[rescue] Re: rescue Digest, Vol 3, Issue 4

[Mike Hebel]

Kinda makes all the more fun out of the "throwing rocks" reference that 
Heinlein made in several of his novels.("We'll get there even if we have 
to throw rocks off the nose!" - yes, I know I'm mis-quoting.)

Hypothetically what's the air duration in the EVA suits?  I'm probably 
re-writing physics but couldn't they wait until they were within range 
of the ISS then over-pressurize the cargo area then release it at a 
controlled rate through the dorsal door edges while surviving on the 
suit air. I know that would leave them with nothing extra at the ISS but 
would it be at least possible?

But then if it were possible I'd bet that we humans would find some way 
to do it.  We're pretty resourceful - when we're not busy killing each 
other.

Mike Hebel

Ido Dubrawsky wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 05:49:55PM -0600, rescue-request at sunhelp.org wrote:
> 
>>Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2003 18:28:58 -0500
>>From: Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com>
>>
>>   So they knew they had problems and just had to come down anyway?  I 
>>don't buy it.  They could've gone to ISS and hung out there and awaited 
>>another ride home.  Sure, a difficult proposition, but better than 
>>losing the ship and crew.
>>
>>          -Dave
>>
> 
> OK, so now I've got to answere.  A little on my background first:  I have
> both a bachelors and a masters in Aerospace Engineering (in particular, 
> in orbital mechanics and spaceflight).  I used to work for NASA JPL doing
> trajectory and maneuver calculations for the Galileo project in another life.
> To answer your question Dave they could not have gone to ISS.  I'm not saying
> it's a dumb idea (actually it would have been a great idea if it was possible)
> however the amount of fuel required -- and this would mean waiting until they 
> caught up to it because the space station orbits at a slightly higher altitude
> than the typical shuttle orbit -- would be more than what they have on board.
> They only bring enough fuel for the trip and a small amount of "extra" fuel 
> because every pound of fuel matters.  They could not have executed such a 
> maneuver given the fuel that they did have.  So, the proposition, while 
> logically making sense, is not possible given the way NASA manages fuel on
> board the shuttles and the orbital trajectory changes and maneuvers required.
> I wish it would have been possible though...seven lives lost (and the pain
> their families feel).  I haven't felt this crappy since 9/11.
> 
> Ido