escape pod in space shuttle
Guest
Posts: n/a
escape pod in space shuttle
Just read article the other day in the LA Times (Los Angeles that is) about NASA making a "shuttle escape capsule" for astronauts . Statistically, NASA puts the odds of another shuttle disaster at 1 in 438. NASA officials reported "ther e is no in flight crew escape system for the orbiter other than for abort below 20,000 feet during a controlled glide."
The idea of this proposed "flyaway capsule" would be to install ejection seats in the cockpit for the pilots and put a pod in the cargo bay for everyone else to sit during the launch and landing. In the event of an emergency, the pilots would eject from the shuttle military style and the rest of the crew would escape inside a pod that blasts out of the cargo bay and parachutes to Earth. Interesting!
The idea of this proposed "flyaway capsule" would be to install ejection seats in the cockpit for the pilots and put a pod in the cargo bay for everyone else to sit during the launch and landing. In the event of an emergency, the pilots would eject from the shuttle military style and the rest of the crew would escape inside a pod that blasts out of the cargo bay and parachutes to Earth. Interesting!
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'm not an expert on anything space-wise, but I am sure that the shuttle currently has an escape system similar to a pob, since this is what the crew from challenger escaped in (study the pictures) and the bodies were recoved with some with water in the lungs, ie they drowned and were not blown up, and were alive when they hit the water. Maybe improving this system is what they meant?
Guest
Posts: n/a
All Challenger crew were still strapped into their seats, and there remains no way of escape after launch (after the disaster ther was an improvement in the ground escape equipment). Although for its first flight Columbia had ejection seats for the 2 man crew, subsequent flights have not had them, mainly due to the impossibility of providing downwards ejection for the bulk of the crew. There were plans for an escape regime at low speed/alt but as this would only be usable for a short period prior to landing, this was not developed.
With the ISS the problem is that crew will be in residence for long periods without the shuttle being present, so for emergency escape purposes they require a life boat capable of reentry. NASA's preferred method is the X-38 Crew Transfer Vehicle (an unpowered lifting body, landing by parachute), with Soyuz capsule being used until it was ready. George W Bush wants to cut a lot of the space program, including the X-38, and if this does happen then the Russians may develop their own version
With the ISS the problem is that crew will be in residence for long periods without the shuttle being present, so for emergency escape purposes they require a life boat capable of reentry. NASA's preferred method is the X-38 Crew Transfer Vehicle (an unpowered lifting body, landing by parachute), with Soyuz capsule being used until it was ready. George W Bush wants to cut a lot of the space program, including the X-38, and if this does happen then the Russians may develop their own version
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Russians, on the other hand, had planned to use ejection seats as a standard feature on the Buran. The ubiquitous K-36 was redesigned for operation at up to Mach 3 at 100,000ft, with a more powerful booster and enhanced trajectory control systems. The initial versions of Buran were to have had single seats for all four crew members, with two 'double' crew ejection seats planned for later versions.
The X38 escape module:
With steerable landing chut deployed:
Video of the system is available on NASA's X38 Website
With steerable landing chut deployed:
Video of the system is available on NASA's X38 Website
Guest
Posts: n/a
Capsule escape systems for shuttle should be possible, but will have weight and cube penalties, and it is unclear what the change would do structurally to the "aircraft/spacecraft".
Check out the F-111 and XB-70, both of which had/have escape capsules. In the F-111 the cockpit is the capsule, in the XB-70 it was a seats on tracks go back from the flight deck into a capsule that then is fired like an ejection seat. They tried it once for real and it pretty much worked, at least it beat the alternative.
Suspect with NASA budget the way it is they shouldn't expect much other than a couple ejection seats for the flight deck. Maybe parachutes for the lower deck crew, who can line up at the side door and jump.
As far a space station escape, are there any left over Apollo capsules in storage?
The problem is I think that the shuttle ists on top of a bunck of rockets, so when things go wrong they go wrong so quickly that escape capsules and such aren't much use.
A bit like the F1-11 module which, while very smart, has never been used in anger to my knowledge. Mostly this is due to the environment the aircraft operates in (high speed low level) so when things go wrong there just isn't time.
The X33 technology demonstrator ("Next generation shuttle") is pilotless, so the whole question of crew survival capsules may be outdated if there isn't to be a crew.
A bit like the F1-11 module which, while very smart, has never been used in anger to my knowledge. Mostly this is due to the environment the aircraft operates in (high speed low level) so when things go wrong there just isn't time.
The X33 technology demonstrator ("Next generation shuttle") is pilotless, so the whole question of crew survival capsules may be outdated if there isn't to be a crew.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: at the edge of the alps
Posts: 447
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The XB-70 Valkyrie also had escape pods which were used during the midair crash that more or less ended the program. AFAIK one of the pods worked while the pilot in the second pod was killed.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The F-111 escape capsule has indeed been used in anger although I don't have details of suvival rates.
I'm pretty sure that I recall reading, a few years ago, of the display of a such a "used"
piece of kit at an air museum in, I think, Scotland.
Can anyone enlighten us further?
I'm pretty sure that I recall reading, a few years ago, of the display of a such a "used"
piece of kit at an air museum in, I think, Scotland.
Can anyone enlighten us further?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Here is an account of successful F-111 escape capsule deployment taken from the USAF's FLYING SAFETY magazine dated January 1997.
Introduced when the Monkees were hot and polyester was cool, the remaining portion of the bomb-dropping F-111 fleet was proudly retired this year, leaving the Ravens to do the jammin' job with capabilities unrivaled by any other aircraft (despite what the Navy says).
The 27th Fighter Wing, 53d Wing, and the 79th Test and Evaluation Group turned in an exceptional year- no fatalities, no Class B's, and only one Class A. Truly remarkable in light of the retirement and the deployment schedule. The one Class A ended with the loss of the aircraft and an eminently successful recovery of the crew, thanks mostly to the crew's handling of the EP.
Our mishap crew was on a night low-level training sortie. They noted light reflecting off the ground beneath the aircraft and were in the process of analyzing "what's wrong with this picture" when the right engine fire light illuminated. Trading airspeed for altitude, they were around 10,000 MSL when
aircraft response became sluggish to flight control inputs. As control continued to rapidly degrade, the EWO responded to the A/C's direction and punched the crew out. There were no cockpit indications, other than the fire light, of any problems with the jet prior to when the A/C first noted the ground glow that turned out to be the jet doing its own version of "torching"! The capsule rolled upside down upon landing, and egress was hampered by the inability to open one canopy and a partial obstruction to the other side. Recovery of the crew was swift due to superb SAR efforts.
Introduced when the Monkees were hot and polyester was cool, the remaining portion of the bomb-dropping F-111 fleet was proudly retired this year, leaving the Ravens to do the jammin' job with capabilities unrivaled by any other aircraft (despite what the Navy says).
The 27th Fighter Wing, 53d Wing, and the 79th Test and Evaluation Group turned in an exceptional year- no fatalities, no Class B's, and only one Class A. Truly remarkable in light of the retirement and the deployment schedule. The one Class A ended with the loss of the aircraft and an eminently successful recovery of the crew, thanks mostly to the crew's handling of the EP.
Our mishap crew was on a night low-level training sortie. They noted light reflecting off the ground beneath the aircraft and were in the process of analyzing "what's wrong with this picture" when the right engine fire light illuminated. Trading airspeed for altitude, they were around 10,000 MSL when
aircraft response became sluggish to flight control inputs. As control continued to rapidly degrade, the EWO responded to the A/C's direction and punched the crew out. There were no cockpit indications, other than the fire light, of any problems with the jet prior to when the A/C first noted the ground glow that turned out to be the jet doing its own version of "torching"! The capsule rolled upside down upon landing, and egress was hampered by the inability to open one canopy and a partial obstruction to the other side. Recovery of the crew was swift due to superb SAR efforts.
