Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!umich!dgsi!gregc From: gregc@cimage.com (Greg Cronau/1000000) Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle Subject: Re: Liftoff Question Message-ID: <1990Sep17.222143.23282@cimage.com> Date: 17 Sep 90 22:21:43 GMT References: <36104@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> <7082@alvin.mcnc.org> <1990Sep16.012312.9303@chinet.chi.il.us> Reply-To: gregc@dgsi.UUCP (Greg Cronau/1000000) Organization: Cimage Corp, Ann Arbor, MI Lines: 24 In article <1990Sep16.012312.9303@chinet.chi.il.us> john@chinet.chi.il.us (John Mundt) writes: >In article <7082@alvin.mcnc.org> rinne@mcnc.org.UUCP (Glenn A. Rinne) writes: >>In article shafer@skipper.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) writes: >>The original question referred to the need for the roll just after liftoff. >>Looking at the Shuttle stack, wouldn't the center of thrust (given the SRB's >>large thrust) be on the orbiter side of the stack? If so, the 180 degree >>roll may facilitate using the SMEs to control the trajectory. > >What I never understood was why not turn the thing around in the VAB and >drive it out to the launch pad the other way. Then there would be no need >for the fancy rotation. Put the TV cameras on the other side and everyone >is happy. Was the tower built for the Apollo program and thus in the >wrong orientation? >-- Well, sort of.... The actual concrete pad, flame trench, and support facilities are the luanch complex 39A/B that all the saturn Vs were launched from. The towers that are permanently fixed to the ground at both pads now, are actually the upper 2/3s of the old towers that used to be attached to the mobil launch platforms. But, I have no idea why the towers were fixed to the north side of the pads vs. the south side. gregc@cimage.com