Space Launch System - Orion
Discussion
Smiljan said:
I don’t get why those folks just pour negativity on this entire program without actually taking any time and effort to see what it’s doing and why this particular vehicle is being used now.
Read the entire thread. There's a reason SLS has a lot of criticism. You can fully support the goals of the mission whilst not being enamoured by the method. No need for pejoratives.Smiljan said:
Some great comments on the thread again after the muppets moaning about poor camera blah
You really are an odious little troll. Anyone who doesn’t share your pov is a “muppet”?I’d love you to call me that to my face…. I suggest you wind your neck in. Anyway, this isn’t the forum for personal insults; as stated by another poster in response to your attitude: take it to NPE.
Anyway back to pictures - there do look to be some belters so I anticipate some excellent lunar views - hopefully real time moving 4K sort of stuff, which would be, I’m guessing, the first time since we got the low frame rate stuff from the lunar module window.
There are also some crackers from a chap called Krauss iirc with a lot of remote camera shots.
Dog Star said:
Anyway back to pictures - there do look to be some belters so I anticipate some excellent lunar views - hopefully real time moving 4K sort of stuff, which would be, I’m guessing, the first time since we got the low frame rate stuff from the lunar module window.
Have a look at the digital imagery that was sent back by the Japanese space probe Kagua in 2008 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1KWtG66lEQ
NASA's LRO has been imaging the moon from orbit for 13 years - although chiefly stills rather than movies.
Eric Mc said:
I assume that the Shuttle launch structure needed a fair bit of refurbishment after each launch too.
Not sure how much damage the Saturn V did to its tower.
Wonder if that's because they use solid fuel boosters - do they burn hotter?Not sure how much damage the Saturn V did to its tower.
NB Artemis trivia here: https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/15/world/artemis-i...
Edited by Simpo Two on Thursday 17th November 19:04
Flooble said:
Is that the one they were only planning to use once anyway as the next SLS needed a different tower, or am I confused?
They don’t technically need a new mobile launch tower until the larger SLS Block 1B rocket for the 4th flight - Artemis IV. This is intended for 2027, but don’t hold your breath on that. The existing 355ft tower would be too short for the extended upper stage of the Block 1B. NASA are having the second, 380 ft mobile launch tower built at the moment by Bechtel. It goes without saying that it’s late and over budget too. It’ll probably be finished by late 2025.
Simpo Two said:
Wonder if that's because they use solid fuel boosters - do they burn hotter?
NB Artemis trivia here: https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/15/world/artemis-i...
Don't know for sure but that was the first thing I thought of. Also, on ignition the solids go from nothing to instant full thrust, so there are multiple suopersonic shock waves generated in an around the pad. You can see them rippling through the exhaust smoke. It was the same with the Shuttle. I bet most of the damage comes from that.NB Artemis trivia here: https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/15/world/artemis-i...
Edited by Simpo Two on Thursday 17th November 19:04
They’re able to selectively vary the propellant grain in the solid boosters, so they effectively throttle back for max-Q. Then they throttle back up after, just like the main engines.
I don’t know if they do that for the launch too. The main engines take off at “100% power”, then throttle up to 109%, I believe it is on SLS. This is to avoid wrecking the pad. They did that with Shuttle too, but since those engines were meant to be reused, it had a lower full throttle. About 106% I think it was.
SLS throttles back the main engines a little for booster jettison. Then goes full send.
I don’t know if they do that for the launch too. The main engines take off at “100% power”, then throttle up to 109%, I believe it is on SLS. This is to avoid wrecking the pad. They did that with Shuttle too, but since those engines were meant to be reused, it had a lower full throttle. About 106% I think it was.
SLS throttles back the main engines a little for booster jettison. Then goes full send.
Beati Dogu said:
They’re able to selectively vary the propellant grain in the solid boosters, so they effectively throttle back for max-Q. Then they throttle back up after, just like the main engines.
I don’t know if they do that for the launch too. The main engines take off at “100% power”, then throttle up to 109%, I believe it is on SLS. This is to avoid wrecking the pad. They did that with Shuttle too, but since those engines were meant to be reused, it had a lower full throttle. About 106% I think it was.
SLS throttles back the main engines a little for booster jettison. Then goes full send.
Once they are lit though, they can't be shut down?I don’t know if they do that for the launch too. The main engines take off at “100% power”, then throttle up to 109%, I believe it is on SLS. This is to avoid wrecking the pad. They did that with Shuttle too, but since those engines were meant to be reused, it had a lower full throttle. About 106% I think it was.
SLS throttles back the main engines a little for booster jettison. Then goes full send.
Leithen said:
Beati Dogu said:
They’re able to selectively vary the propellant grain in the solid boosters, so they effectively throttle back for max-Q. Then they throttle back up after, just like the main engines.
I don’t know if they do that for the launch too. The main engines take off at “100% power”, then throttle up to 109%, I believe it is on SLS. This is to avoid wrecking the pad. They did that with Shuttle too, but since those engines were meant to be reused, it had a lower full throttle. About 106% I think it was.
SLS throttles back the main engines a little for booster jettison. Then goes full send.
Once they are lit though, they can't be shut down?I don’t know if they do that for the launch too. The main engines take off at “100% power”, then throttle up to 109%, I believe it is on SLS. This is to avoid wrecking the pad. They did that with Shuttle too, but since those engines were meant to be reused, it had a lower full throttle. About 106% I think it was.
SLS throttles back the main engines a little for booster jettison. Then goes full send.
Eric Mc said:
They aren't actually "throttled" in the conventional sense. Once lit they will burn at the full thrust related to the amount of propellant that is being burned. The thrust varies due to the fact that the fuel is profiled in the tubes so that, as the burn progresses, the thrust goes up and down at predetermined points. There is no control over this process once the booster ignites. It happens automatically.
Thank you Eric. 
Leithen said:
Eric Mc said:
They aren't actually "throttled" in the conventional sense. Once lit they will burn at the full thrust related to the amount of propellant that is being burned. The thrust varies due to the fact that the fuel is profiled in the tubes so that, as the burn progresses, the thrust goes up and down at predetermined points. There is no control over this process once the booster ignites. It happens automatically.
Thank you Eric. Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff