Jump to content

What's this red triangle?


bigdad84

Recommended Posts

What's the deal with the red triangle on the Space Shuttle above the window they're peering out of? First time I've ever noticed it?

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/history/shuttle-mir/multimedia/sts-74-photos/74p-007-low.htm

I think it says something like 'in emergency, break window here to gain access'. I've definitely seen them on other aircraft, but google is failing me right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the deal with the red triangle on the Space Shuttle above the window they're peering out of? First time I've ever noticed it?

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/history/shuttle-mir/multimedia/sts-74-photos/74p-007-low.htm

I don't know why it's there, but it says "DANGER DANGER DANGER" which should calm the nerves of any pilot. Here's a better (though much larger so I'm not putting it inline) picture:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/STS-135_cockpit.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The closest thing that I've been able to find was a $6.00 ejector seat sign. It was a red triangle with the word "danger" on each side.

That being said, the Shuttle never had ejector seats, so it can't be that.

I'm starting to think that it might be some sort of low-tech docking helper. If the ISS crew could read the words "danger", then the Shuttle was getting too close. That's just a guess though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hm. After Challenger the shuttles had pyrotechnics that would open a hatch for the astronauts to bail out, but this is located on the middle deck.

That is what those DANGER markers are for; they indicate egress panels, ejector seats, explosive canopies, etc. that are attached with explosive bolts and are capable of a powered jettison. Those portals look fairly modular from the inside, so it's very possible that they're an emergency manway:

Hy9jVHQ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The closest thing that I've been able to find was a $6.00 ejector seat sign. It was a red triangle with the word "danger" on each side.

That being said, the Shuttle never had ejector seats, so it can't be that.

I'm starting to think that it might be some sort of low-tech docking helper. If the ISS crew could read the words "danger", then the Shuttle was getting too close. That's just a guess though.

Columbia had ejection seats for it's first four missions actually, They were the same used on the SR-71 and were in the event in an accident. However there usefulness was soon realized, This is a quote from Robert Crippen.

In truth, if you had to use them while the solids were there, I don’t believe you’dâ€â€if you popped out and then went down through the fire trail that’s behind the solids, that you would have ever survived, or if you did, you wouldn’t have a parachute, because it would have been burned up in the process. But by the time the solids had burned out, you were up to too high an altitude to use it. ... So I personally didn’t feel that the ejection seats were really going to help us out if we really ran into a contingency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That *is* an "explosive jettison charge" warning logo. The main hatch always had an explosive charge (ever since the Apollo 1 fire, NASA has wanted a way for the white room crew and the vehicle crew to get the hatch open NOW in the event of a fire on the pad), complete with a recessed, covered T-handle on the outside that would allow it to be blown by the white room crew (hence the "RESCUE" arrow on the side--at the point of it is the cover for the T-handle; you open the cover, grab the T-handle, and run ten feet away from the vehicle while pulling it with you, and the hatch blows, just like the canopy on any airplane with ejection seats would when you pull the corresponding external handle). However, NASA also considered the possibility that the Shuttle would end up landing off-runway someplace, leaving the main hatch blocked. For that contingency, they made the port docking window (the overhead ones seen in the OP photo) able to be removed in an emergency, with a thermal blanket and escape rope that would allow the crew to crawl/slide down the side of the vehicle to evacuate in that situation. I don't recall it having a jettison charge then, but apparently one was added at some point.

Of course, all of this blithely ignores the fact that there was no way in hell that an off-runway landing of the Shuttle would be in any way survivable, but hey, it weighed next to nothing, and had to be good for morale, right? (I think the thermal blanket and escape rope that were just inside the main hatch were much more likely to be useful in an emergency--say, the vehicle caught fire after a contingency landing and they couldn't wait for anyone to find the keys to the airport's stair truck.) Officially, the docking window exit was also supposed to be used in the event of a ditching (water landing), and there are plenty of photos of the water evacuation trainer at the Cape with astronauts clambering out that window during training, but again, there's NO WAY IN HELL that a ditching would have ever been survivable in the Shuttle (hence the escape pole added after Challenger)--I've seen films of some of the model tests at the Navy's David Taylor Model Basin, and regardless of the angle of descent, deck angle, and speed at impact, something about the design of the vehicle's belly causes it to slap the nose down, dig it in, and either start tumbling end-over-end, or yaw sharply to one side and then violently roll when the front wing digs in. In some cases, it was enough to cause the models (which are capable of handling far greater structural loads than the actual vehicle) to at least partially break apart... anyone on board would have been unconscious at best, and chunky salsa at worst, and the cabin would have sunk before anyone could have evacuated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, all of this blithely ignores the fact that there was no way in hell that an off-runway landing of the Shuttle would be in any way survivable, but hey, it weighed next to nothing, and had to be good for morale, right?

You can change a runway landing into an off-runway landing pretty quickly if you manage to miss the runway or run off the side... Civil Airliners manage to do that from time to time, and they have similar arangements, of course without the explosives to remove the hatch.

All transport category aircraft have a way for the crew to egress from the cockpit through a window with a rope as a secondary escape route. The 747 even has a hatch in a similar position on the roof. (It is sometimes used to clean the cockpit windows from above,too...) It's because if you get into a crash landing, the fuselage and with it the cockpit door might be warped and will not open, or there might be a fire in the cabin behind. And they have been used quite a few times.

I guess the reasoning behind the installation on the shuttle might be similar. More escape routes are always better, and the roof is the area least likely to be damaged in a rough landing.

Edit: Found a picture of the 747 roof hatch used to clean the windscreen:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Qantas/Boeing-747-438/0968767/L/

Edited by Lexif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...