Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
Author Topic: Your biggest misconception about the shuttle  (Read 33476 times)
desktopsimmer
Shuttle Pilot
*****
Posts: 692


Re-Building Mir, with a Hammer and Sickle


WWW
« Reply #15 on: August 05, 2008, 04:53:09 PM »

Sorry for going off topic, last word on sail-planes/gliders from me.

The only 'thermals' that the shuttle can us would destroy a glass-ship, mind you to get to those heights be a very large wave lift Cheesy The Eta is a weird glider, those wings look like they'll snap at any moment Cheesy Personally, I prefer either the ASG29 or the Antares 18/20e. I created this for another sim Wink
Logged

Winner of the "weakest HW/OS combination on which SSM2007 runs with acceptable frame-rates" - Admin

Proud SSM2007 Linux User
Hyphon
Just joined training
*
Posts: 29



« Reply #16 on: August 05, 2008, 10:30:04 PM »

When I was (Real young) kid, I thought the external tank will deflate in space and carried back in the cargo bay...
(But no bad idea I think. That could really conserve some materials for building a new one every time the shuttle starts)

Remember, The Shuttle rides on that....  Shocked
 

Sorry for Off-Topic!  Lips sealed

Not really... It just a big tank with pumps and isolation... After the fuel is out, it's just littering the orbit or falls back into atmosphere.

The trick will be to make it stable enough to resist the force's through start while SRB's (attached to the shuttle and external tank) and Space Shuttle main engine's are running.
Logged
abortflight
Guest
« Reply #17 on: August 14, 2008, 06:22:06 PM »

I very recently thought the shuttle would go almost into orbit, do the mission in 1 orbit, then reenter and land again
Logged
STS78MEMBER
Mission Specialist
****
Posts: 347



« Reply #18 on: August 14, 2008, 08:39:40 PM »

Another misconception I had just remembered is that I never realized the "shuttle" was for low atmosphere missions.  I use to think it could go to the moon.
Logged

"No bucks; no Buck Rogers!"
uri_ba
Moderator
Shuttle Pilot
*****
Posts: 2,079


Proudly Addicted!


WWW
« Reply #19 on: August 22, 2008, 10:15:00 AM »

just discovered a new misconception I had..
always thought the Challenger blew up.. I just found out I was wrong...
Logged

The SSM-fans sites:
Blog: http://blog.ssm-fans.info
Wiki: http://wiki.ssm-fans.info
The Image Pad: http://upload.ssm-fans.info
you can contact me at uri@ssm-fans.info
desktopsimmer
Shuttle Pilot
*****
Posts: 692


Re-Building Mir, with a Hammer and Sickle


WWW
« Reply #20 on: August 22, 2008, 05:17:54 PM »

yes, mostly aerodynamic forces cause the breakup of the shuttle. An over simplified version: the right SRB separated at the faulty O-ring, which caused the ET to have massive structure failure, which placed the shuttle in a serious angle into the air stream, which could not cope with the forces...
Logged

Winner of the "weakest HW/OS combination on which SSM2007 runs with acceptable frame-rates" - Admin

Proud SSM2007 Linux User
JLM
Shuttle Pilot
*****
Posts: 601


"Space....the infinite frontier."-Spock


« Reply #21 on: November 11, 2008, 12:13:55 AM »

Almost everyone I know thinks the shuttle can land on the moon, But I tell them that the shuttle is an Shuttle vehicle and not a moon lander! Cool
Logged



Admin
Commander
Shuttle Pilot
*****
Posts: 4,665


Sic Itur Ad Astra


WWW
« Reply #22 on: November 11, 2008, 08:11:13 AM »

Almost everyone I know thinks the shuttle can land on the moon, But I tell them that the shuttle is an Shuttle vehicle and not a moon lander! Cool

Then show them SSM2007  Cool

/Admin
Logged

- The Space Shuttle Mission 2007(tm)Team -
JLM
Shuttle Pilot
*****
Posts: 601


"Space....the infinite frontier."-Spock


« Reply #23 on: November 13, 2008, 01:24:18 AM »

don't I d did Wink
Logged



SergeBMW
Guest
« Reply #24 on: November 15, 2008, 04:05:42 AM »

Before I went to KSC and went inside, I think was Discovery Space Shuttle, I always thought that the cargo bay was all for the astronauts to live in  Cheesy
Logged
IceManHG
Trainee
**
Posts: 63



« Reply #25 on: November 16, 2008, 07:04:05 AM »

I always assumed that the re-entry took only a few minutes....until I did my first full re-entry on STS-1.  Cheesy
Logged

STS Logbook started: 06/09/2008
----------------------
Missions completed: 2
Successful landings: 13
Shuttle Flight time: 09:20 hrs
SergeBMW
Guest
« Reply #26 on: November 16, 2008, 08:07:41 AM »

WOW, I wonder what was wrong with me, my previous post was odd lol.

Well ill rephrase it, before I ever went to KSC and inside the Discovery Space shuttle, I always used to think that the cargo bay was where the astronauts lived, did experiments or whatever where they dont need there space suits.
Logged
bjbeard
Mission Specialist
****
Posts: 292


At T-9 minutes and holding...


« Reply #27 on: March 01, 2011, 05:28:10 AM »

Cheap

Common place

Moneymaker

Bout covers it...
Logged

4merly known as blazingstang
AMD Phenom X4 965 Deneb Black
Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3
GeIL Enhance CORSA PC12800 16GB
EVGA GTX 550 Ti Thermaltake 850W PS
Cras
Astronaut
***
Posts: 182


« Reply #28 on: April 20, 2011, 05:42:13 PM »

I too thought Challenger exploded.  Saw on "When we Left Earth" when that ran on Discovery channel that the crew actually survived the break up of the shuttle.  That was some very sad news to hear indeed.

And I also thought that during re-entry that the Shuttle was engulfed in that plasma glow for a lot longer than I have experienced in SSMS.
Logged
Augustus
Trainee
**
Posts: 64



« Reply #29 on: July 20, 2011, 07:01:18 PM »

When I saw my first launch I thought the Main Engines are not working. Cool
I know it better today.
Logged

This is a signature forum outer Space...
 ...not really.
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC
SMF Theme Designed by XP Concept