explosive materials its pretty hard to get started. One of the nice things about solid fuel rockets for things like air-to-air attacks is you want them to sit around for years unused with minimal risk and maintenance, and they do. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |