Space Shuttle Era: "External Tank and Solid Rocket Boosters" 2011 NASA KSC

Author: Jeff Quitney
97905 View
4m 47s Lenght
279 Rating

more at http://scitech.quickfound.net/astro/space_shuttle_news.html Overview of the Space Shuttle External Tank (ET) and Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs). playlist: Space Shuttle HIstory http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL432F188226C29E68&feature=view_all "Study of Solid Rocket Motors for a Space Shuttle Booster" 1972 Morton Thiokol http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730021088_1973021088.pdf INTRODUCTION The feasibility of producing solid propellant rocket motors up to 260 in. in diameter has been demonstrated through a series of programs funded by the Air Force and by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. This study, therefore, was devoted to an in-depth analysis of baseline solid rocket motor (SRM) booster stages, suitable for application to a Space Shuttle Transportation System, and their attendant subsystems and costs. The study encompassed all facets of development and production of an SRM Stage, buildup of the stage with the orbiter at the launch site, and issues associated with total vehicle function, environmental effects, and booster recovery. Costs were given special emphasis, since this probably is the most critical issue in the selection of a booster type. Space Shuttle Booster concepts evaluated cover both the series and parallel burn (with the orbiter main engines) and include three separate classes of motor size. The study scope initially encompassed the 156 and 120 in. SRM's; however, late in the study, a 260 in. SRM configuration was considered. Table I summarizes the study scope, showing that the 156 in. stage was given special emphasis. Definition of SRM designs was based upon inputs from vehicle study contractors. DDT & E and production program costs were estimated in detail for the NASA mission model (440 operational launches) and for alternate launch rates building up to 40, 20, and 10 launches per year. In addition to evaluating selected baseline designs in detail, design and cost data were provided to all vehicle study contractors for their specific SRM configurations. Data for 29 different stage configurations were provided to vehicle contractors. Areas of uncertainty were evaluated, as was SRM recovery potential. SRM Stage recovery will result in a significant reduction in program costs. Design and cost data presented in the final report are for an SRM Stage associated with a large payload bay (15 x 60 ft) orbiter. SRM Stage data associated with small payload bay orbiters have been provided to vehicle contractors. SUMMARY SRM booster stages can be developed within the NASA time schedule (FMOF in March 1978) with minimum technical and cost risk. Required technology has been demonstrated. Areas of concern or uncertainty were evaluated and no problems were uncovered which would prevent selection of an SRM booster. The study shows that a segmented 156 in. SRM booster provides the lowest cost per flight for the parallel configuration. The 260 in. diameter motor provides a lower cost per flight for the series configuration. If a series configuration is to be considered further, a more detailed evaluation of the 156 in. versus 260 in. SRM booster should be conducted... also see: Space Shuttle Main Engine and Solid Rocket Booster MSFC 1980 http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19810007588_1981007588.pdf "External Tank: Legacy of Success" 2010 NASA (slides with cutaway ET) http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20100035696_2010037222.pdf

Comments

  1. Absolutely Amazing!!!
  2. Imagine how ppl in future will think how crazy we were by sending them in those things :')
    Shuttle Era is the best
  3. The orange tank is not recovered?
  4. Is 4:40 showing burn-through on an SRB o-ring?
  5. He makes it sound as if the ISS is American, when it was originally started by Russia. Plus he's trying to make it sound as if the shuttle design is best, when the Soyuz design has harmed less people and gives a smoother take off.
  6. Oh wow I didn't know the external tank burned up, I thought it too was reused. Thanks for posting this.