Space Shuttle Liftoff

[EagleRJ]

Rolling the Shuttle on its back during ascent points the antennas back in line-of-sight with the Cape and downrange tracking stations. It also positions the orbiter for an RTLS (Return to Launch Site) Abort- essentially a giant Split-S used in the event of an abort between SRB separation and the point at which they have enough energy to reach their Trans-Atlantic abort field in Rota, Spain. The orbiter is rolled immediately after liftoff since it's a lot safer than waiting until the stack is hypersonic further downrange.
The orbiter flies "upside down" in orbit to position the heat shield toward any incoming micro-meteorites, as well as maintaining line-of-sight for the comm and data links with ground stations.

The External Tank does not need to "fall away" from the shuttle, since at the point of separation, only microgravity remains. The orbiter's Reaction Control System pulls the orbiter away from the tank, and remaining propellant is vented from the nose of the tank. That induces a spin, ensuring the tank burns up completely during re-entry.

The payload bay doors are opened as soon as possible upon reaching orbit, since there are large radiators under the doors. The avionics and life-support systems on the Shuttle would quickly overheat without the radiators, since there's nowhere for the heat to go. If the doors couldn't be opened, it would be a quick return to the ground (AOA- Abort Once Around, another abort phase).

 

[Genital Leech]

I heard somewhere that the space shuttle rolls 90 degrees right after liftoff in order to point the antennas toward mission control to maintain good communitcation.

WTF is "communitcation"??????

Just curious.....

Bye bye---Genital Leech

 

[frog_flyer]

you're an idiot

 

[sleddriver71]

you're an idiot

Maybe he just really wanted to be part of the thread and couldn't think of anything better to write about. Let's see, communitcation, one letter misspelled out of 13, I've seen worse. His response in this thread is probably just as much a waste of space as mine is in responding to your response about his response...

 

[wmuflyguy]

I like how after people post a reliable source for the reason (from the NASA website or so)

People will still post some opinion that dosn't fully agree with the reliable source. Guess the NASA guys aren;t as smart as us pilots eh?

 

[dseagrav]

Guess the NASA guys aren't as smart as us pilots eh?

If NASA is so great, why do they need NASA forms? If they're so smart, why did they crash the Mars Polar Lander? Why did they blow up the Columbia? Or Challenger? Why did they crash the Genesis return capsule? NASA's only "success" so far was the Apollo missions, which are widely known to have been faked. And if it weren't for the Russians and the French covering for us on the ISS,it never would have been built.

Face it, NASA is a money-sucking black hole of breaucracy and pork projects that has never done any real science in its entire existence. It diverts funds desperately needed for government executive bonuses, supporting airline executive bonuses, killing more brown people for Jesus, and corporate welfare. The best thing we as Americans (and as human beings) can do at this point is to shut down the entire operation and leave the space innovation to real pioneers like Burt Rutan, Al Gore, Energia, and ESA.

 

[sleddriver71]

If NASA is so great, why do they need NASA forms? If they're so smart, why did they crash the Mars Polar Lander? Why did they blow up the Columbia? Or Challenger? Why did they crash the Genesis return capsule? NASA's only "success" so far was the Apollo missions, which are widely known to have been faked. And if it weren't for the Russians and the French covering for us on the ISS,it never would have been built.

Face it, NASA is a money-sucking black hole of breaucracy and pork projects that has never done any real science in its entire existence. It diverts funds desperately needed for government executive bonuses, supporting airline executive bonuses, killing more brown people for Jesus, and corporate welfare. The best thing we as Americans (and as human beings) can do at this point is to shut down the entire operation and leave the space innovation to real pioneers like Burt Rutan, Al Gore, Energia, and ESA.

So because NASA has had accidents, they are a total failure? Are you saying Burt Rutan, Al Gore(?), Energia, and ESA haven't had any accidents/mistakes? "Widely known to have been faked?" What is widely known, in your mind? I think that everyone would agree that NASA is involved in highly risky operations and because they have had accidents does not make them a failure. I guess any war that was ever fought would be considered a failure if anyone died, regardless if the final objective was met? I'm just trying to figure out your thought process because it doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[wmuflyguy]

If NASA is so great, why do they need NASA forms? If they're so smart, why did they crash the Mars Polar Lander? Why did they blow up the Columbia? Or Challenger? Why did they crash the Genesis return capsule? NASA's only "success" so far was the Apollo missions, which are widely known to have been faked. And if it weren't for the Russians and the French covering for us on the ISS,it never would have been built.

Face it, NASA is a money-sucking black hole of breaucracy and pork projects that has never done any real science in its entire existence. It diverts funds desperately needed for government executive bonuses, supporting airline executive bonuses, killing more brown people for Jesus, and corporate welfare. The best thing we as Americans (and as human beings) can do at this point is to shut down the entire operation and leave the space innovation to real pioneers like Burt Rutan, Al Gore, Energia, and ESA.

At least you made me laugh.

 

[wmuflyguy]

So because NASA has had accidents, they are a total failure? Are you saying Burt Rutan, Al Gore(?), Energia, and ESA haven't had any accidents/mistakes? "Widely known to have been faked?" What is widely known, in your mind? I think that everyone would agree that NASA is involved in highly risky operations and because they have had accidents does not make them a failure. I guess any war that was ever fought would be considered a failure if anyone died, regardless if the final objective was met? I'm just trying to figure out your thought process because it doesn't make much sense to me.

I got 10 bucks it was all sarcasm....either that or it was flame. C'mon he gave credit to the FRENCH! That is a dead give-away.

 

[sleddriver71]

I got 10 bucks it was all sarcasm....either that or it was flame. C'mon he gave credit to the FRENCH! That is a dead give-away.

You might be right, I seem to be pretty gullible when it comes to sarcasm on this site. I thought what's his name was serious for the longest time about the oil being produced from the center of the earth thread. He had to write me and tell me he was being sarcastic.