Immediately after launch, is it possible for the shuttle to make some kind of return trajectory and land again? Could they “gun the engines” (so to speak) and/or place the shuttle at a certain attitude to land immediately - while still within the earth’s atmosphere? Of course, the external tanks would have to be jettisoned at some point, assumingly over water. Is there any such contingency plan? And, if so, did NASA have time to make such a call once the insulation struck the left wing 80 seconds into the flight?
I put this in GD since I expect it to lead more to a debate than a factual answer. But, I am curious to hear the SD’s thoughts on this…and what facts might be out there on the topic of contingency flight plans and aborts for a shuttle launch in progress (prior to leaving the atmosphere).
“There are hosts of people standing by ready to assist,
including the medical staff from U.S. Naval Hospital, Rota,
Spain. It’s the medical team’s job to standby for each flight
and be prepared to provide medical assistance to the astronauts
in case of an aborted flight at Moron Air Base, about 80 miles
from Rota, which is one of four trans-Atlantic abort landing
(TAL) sites in the world.”
The shuttle hits about 17000mph around 8mins after takeoff so in other words, once those rockets get going, next stop, Spain (about 30 minutes later).
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/computers/Ch4-7.html
“If engine loss occurs early in a flight, the mission can be aborted through a RTLS maneuver that causes the spacecraft essentially to turn around and fly back to a runway near the launch pad. Slightly later aborts may lead to a landing in Europe for Kennedy Space Center launches. If the engine fails near orbit it may be possible to achieve an orbit and then modify it using the orbital maneuvering system engines”
80 seconds into flight, the only option would be an RTLS abort. About 2:30 into it TAL becomes a possibility, and soon after so does a ditch contingency, where the crew basically abandons the shuttle mid-flight. Any of these, I think, is preferable to RTLS, which many people believe has less than a 10% chance of getting the orbiter and crew back in one piece.
The type of damage (assuming the heat shield was breeched by damaged tile) limited the abort options to a certain atmospheric height and a certain air speed… didn’t it?
Once at that speed - 8 mins into flight - wouldn’t some abort mean the shuttle had to assume a landing posture…with tiles facing the atmosphere at 17-18,000 mph?
While we know of abort options, do we discount these ‘fly to an emergency place’ plans because doing so is like re-entry?
I’m not sure, but thought I’d toss these issues in because they might have a bearing on the correct answer to the OP, and might be overlooked.
At 80 seconds, it would have been possible to do a RTLS (Return To Launch Site). However it’s an extremely dangerous and untested maneuver. It’s not a way to abort a potentially dangerous mission. It’s the last resort in case the Shuttle cannot reach orbit, or in case it’s obvious that the Shuttle would not survive the flight (e.g. total failure of life support system). A few missing tiles probably wouldn’t have called for an immediate abort.
scr4…is that like re-entry? The shuttle on a RTLS run would be doing so at 18000 mph superheating the heat shield? So, even if someone was crazy enough to abort the mission based on seeing debris hit the wing, doing so would still result in break up?
No, RTLS would not involve as much thermal stress/velocity or for as long as reentry, but it would be nothing to sneeze at. What it WOULD create would be high aerodynamic or mechanical stress, if you have a sound airframe it’s at the edge of the performance envelope. Abort across the Atlantic (to Spain or W. Africa) would be a sub-orbital type maneouver, there would be reentry-type heat stress, probably not as long since initial velocity would be lower.
Yesterday’s press conference indicated that Flight was not themselves aware that something had come off and hit the wing until they reviewed the launch films the day after.
I’d always heard that the RTLS was always possible, but that everyone thought it would suck IRL. This 1996 article (about Columbia, as it happens) says as much…
I think the biggest problem is that, thought it would look cool in a movie, you can’t blow the SRBs and fuel tank, you’re stuck to them for the duration. If something goes wrong with one of them, there’s nothing you can do really but cross your fingers.
I found a nifty site with pictures that are quite enlightening. You get to go backwards while thrusting forwards. :-/
The only aborts involving significant thermal stress would be AOA (Abort Once Around) or ATO (Abort to Orbit). In AOA, the shuttle makes one orbit of the earth before landing again, which would involve almost as much if not the same thermal stress as a normal flight. In ATO, the shuttle continues on to orbit and continues the mission more or less as normal, in which case re-entry would be exactly the same.