Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site umich.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!mb2c!umich!cja
From: cja@umich.UUCP (Charles J. Antonelli)
Newsgroups: net.columbia
Subject: Re: Challenger SRBs
Message-ID: <437@umich.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 29-Jan-86 22:49:10 EST
Article-I.D.: umich.437
Posted: Wed Jan 29 22:49:10 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Feb-86 00:08:38 EST
References: <4270@mhuxd.UUCP>
Reply-To: cja@umich.UUCP (Charles J. Antonelli)
Organization: University of Michigan, EECS Dept., Ann Arbor, MI
Lines: 18
Summary: 

In article <4270@mhuxd.UUCP> wolit@mhuxd.UUCP (Jan Wolitzky) writes:

>Am I correct in my understanding that,
>under less catastrophic conditions, the SRBs are capable of
>independent guidance, at least to keep them clear of the orbiter
>after jettisoning following burnout or during an abort?

I would be surprised if the SRBs were capable of independent guidance.
They have no control surfaces, and I doubt the SRB nozzles are on gimbals
like those of the main engines.  At burnout explosive bolts separate the
SRBs from the rest of the orbiter which continues to accelerate away
on its main engines.  I'll admit I don't know the cause for the smooth
peeling away of the SRBs following burnout.  Maybe the top bolts blow
first, and the aerodynamics do the rest.

During an abort I suspect the orbiter must be flown away from the
tank/SRB assembly.  Does anyone know if there is a small fuel
reserve within the orbiter for such an occasion?