The X-15 was coated for a few flights with a lightweight ablative material that burned off the craft. It had to be replaced after each flight. It had some problems with burn off, but that is what we want. The structure could take some impacts.
If the news is also to be believed, this foam hit the shuttle at over 1200 MPH. If that is the case, there really isn't a meterial that would have protected the tiles. Titanium would have been compromised at that speed. Joe Latrell On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 23:19, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Joe Latrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Europa IcePIC mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 9:27 PM > Subject: Re: From tonight's NY Times editorial > > > > > > Gary, > > > > You are right on the money. Lateral thinking is needed. > > > > With the repair kit idea, we could have a small drone fly around the > > shuttle to check for damage and the send out an astronaut. In this case > > it still would have been a disaster since the spacelab left no egress > > hatch available for a spacewalk (a design flaw?). > > > > As for the fiberglass, imagine somthing like a bug deflector on a truck, > > a strong piece of fiberglass that the orbiter fits into. This deflector > > stay with the ET on shuttle separation, or it can go with the shuttle > > and burn off while entering the atmosphere (potentially messy for ground > > crews). I'm working on a drawing now to illustrate the point. > ________________________ > > There have been a LOT of questions asked by reporters at all the NASA news > conferences about the possibility of carrying an EVA emergency tile repair > kit. The NASA spokesmen's reply is always the same: they very seriously > considered the idea all the way back before the first Shuttle flight and for > several years afterwards (as I read at the time) -- but repeated tests > showed that the odds were very strong that there was no workable adhesive, > and that any spacewalker trying to carry out such repairs would probably > actually knock more new tiles loose than he manged to glue on. (I wonder > about that second point, though -- the Shuttle arm can reach many areas > under the craft, and we already know from the spectacular Hubble repair > missions that they're damned good at doing very detailed and delicate repair > work from it.) > > As for Joe Latrell's ice deflector, it's an idea -- but it would have to be > BIG, covering the entire front of the Shuttle (look how tall above the > Shuttle that external tank towers, and how many areas on the Shuttle's > surface could be hit by a piece of tank debris). And the only possible way > to implement it would be by attaching it to the tank, not the Shuttle. > > I've wondered about another idea, myself: would it be possible to coat the > entire Shuttle body with a thin layer of some lightweight shock-absorbent > foam that would burn away quickly and safely during initial reentry, but > which would disperse the shock of any piece of falling debris during launch > enough to vastly reduce the danger of cracking or loosening any tiles? > > And there is another, grimmer problem which hasn't been discussed yet. This > accident was apparently caused by a piece of tank debris during launch -- > but what about the fact that space garbage could do exactly the same thing > to the Shuttle, in a way which would be far harder to shield against? I > would have sworn 20 years ago that the human race would never be able to > pollute outer space, but by God we've managed it, to a rapidly more serious > degree. On most flights now, there are a scattering of tiny pits in the > tiles -- and even the cockpit windows -- from dust-sized specks of paint > slamming into the Shuttle much faster than bullets. One French satellite a > few years ago had its gravity-gradient boom clipped clean off by a larger > piece. And if an object the size of a bullet ever hits the Shuttle at that > speed, no acceptably lightweight foam coating could protect it -- or the > Station. One can argue that the space garbage cleanup problem should be > NASA's most important task, even more important than trying to develop > cheaper launch vehicles. But how much are we hearing about it? Not > glamorous enough. > > > == > You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
