NASA Moon Rocket May Shake Too Much (Pogo Problem)

Associated Press ^ | Jan 19, 2008 | SETH BORENSTEIN

[ko_kyi]

I really enjoyed the chapters in Richard Feynman’s books that talk about his investigation into the shuttle disaster.

It seems that the shuttle is about as safe as they can make it now - about a 1% chance of total loss per flight. That said, 1% can become %100 if the machines are put in situations they weren’t designed for.

[null and void]

Absolutely!

[mad_as_he$$]

Thanks. Putting it into my seminar for new hire engineers.

[null and void]

Odd. I remember an ad in Aviation Leak and Space Technology

It had a buncha crudely drawn missiles flying towards the top of the page and one spiraling down out of control. In the forground is a man in a general's uniform scowling at the dud.

The caption was something like:

Don't give me 99% reliability! Would YOU fly it?

If it were the Shuttle, I would, in a heartbeat!

[null and void]

Excellent. I first saw it in a spam e-mail, and don’t know the original source. I expect it could be googled for that (I googled to get it for today)

[null and void]

You’re hiring engineers?

What kind, and where are you????

[Telepathic Intruder]

Hydrogen does have three times the energy of gasoline by weight, for example. The trouble is that liquid hydrogen has only one tenth the density of gasoline, so as a result it has only a third the energy by volume. I don’t know what type of solid fuels the SRB’s use, but for their small size they get much more lbs of thrust than the shuttle itself, which uses hydrogen.

[mad_as_he$$]

lol. Yes, mostly electrical and I am in Northern Nevada.

[null and void]

Need any wafer fab people?

[COBOL2Java]

NASA Moon Rocket May Shake Too Much (Pogo Problem)

I'm more worried about Owl...

[barkeep]

n&v, the horse’s patoot has been several places, National Review did it a few years back, but still a great one, too true.

The line in the article that got me cackling was Prof. Arenas’ declaration that “NASA has developed one of the safest and risk-controlled space programs in engineering history.”. Like there’s a lot to compare with in “engineering history” of space flight.

‘Scuse me Prof, but with the limited launches and two total losses, we are running about 1 in 50 lethal/passenger ratio. Bomber pilots from WWII might have admired that, but today we wouldn’t accept it as a loss level amongst pilots flying combat missions.

That said, give me a ticket on a shuttle, it would take physical restraint to keep me off the bird, I don’t care if the odds were 50/50 of return.

[RightWhale]

Was wondering when this would pop up. Solids are a rough ride, and a single solid with no other mass to dampen the pogo would be roughest of all.

[RightWhale]

Is it the UN space treaty that holds us back?

No. That is holding back private space development, not this gov't stuff.

[null and void]

That said, give me a ticket on a shuttle, it would take physical restraint to keep me off the bird, I don’t care if the odds were 50/50 of return.

Me too. We're funny that way...

[KevinDavis]

Ruh roh Shaggy...

[AntiKev]

To be fair, the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo spacecraft (and the Shuttle for that matter) were developed by Max Faget (born in British Honduras). And without the spacecraft, the rockets had nothing to send the astronauts up in. The Lunar Module was designed and built by Grumman Aircraft.

[Nonstatist]

Low frequency axial mode problems. Not the first time this has happened in rocket design.

[mad_as_he$$]

No. Left the semi world in 97. Could not take the Valley any more.

[null and void]

There’s life after silicon?

[Dead Dog]

Geezus Cripes, this is a fundamental design problem that has to be dealt with on EVERY rocket. It ain’t new, it isn’t a show stoper it is business as usual.

It’s rocket science, not brain surgery!