Path: utzoo!dptcdc!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!rice!titan!phil From: phil@titan.rice.edu (William LeFebvre) Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle Subject: Re: Shuttle Payload Capacity Message-ID: <3111@kalliope.rice.edu> Date: 18 Apr 89 14:15:11 GMT References: <1521@fredonia.UUCP> <3108@kalliope.rice.edu> Sender: usenet@rice.edu Reply-To: phil@Rice.edu (William LeFebvre) Organization: Rice University, Houston Lines: 20 In article <3108@kalliope.rice.edu> I wrote: >Certain scenarios that involve loss of an SSME are considered catastrophic. >If one of those was to fly apart at full throttle, there's no way to predict >what damage it could do. Someone has pointed out to me that the difference in throttling between 104% and 109% isn't going to make that much difference if the engine flies apart. However (as he also pointed out), running at 104% produces less wear on the engine and thus reduces the chances of failure. I concur. Besides, I don't think that the difference in thrust would be all that significant, especially where payload capacity is concerned. During the first two minutes of flight, the large majority of the thrust is coming from the SRB's, not the SSME's. Wouldn't that be more of a limiting factor? William LeFebvre Department of Computer Science Rice University