Replies

I don't wonder that you do not want me to post to you. Like Eva Gabor in Green Acres you have managed to completely obfusticate the original point of our discussion.

Let us review it:

In Post 21 I stated:

"The tile damage was done after liftoff. After Main Engine Cut Off there was literally nothing NASA could do. "

Your response, in message 89 was that quote followed by the following:

“Here you go:

RTLS: Return to Launch Site
An engine fails within the first few minutes of flight, or a systems problem (cabin leak, loss of cooling, etc.) occurs which requires the shuttle to come home early. In this case, the shuttle will fly downrange a bit, and then do a flip: it's originally travelling east, with the ET on "top" (away from the earth). During this flip maneuver, the shuttle will rotate so that its nose and tail swap places, and at the end the shuttle is flying backwards into is own exhaust, with the tank on the bottom. Eventually this will negate all of its forward momentum, and start to move back towards KSC. Then it's just a matter of dropping the ET and gliding back to the Cape. The whole thing takes about 25 minutes.

TAL: Transoceanic Abort Landing
If a problem occurs after the last RTLS capability, then the shuttle will have to land on the other side of the Atlantic. Depending on inclination, this will be either in Africa (Ben Guerir, Morocco) or Spain (Zaragoza or Moron). A TAL takes about 35 minutes.”

Post 89 is a non-sequitor. My post 21 stated that after MECO nothing could be done. Your response was to highlight two options that can only be chosen before MECO. This prompted my response in Post 111

“OK, Captain Science, explain -- using one and two syllable words, because I must be slow -- how we do a RTLS or a TAL after Main Engine Cut Off.”

To which you responded in Post 122

“Why don't you ask NASA, they developed the contingencies.

“My reading of this is that the MECO would now happen immediately after SRB separation.”

Note that your second statement is wrong, absolutely.

In post 139 I replied:

“Maybe because I already know the answer, not having gotten Shuttle Backseat Pilot wings from collecting enough cereal boxtops. You cannot. MECO ends powered flight. At MECO you are committed to where you are going. You have to opt for an RTLS or a TAL almost immediately after liftoff. Four minutes into the mission and you lose RTLS. Six minutes, and you cannot do a TAL. As I said earlier, the problem occurred at T+80, and was probably noted *after* MECO. “

Your sparkling response in Post 193 was simply to repeat the information you posted in 89.

In Post 206 I stated:

“My original statement was "Explain How you opt for a RTLS or a TAL after MECO." The SRBs are not MAIN ENGINES.

The Main Engines are those three things in the back that keep burning *after* SRB Sep. Please explain again -- using small words that I can understand -- what portion of the NASA document you have quoted contradicts my claim that you cannot opt for an RTLS or a TAL after MECO. In fact, I will *broaden* my claim. You cannot opt for an ATO or an AOA after MECO.

But if you can explain how it is done, why then I will be properly humbled. (What were you saying about karma?)”

And of course in post you respond:

“Hey, you are absolutely wrong as I pointed out. You forgot to notice that. So you can stop posting, at least to me.

Your "facts" cannot be trusted. Truce, you shoot from the hip, and supply absolutely wrong information. You even asked (in post 111) "...how we do a RTLS or a TAL after Main Engine Cut Off". Well Truce, you can't, as I pointed out so clearly in the NASA press package post, the Main Engines are required to be operational to do either abort option."

My response is that my original position was that there was nothing that could be done after MECO. You insisted that an abort could be used -- in a context that implied they would be used after MECO. You stated that the Mains would cut off after SRB sep on an abort. You ignored my response that it was impossible to do an abort after MECO, and then claim that that was my position.

I am not sure whether you know you were wrong, and are trying to cover it up, or whether you sincerely believe what you are saying. Either way, don't ever bother sending me your resume.

Hey, you are absolutely wrong as I pointed out. You forgot to notice that.

Allow me to referee -- he's not wrong, and you're making an ass of yourself. YOUR OWN POST agrees with what he wrote. Furthermore, you owe him an apology.

Your "facts" cannot be trusted. Truce, you shoot from the hip, and supply absolutely wrong information.

What have you been smoking?

He wrote that RTLS is no longer an option after "four minutes into the mission". You claimed he was "wrong" on that count and as "proof" you quoted NASA, and even personally highlighted the portion where they said that RTLS had to be done "between lift-off and approximately four minutes 20 seconds". So yeah, just as he said, after about four minutes into the mission, to the nearest minute, you can no longer do an RTLS. YOUR OWN NASA QUOTE CONFIRMS IT.

So what on earth are you babbling about when you claim that he's "absolutely wrong"?

Perhaps you're boneheadedly misunderstanding what he meant when he wrote, "You have to opt for an RTLS or a TAL almost immediately after liftoff", but in context with the "four minutes" comment that immediately followed that, it's quite clear that "almost immediately" means "in the first few minutes", not the first few seconds, if that's how you're misreading it.

This was all started when he wrote, correctly, "After Main Engine Cut Off there was literally nothing NASA could do". And he's right. MECO is well after the 4:20 limit beyond which RTLS is not an option, and 100 seconds after that, TAL is not an option either. He was entirely correct.

You on the other hand were dead wrong when you wrote, "My reading of this is that the MECO would now happen immediately after SRB separation". No, it wouldn't. MECO means Main Engine Cut Off. If you cut off the main engines "immediately after SRB separation", you would now have no thrust to speak of (the OMS thrust would barely be noticeable, and not last long), and would be in "flying brick" mode, traveling at several Mach eastward out over the Atlantic, looking forward to a very wet landing.

So when he wrote, "I suggest you come back to this discussion when you can make informed recommendations", it seems excellent advice.

I love it when such a pompous ass is delivered his due.

So do I, and now you've been delivered your due.