How fast was the shuttle moving at SRB separation?

There is a frustrating lack of that data in the many sites that I have searched.

Thanks,

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 10:26:07 PM UTC-4, Scott M. Kozel wrote:

How fast was the shuttle moving at SRB separation?

There is a frustrating lack of that data in the many sites that I have searched.

Thanks,

I found the answer ... about 2,950 mph, see at 2:35 in this video -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aCOyOvOw5c

I would have guessed around 5,000 to 6,000 mph, as it is still a long way to go to 18,000 mph.

Booster burnout/separation is at 28 miles altitude, probably above 99.9% of the atmosphere, so maybe that is the key, getting it that high and then shedding all that weight. The SSME with over 400,000 pounds thrust each, still provide plenty of thrust.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message news:d192b5fe-7581-46c8-a389-0bb71f3e933e@googlegroups.com...

On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 10:26:07 PM UTC-4, Scott M. Kozel wrote:

How fast was the shuttle moving at SRB separation?

There is a frustrating lack of that data in the many sites that I have
searched.

Thanks,

I found the answer ... about 2,950 mph, see at 2:35 in this video -- >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aCOyOvOw5c

I would have guessed around 5,000 to 6,000 mph, as it is still a long way
to go to 18,000 mph.

Booster burnout/separation is at 28 miles altitude, probably above 99.9% of >the atmosphere, so maybe that is the key, getting it that high and then >shedding all that weight. The SSME with over 400,000 pounds thrust each, >still provide plenty of thrust.

Yeah, that really was the point of the SRBs, get the thing up and out of as much of the atmosphere as possible. Once you've done that, then you can take your time getting to speed.

--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 3:40:36 PM UTC-4, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message news:d192b5fe-7581-46c8-a389-0bb71f3e933e@googlegroups.com...

On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 10:26:07 PM UTC-4, Scott M. Kozel wrote:

How fast was the shuttle moving at SRB separation?

There is a frustrating lack of that data in the many sites that I have
searched.

Thanks,

I found the answer ... about 2,950 mph, see at 2:35 in this video -- >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aCOyOvOw5c

I would have guessed around 5,000 to 6,000 mph, as it is still a long way >to go to 18,000 mph.

Booster burnout/separation is at 28 miles altitude, probably above 99.9% of >the atmosphere, so maybe that is the key, getting it that high and then >shedding all that weight. The SSME with over 400,000 pounds thrust each, >still provide plenty of thrust.

Yeah, that really was the point of the SRBs, get the thing up and out of as much of the atmosphere as possible. Once you've done that, then you can take your time getting to speed.

They still need a lot more altitude at that point, at least 100 miles altitude to be in a stable orbit, but I suppose that the ascent angle at 28 miles is only a few degrees from horizontal.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <de1ea3e6-e849-4a9b-8ef3-ede37606d719@googlegroups.com>, kozelsm@comcast.net says...

On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 3:40:36 PM UTC-4, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message news:d192b5fe-7581-46c8-a389-0bb71f3e933e@googlegroups.com...

On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 10:26:07 PM UTC-4, Scott M. Kozel wrote:

How fast was the shuttle moving at SRB separation?

There is a frustrating lack of that data in the many sites that I have >> searched.

Thanks,

I found the answer ... about 2,950 mph, see at 2:35 in this video -- >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aCOyOvOw5c

I would have guessed around 5,000 to 6,000 mph, as it is still a long way >to go to 18,000 mph.

Booster burnout/separation is at 28 miles altitude, probably above 99.9% of
the atmosphere, so maybe that is the key, getting it that high and then >shedding all that weight. The SSME with over 400,000 pounds thrust each, >still provide plenty of thrust.

Yeah, that really was the point of the SRBs, get the thing up and out of as much of the atmosphere as possible. Once you've done that, then you can take
your time getting to speed.

They still need a lot more altitude at that point, at least 100 miles altitude to be in a stable orbit, but I suppose that the ascent angle
at 28 miles is only a few degrees from horizontal.

The ascent trajectory is more vertical than horizontal until it's above
most of the atmosphere. This is to minimize aerodynamic drag (over
time) on the vehicle. After that it becomes more horizontal than
vertical in order to attain the velocity needed to stay in orbit (which
is where a hell of a lot of the delta-V is actually needed).

You'd have to look at a plot of the ascent trajectory to get the
details, but the above is the "executive summary" of the most efficient
way of getting into earth orbit.

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2016-08-13 15:40, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:

Yeah, that really was the point of the SRBs, get the thing up and out of as much of the atmosphere as possible. Once you've done that, then you can take your time getting to speed.

At what point during the SRB's 2 minutes of fame would Shuttle+ET become
light enough that SSMEs could accelerate them without SRBs ?

Was that point near the end fo the 2 minutes, halfway thorugh the SRB
life or not long after liftoff ?

At the time the SRBs are jettisoned, what is the G force profile ? Does
it suddently drop and then gradually increases back to 3 G until engines
start to throttle to keep it at 3G ?

Or do engines throttle down towards end of SRB period to keep G forces
in checlk, and when SRBs are jettisoned, egines throttle up again ?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <57e226a3$0$15606$c3e8da3$9deca2c3@news.astraweb.com>, jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca says...

On 2016-08-13 15:40, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:

Yeah, that really was the point of the SRBs, get the thing up and out of as much of the atmosphere as possible. Once you've done that, then you can take
your time getting to speed.

At what point during the SRB's 2 minutes of fame would Shuttle+ET become light enough that SSMEs could accelerate them without SRBs ?

Was that point near the end fo the 2 minutes, halfway thorugh the SRB
life or not long after liftoff ?

At the time the SRBs are jettisoned, what is the G force profile ? Does
it suddently drop and then gradually increases back to 3 G until engines start to throttle to keep it at 3G ?

Or do engines throttle down towards end of SRB period to keep G forces
in checlk, and when SRBs are jettisoned, egines throttle up again ?

Google broken? You might want to try again today.

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)