Yes, and the four RS-25 main engines on the SLS rocket (Space Launch System) are literally SSME's harvested from the shuttles (Space Shuttle Main Engine). Of course that means they are re-usable. So sad to see them plummet to the ocean floor. Perversely Rocketdyne is building cheaper non-reusable versions of the RS-25 for future missions.
replyIt has a launch escape system, unlike the shuttle.
replyWas any shuttle lost to the SRBs?
replyYes, Challenger - although program management knew they were violating a launch constraint (temperature), and it was the low temperature that produced the conditions necessary for SRB failure.
replyAs with any aerospace mishap, it's a chain of events, not just one cause.
Yes, challenger. The O-ring failed, creating a gas exhaust that almost instantly destroyed the main propellant tank.
replyI believe what it destroyed was the strut holding the booster to the tank. When the strut burned through the assembly came apart and aerodynamic forces did the remainder of the destruction.
replyYes, 50% of shuttle losses were due to SRB failures (Challenger)
replyThat's exactly how Challenger was lost.
replyThe Artemis SRBs incorporate design changes to address the causes of the Challenger failure. Specifically they changed the joint design, added another o-ring, and they have electric joint heaters to keep the seals warm.
reply