Pad damaged during Discovery's liftoff

[dbeachy1]

"Launch pad 39A at the Kennedy Space Center suffered unusual damage during the shuttle Discovery's blastoff Saturday, NASA officials said."

http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts124/080601pad/damage.html

Isn't this supposed to be full of water at liftoff? :blink:

 

[Urwumpe]

It is not full of water, that would have to be really huge amounts.

The damage looks like the surface of the flame trench was just old and separated from the wall below at the parts of the highest dynamic movements. When was the last renovation?

 

[Chipstone306]

Wow i just took a look at the pics that is a lot of damage did the water suppression system kick in on time?

 

[pete.dakota]

Wow i just took a look at the pics that is a lot of damage did the water suppression system kick in on time?

It would have to have done, or the launch would have been aborted.

 

[Urwumpe]

Wow i just took a look at the pics that is a lot of damage did the water suppression system kick in on time?

According to the launch videos I have seen, yes. also the damage is not unexpected - once the stones separate from the walls, the Bernoulli effect of the SRB exhaust should be able to blow them away from the wall. The shape of the damage also looks like it was primarily caused by exhaust, the shape looks like waves.

Except of aging, it could also be caused by rough ignition of the SRBs. But that would be known to NASA earlier.

 

[Zatnikitelman]

Will it cause a delay? Cause isn't the other pad being refitted for Orion? Well, those pads are nearing the end of their Shuttle-lifetimes. I guess they'd have been completely overhauled for Orion.

 

[Urwumpe]

Three German masons can fill the holes in the wall in one day. Assuming you allow them a beer during the lunch break and don't give them reason to go on strike because of the toilet state.

Worse will be finding the cause, which might be important to know how many of the surrounding stones need to be peeled from the wall as well.

How does the other side look? Similar damage or is only one side of the pad affected?

 

[Chipstone306]

What are the walls made of anyways i supposed it would have to REALLLLyy be reinforced

 

[TimA]

They're talking about it in the post MMT briefing, on NASA-TV now.

 

[Urwumpe]

What are the walls made of anyways i supposed it would have to REALLLLyy be reinforced

Looks more like the same stuff they use in furnaces. Is really robust, but requires repairs every few years of full operation. The stones are not even reinforced with steel rods, like they do in mining.

BTW:

6. Repair Flame Deflection Systems..............................................570,000

This project repairs deteriorated flame deflectors which are part of Space Shuttle Launch Complex Pads A and B. Launch vibrations have caused large sections to separate during vehicle lift off.

Flame retardant concrete and steel coatings will be replaced, as well as corroded structural steel components. The project will also evaluate alternate positions for the deflector units in an effort to reduce the corrosive effect of launch activity.

 

[DaveS]

Looks more like the same stuff they use in furnaces. Is really robust, but requires repairs every few years of full operation. The stones are not even reinforced with steel rods, like they do in mining.

BTW:

Pad A got a long and extensive overhaul after STS-107. Just compare the the Pad A FSS/RSS state for the STS-117 launch and the Pad A state for the STS-107 launch.

The FSS/RSS got quite a makeover while Pad B supported launches between 2005 and 2007.

 

[tblaxland]

What are the walls made of anyways i supposed it would have to REALLLLyy be reinforced

From the image in the original post it looks like concrete with some sort of brick veneer. There appears to be vertical reinforcing bars running up the face of the concrete and the veneer is probably tied into that. Given sufficient cycles of vibration, I expect the ties would work loose.

EDIT:

Will it cause a delay? Cause isn't the other pad being refitted for Orion? Well, those pads are nearing the end of their Shuttle-lifetimes. I guess they'd have been completely overhauled for Orion.

Both pads 39A and 39B are needed for STS-125. Atlantis will launch off 39A and Endeavour will be sitting on 39B for Launch On Need duties.

 

[Andy44]

Wow, so there will will be two vehicles stacked up at one time? That only happened once before, back in the early 80s when the launch schedule was getting into high gear.

ETA: I was looking for a well-known photo of both shuttles stacked up on pads A and B at the same time, when I ran across an even better one.

 

[Bj]

Wow, so there will will be two vehicles stacked up at one time? That only happened once before, back in the early 80s when the launch schedule was getting into high gear.

ETA: I was looking for a well-known photo of both shuttles stacked up on pads A and B at the same time, when I ran across an even better one.

woh, thats a rare shot, would be insane to have both liftoff at almost the same time, and both dock at the same time...ext

 

[DaveS]

Wow, so there will will be two vehicles stacked up at one time? That only happened once before, back in the early 80s when the launch schedule was getting into high gear.

Once? Not quite! Here's a full list of when there has been vehicles on both pads at the same time: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/launch/bothpads.html

 

[tblaxland]

From the image in the original post it looks like concrete with some sort of brick veneer. There appears to be vertical reinforcing bars running up the face of the concrete and the veneer is probably tied into that. Given sufficient cycles of vibration, I expect the ties would work loose.

My assumption that the walls ties had worked loose due to vibration was incorrect. Apparently it was due to corrosion.

From http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5439:

The wall is being inspected by USA Structures and NASA Structures engineers, who have already noted that the pad's 3'' by 4'' metal tabs that are used for anchoring the bricks to the concrete are 'severely corroded and or missing.'

The remaining brickwork may have to be removed, as the wall is 'judged to be unstable at this time,' though the process of replacing the bricks is still being evaluated.

'The bricks from the wall are Apollo-era and are no longer available; as a result, the team is consulting with the manufacturer and repair options are being investigated,' added the investigation notes.

 

[Andy44]

Once? Not quite! Here's a full list of when there has been vehicles on both pads at the same time: [URL="http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sh.../bothpads.html"]http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sh.../bothpads.html[/URL]

The 1985 one is the one I was thinking of; I read about it in an article or book that was discussing the heavy launch schedule of those days. I didn't realize it had happened so many times.

 

[gawinnard]

In 2005 they were still working on PAD 39A when I was at KSC. Also STS-114 was on the pad 39b with the RSS neatly concealing the orbiter. If I can find the images, I'll post a few here.

 

[DaveS]

In 2005 they were still working on PAD 39A when I was at KSC. Also STS-114 was on the pad 39b with the RSS neatly concealing the orbiter. If I can find the images, I'll post a few here.

Yes. I believe the Pad A mod period began in 2004 or mid-2003 and it was supposed to be completed in 2006. In 2004 they weighed both the FSS and RSS: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=2893

 

[gawinnard]

Images as promised. Pad 39 A and B. June 21st 2005