Slashdot Mirror
Shuttle Main Engine Test to be Webcast
spamacon writes "Periodically, the Space Shuttle Main Engines (SSMEs) get tested, and sometimes the public is invited to witness the event. Well, now they've gone and done it right: this Friday, they are going to broadcast the test over the internet (with audio, so go out and buy that big subwoofer you've had your eye one). The webcast link is here, and a little history of the SSME is located here. If you are in southern Mississississ(stop me!)ippi on Friday, go have a peek. Should be a blast (ugh)."
Does anyone know which shuttle's engines will be tested?
Youre gonna slashdot the space shuttle, you bastards!!!
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
from the news blurb (emphasis mine):
:)
The streaming presentation will begin about 30 minutes before the test firing, roughly at 5:30 pm CST (23:30 GMT) Friday. Note that these times are the scheduled times. However, since this really is rocket science, times are approximate.
Even NASA has a sense of humor
Have EVDO, will travel.
On the other, they're expensive as hell, after 30 years of flying they're only just now looking like they're even close to getting them fully reusable (does it count if you have to remove them and tear them apart after each and every mission 'just to check'), and contrary to what NASA will tell you they aren't the only reusable engine out there (other engines aren't classed as such, mainly by NASA, but have had >2,000 seconds on them during testing, and that's about the same as most of the shuttle engines have, only the other engines probably need less maintenance.)
Oh yeah and they burn hydrogen. Hydrogen gives great exhaust velocity, but it's really seriously not very dense. This makes the tanks, fuel lines, and pumps much heavier, (that external tank costs $100 million, oh yeah and they throw it away each time).
Current thinking is that LOX/LH is about 6% worse overall than LOX/Kerosene for getting to orbit- the rocket needs more delta-v due to the extra vehicle weight and other technical issues and that swamps the extra performance of the hydrogen; oh yeah and LOX/Kerosene may not have needed an external tank to be thrown away because Kerosene is much denser.
All in all. Hey, it works! Anyway, pass the popcorn someone; it's still a rocket engine, and it makes a loud noise. ;-)
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"A problem for Linux users: it requires RealONE Player to play the stream, or does it?
Whatever happened to Linear Aerospike rocket engines, that were supposed to be more efficient than conventional ones with bell-shaped nozzles? In theory they could be made anular as well as linear. Wouldn't these make good replacements for the shuttles main engines, making it more efficient? What's holding back their development? I once read that they were considered for the space shuttle when it was being designed but they were considered too new and radical.
Stick Men
I assume this is Morton Thiokol doing the testing? I'd sort of forgotten they still built the things after the Challenger disaster (not that it was their fault, I know NASA waived its own temperature regs), this article indicates they have a $2.4 billion contract through 2004.
Geez, 1+ million lbs. propellant per booster! Interesting, isn't it that Goddard developed liquid-fueled rockets as a modernization of solid-fueled rockets, then we later went back to solid fuel for so many applications. I guess solid fuel's biggest disadvantage is that you can't turn it off...
IIRC there were, at the outset of the shuttle program, proposals for a one-piece SRB casing. The only reason for a segmented booster was to facilitate shipping; a 1-piece could only have been delivered by barge. I think some politician or other was from UT, and well you get the picture.