3 ms·

They want to carry 100 people. An escape system for those many people is the same scale of a commercial airliner escape system, which is designed to be operated

They want to carry 100 people. An escape system for those many people is the same scale of a commercial airliner escape system, which is designed to be operated on a stationary plane, on land or water. Astronauts will be well trained to use it but I think that there must be a lot of openings to let 100 people get out quickly in mid air. Maybe they'll agree that Starship is its own escape system. There is a section about Space Shuttle's crew bailout at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_abort_modes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_abort_modes Before the "Ejection escape systems" there are a few paragraphs about "inflight crew escape system" > The vehicle was put in a stable glide on autopilot, the hatch was blown, and the crew slid out a pole to clear the orbiter's left wing. They would then parachute to earth or the sea But 100 people is a different matter IMHO. Ejections seats and capsule were not pursued, the Wikipedia page explains the reasons.

ceejayoz 4y ago
It's not going to hold 100 people anytime soon. Airliners don't have an in-flight escape system, anyways.
- mr_toad 4y ago
  > It's not going to hold 100 people anytime soon. Right now we don’t even have that many astronauts.
dingosity 4y ago
"Abort Once Around" was the name my band used in college for a few weeks before people realized who we were.
- smn1234 4y ago
  and who are you ?
  - dingosity 4y ago
    We also went by "Human Interference Task Force" and "Angus MacHammer and the Ukrainian Glowplugs," renown in North Texas for our musical mediocrity. We were once introduced as "DJ Control Rat and MC 1000 Inch Buddha," which was interesting 'cause we were completely unrelated to MC 1000 Foot Jesus and played bluegrass.
the_third_wave 4y ago
The big problem with the Space Shuttle was that the orbiter was located next to the fuel tank and between the solid boosters instead of on top of it. This made it impossible to perform the normal "accelerate away from the big boom" manoeuvre which normal rocket escape systems use. On Starship the passengers will be situated above the explosives instead of next to them/between them. As to whether it is possible to add escape engines of sufficient power to pull away the nose cone, push it up into a parabolic trajectory of sufficient height to give parachutes the chance to deploy I don't know but at least it could be done in theory where the design of the Space Shuttle and its "close cousin" Buran made this impossible.
dabluecaboose 4y ago
Fun, little known fact: The Shuttle program's only successful post-launch abort was performed by Challenger in STS-51-F (not to be confused with Challenger's STS-51-L, which ended... suboptimally)

ceejayoz 4y ago

It's not going to hold 100 people anytime soon. Airliners don't have an in-flight escape system, anyways.

mr_toad 4y ago
> It's not going to hold 100 people anytime soon. Right now we don’t even have that many astronauts.

dingosity 4y ago

"Abort Once Around" was the name my band used in college for a few weeks before people realized who we were.

smn1234 4y ago
and who are you ?
- dingosity 4y ago
  We also went by "Human Interference Task Force" and "Angus MacHammer and the Ukrainian Glowplugs," renown in North Texas for our musical mediocrity. We were once introduced as "DJ Control Rat and MC 1000 Inch Buddha," which was interesting 'cause we were completely unrelated to MC 1000 Foot Jesus and played bluegrass.

the_third_wave 4y ago

The big problem with the Space Shuttle was that the orbiter was located next to the fuel tank and between the solid boosters instead of on top of it. This made it impossible to perform the normal "accelerate away from the big boom" manoeuvre which normal rocket escape systems use. On Starship the passengers will be situated above the explosives instead of next to them/between them. As to whether it is possible to add escape engines of sufficient power to pull away the nose cone, push it up into a parabolic trajectory of sufficient height to give parachutes the chance to deploy I don't know but at least it could be done in theory where the design of the Space Shuttle and its "close cousin" Buran made this impossible.

dabluecaboose 4y ago

Fun, little known fact: The Shuttle program's only successful post-launch abort was performed by Challenger in STS-51-F (not to be confused with Challenger's STS-51-L, which ended... suboptimally)