[AR] Re: shuttle SRBs (was Re: Re: Phenolic regression rate)
- From: Nels.Anderson@xxxxxxx
- To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 16:21:22 +0100
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 08. Februar 2018 um 05:09 Uhr
Von: "Florin Mingireanu" <florin.mingireanu82@xxxxxxxxx>
Can you iterate on what you mean that the escape is more difficult than from
a liquid booster?
The first thing I would want to do escaping a malfunctioning booster would be
to shut it down so it doesn't chase me. That's easy with a liquid but tricky
with a solid. If shutdown is not feasible, then, other things being equal,
I'll need an extra powerful escape system to outrun the still-accelerating
booster.
An Apollo-era escape analysis I've seen assumes that the failing Saturn would
continue on at constant velocity, describing this as a conservative assumption.
I presume that means it was assumed the engines had been shut down but no
assumptions were being made as to how fast the Saturn would decelerate. Apollo
aborts, according to this analysis, required 2-3 seconds' warning, depending on
which stage was exploding, if the escaping CM was to outrun the over-pressure
wave until it had dispersed sufficiently as to be non-hazardous.
Other related posts: