Timeline for What is this large fan in front of the Space Shuttle during Ground Turnaround?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 19, 2020 at 6:27 | vote | accept | Jörg W Mittag | ||
| Dec 23, 2019 at 16:47 | comment | added | Digger | @OrganicMarble Glad to hear it! Y'all used to rack our brains all the time! | |
| Dec 18, 2019 at 1:12 | comment | added | Organic Marble | @Digger I'm glad to hear it wasn't a Systems switch! I was racking my brain. | |
| Dec 18, 2019 at 0:30 | comment | added | Digger | @OrganicMarble Also, independent of c of g concerns, one could make a case that the forward RCS dump procedure, with the subsequent securing of the subject system, could prevent a bad day from getting worse if the Orbiter suffered a hard nose slapdown on landing (lots of relatively fragile plumbing located a good distance away from the main landing gear center of rotation). | |
| Dec 18, 2019 at 0:28 | comment | added | Digger | @OrganicMarble Prolly not one you saw too often (since you guys would never let us attain a "nominal end of mission" state)! After a (nominal) OMS reentry burn, the PLT set the 4 L,R OMS He PRESS/VAP ISOL switches to CL, thereby mitigating the (remote) chance that OMS oxidizer vapor could contact OMS fuel vapor (not a good thing for hypergolic propellant). | |
| Dec 17, 2019 at 2:14 | comment | added | Organic Marble | @Digger I'll bite - what was that switch throw? | |
| Dec 10, 2019 at 16:24 | comment | added | Digger | FYI, while the Orbiter was in the reentry phase during a nominal end of mission, there was at least one switch throw, performed by the pilot, that was done solely to make the ground crew's job safer. | |
| Dec 10, 2019 at 13:12 | comment | added | J... | @Arvo That's not for the metrically challenged - NASA are the metrically challenged ones! | |
| Dec 10, 2019 at 9:35 | history | edited | Jörg W Mittag | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Add windspeed in m/s.
|
| Dec 10, 2019 at 9:34 | comment | added | Jörg W Mittag | @Arvo: Fair enough :-D | |
| Dec 10, 2019 at 9:07 | comment | added | Arvo | For the metrically challenged (in some regions): 45mph = 20m/s ;) | |
| Dec 10, 2019 at 7:10 | comment | added | ikrase | Sounds like mostly hypergol, as I thought... except for the ammonia. | |
| Dec 10, 2019 at 7:09 | comment | added | Jörg W Mittag | The linked document lists "hydrogen, monomethyl hydrazine, and hydrazine and ammonia". I added it to the answer. | |
| Dec 10, 2019 at 7:09 | history | edited | Jörg W Mittag | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Add examples of toxic and explosive gases in response to comment by @ikrase.
|
| Dec 10, 2019 at 5:47 | comment | added | ikrase | Is it known what toxic gases they are worried about? Is there any hypergol left in the shuttle on landing? | |
| Dec 9, 2019 at 17:57 | history | answered | Jörg W Mittag | CC BY-SA 4.0 |