Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!skipper!shafer From: shafer@drynix.dfrf.nasa.gov Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle Subject: Re: space news from March 27 AW&ST Message-ID: Date: 12 May 89 22:29:38 GMT References: <1989May8.033250.18780@utzoo.uucp> <15988@bellcore.bellcore.com> <6390@cbnews.ATT.COM> <52000@philabs.Philips.Com> <1989May11.202243.1111@utzoo.uucp> Sender: news@skipper.dfrf.nasa.gov Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal. Lines: 29 In-reply-to: shafer@drynix.dfrf.nasa.gov's message of 12 May 89 22:18:00 GMT Xref: utzoo sci.space:11354 sci.space.shuttle:3101 I wrote: I think that Robert Casey is referring to some testing that was done once it was decided that the Enterprise absolutely, definitely would not be used for flight. To test the ability of GVTs (ground vibration tests, a classical structural test technique) to find damage in the Orbiters, structural elements (i.e. wing spars) were cut. GVTs run before and after the damage was inflicted were then examined to see if they could be used in place of other methods (actual inspection, I think) to assess the structural integrity of the Orbiters, particularly for less than total damage to a structural element. The structural elements were cut to various depths, although I don't think any were completely severed. After all, it's still strong enough to be ferried. Thus, the Enterprise is _not_ flightworthy without structural refurbishment. But I forgot to state specifically that the intentional damage was fairly minor and that the vehicle is probably flightworthy for low airspeeds (low qbars, actually) such as those encountered in the ALT program. I don't remember seeing any results of the study, either, so I can't comment on how well it worked. -- M F Shafer NASA Ames-Dryden Flight Research Facility shafer@elxsi.dfrf.nasa.gov or shafer@drynix.dfrf.nasa.gov NASA management doesn't know what I'm doing and I don't know what they're doing, and everybody's happy this way.