Shuttle Foam Test Yields Hole in Wing (Produces vs Yields)

AP ^ | 07/07/2003 | MARCIA DUNN, AP Aerospace Writer

[Normal4me]

In all fairness, Thiokol engineers warned NASA not to fly.

I don't understand how this test and results would have not had a MAJOR aerodynamic effect on the orbiter on accent. You think the orbiter would have flown 17K MPH with a 16" hole in its wing without blowing apart before reaching space? BS!

[american_ranger]

I believe that the story was actually the British and they were testing the Chunnel train locomotive windshield. Other that that, the story is correct. They did not thaw the chicken first.

[El Gato]

I'm curious about this gun. Doesn't the piece of foam need to be shaped to fit the barrel ... or not?

It does, but this "gun" has a square or at least rectangular bore. That is one of it's changeable barrels has a none circular bore. It is a smooth bore, so the "projectile" need not rotate. Plus it uses a sabot and a stripper to "hold" the sabot. The sabot provides the seal to the barrel as the nitrogen gas pushes it and the payload down the barrel, but it then stripped off from the payload, so that only the payload hits the "target".

[El Gato]

I'm curious about this gun. Doesn't the piece of foam need to be shaped to fit the barrel ... or not?

It does, but this "gun" has a square or at least rectangular bore. That is one of it's changeable barrels has a none circular bore. It is a smooth bore, so the "projectile" need not rotate. Plus it uses a sabot and a stripper to "hold" the sabot. The sabot provides the seal to the barrel as the nitrogen gas pushes it and the payload down the barrel, but it then stripped off from the payload, so that only the payload hits the "target".

[Carry_Okie]

In all fairness, Thiokol engineers warned NASA not to fly.

Thiokol management was another matter.

You think the orbiter would have flown 17K MPH with a 16" hole in its wing without blowing apart before reaching space? BS!

Correct. There's no telling how many different combinations of strike location and attitude of the impacting foam object there might be. Each might result in a different degree of damage. Perhaps that's one reason that the problem has taken so long to manifest.

[El Gato]

Video of foam test.

HOLY SHIITE!

[The Westerner]

"This event is significant because the pattern of damage on this flight was similar to STS-87 but to a much lesser degree. The reason for the change in the type of foam is due to the desire of NASA to use 'environmentally friendly' materials in the space program. Freon was used in the production of the previous foam. This method was eliminated in favor of foam that did not require freon for its production. MSFC is investigating the consideration that some characteristics of the new foam may not be known for the ascent environment."

That quote was from your original post on 2/4/03.

My question: will the freon be put back into the foam before the next mission?

[El Gato]

At least one "fact" is wrong in the snopes article:

The chicken gun (also known as the chicken cannon, turkey gun, or rooster booster) has been around since 1972.

Such bird guns have been around longer than that. In 1973 or '74 when I was in the Air Force. I was first told a related story about the use of one at, IIRC, Lockheed with the actual event taking place quite a few years earlier. That story, by an engineer who had seen the high speed films, was from the days when they used live, but sedated, chickens. The story went that the chicken in question woke up before being fired, and could be seen "putting on the brakes", with wings out and cupped forward, in an apparent attempt to stop before hitting the windscreen. Even the guy who told me the story thought that the bird's wings and body were probably just responding to mechanical forces, there being too little time for it to actually react to what was going on.

[XBob]

please ask a specific question.

surely you know the TPS (thermal protection system) is made up of various types of materials, RCC, tiles, and blankets.

surely you have seen the first video of underside and the the impact as it occured, not just the popular video looking from the dorsal side of the orbiter at the foam dropping under the wing, then reappearing in snowflakes at the bottom.

[El Gato]

surely you have seen the first video of underside and the the impact as it occured,

I haven't seen that one. Do you have a link?

[XBob]

look at our 3000+ comment thread,

Observation on TPS damage on Orbiter

and look at budge's image files:

Budge's image files

[XBob]

70 - follow the links in 71, to "Observation on TPS damage", somewhere buried in there in the first 500 posts is the link, posted numbers of times. I think it is on a NASA 'manned spaceflight' program website.

I downloaded it, and still review it regularly, but I neglected to get the link address, unfortunately. But it is/was there.

[XBob]

the name of the 1mb file I have is "ET208Mag.mpeg", and I downloaded it on 5 Feb.

[XBob]

found it.

goto

http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/shuttle/countdown/sts107/vidtoc-b.htm

and there are 3 clips:

External Tank Debris Footage
Clip 1, Clip 2, Clip 3

[DoughtyOne]

Yes, pretty interesting.

[DoughtyOne]

This test seems to have created a hit on the top side of the wing. As such it appears to have created damage, but the actual hit wasn't located there.

If this is the bottom, and I've lost perspective, then the strike doesn't mean as much to me because there are no tiles.

Either way I'm not convinced this test shows particular meaning.

I don't have any questions. These are my thoughts on the test. If you think these thoughts are faulty, I don't mind. I'm just not sure you addressed these perspectives in the comments you made to me.

And no, I'm not trying to give you a hard time.

I had seen the initial shots on the page you linked. Af for Budge's graphics, they wouldn't load for me. The site seemed busy.

[DoughtyOne]

Thank you for the link to the three videos. The view from the left rear, that was just over the plane of the wing was the clearest shot I'd seen of the strike.

[Budge]

Wait a minute you guys. It was bonesmccoy and XBob (as well as many others) that had this nailed from the first.

Thanks, snopercod, that really was/is an epic thread.

I think FReepers had the disaster nailed from the first, and the research that went into that thread is incredible.

[exnavy]

Wow, insightful post, thanks.

[Budge]

76 - D1, I have noticed the site with my pics will get slow, especially with a lot of hits. I hope you'll keep trying because there are a lot of pics and graphs that may be difficult to find now, and may be useful to you.

If this is the bottom, and I've lost perspective, then the strike doesn't mean as much to me because there are no tiles.

If you are refering to this most recent test video/pics of the hit, there are no tiles on the leading edge of the wing.

NASA was testing a hit on this portion of the wing which is Reinforced Carbon Carbon. The RCC is so impervious to heat that tiles would do nothing to protect it, only add un-needed weight.