Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site decwrl.DEC.COM
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-star!fisher
From: fisher@star.DEC (Burns Fisher ZKO1-1/D42 DTN 381-1466)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Shuttle escape question answered
Message-ID: <814@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Date: Thu, 30-Jan-86 09:35:46 EST
Article-I.D.: decwrl.814
Posted: Thu Jan 30 09:35:46 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Feb-86 04:26:58 EST
Sender: daemon@decwrl.DEC.COM
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 30

> 
>The shuttle tragedy has raised some questions (in my mind) about the
>shuttle, and the effect this disaster will have on the space program.
>Perhaps the readers of this digest will have some answers or speculation on
>these questions.
> 
>- What kind of escape mechanism (if any) does the shuttle have for the crew?
> 
All escape possibilities in the Shuttle assume that the orbiter survives and
functions.  For the first 4 flights of Columbia, there were 2 ~standard
escape seats, but it was considered that chances of surviving in them was
only marginal.  You may have noticed during those first 4 flights the call
"negative seats" meaning "you can't use them from now on".  It was not very
far into the flight.

Back of the envelope calculation:  It blew 10 miles high, 72 seconds after
liftoff.  That is an AVERAGE speed of 500 mph (assuming it went straight up,
which it did not).  If you assume linear acceleration (not true either, but
what the hell), that means that the shuttle was going 1000 MPH when it blew. 
Want to guess at the chances of surviving an ejection at 1000MPH at 52000 feet?

It seems to me that the only possible chance would have been to blow the 
orbiter free of the tank and solids and try for a Return-to-launch-site abort
or a ditching.  Separating from the tank is a lot of mechanical action to
take place in only a few milliseconds.

Burns

...decwrl!rhea!star!fisher