Author Topic: General ISS Q&A thread  (Read 879677 times)

Offline Michael Z Freeman

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 231
  • UK
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #860 on: 12/14/2008 09:54 pm »
I have Autodesk Inventor at work. I can't make any promises, but I'll see if I can import the eDrawing file and convert it into something useable. My manager has KeyCreator, which has more options...it might work for him if mine doesn't...

Don't ask why we have 2 different software packages  :(

That would be helpful :) . I think I have everything apart from the US Destiny Science module which is in the eDrawing file. I could take it from the VRML/X3D model I have but that is far from accurate. The eDrawing is based on the ISS engineering drawings published by NASA.
« Last Edit: 12/14/2008 09:56 pm by DJ Barney »
I love NSF!

Offline ede545

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #861 on: 12/22/2008 01:16 pm »
A couple of days ago I watched Sandy Magnus working in one of the new crew quarters.  Since the mic-cable wasn't long enough she had to partly communicate with MCC by hand signals through the video link.

I was just wondering if there ever have been plans to use some sort of wireless headsets on the station.  Not for "normal operations" of course, but for those (rare?) situations where they have either no mic around or need it very frequently.

I totally understand that adding any new radio device to the station environment requires careful evaluation, so it won't be done without having a reasonable benefit.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #862 on: 12/22/2008 01:22 pm »
A couple of days ago I watched Sandy Magnus working in one of the new crew quarters.  Since the mic-cable wasn't long enough she had to partly communicate with MCC by hand signals through the video link.

I was just wondering if there ever have been plans to use some sort of wireless headsets on the station.  Not for "normal operations" of course, but for those (rare?) situations where they have either no mic around or need it very frequently.

I totally understand that adding any new radio device to the station environment requires careful evaluation, so it won't be done without having a reasonable benefit.


The shuttle even had a wireless system.  It ended up being a pain, with battery charging, and interference.   Also always wearing it was a pain.

That was years ago, maybe a WIFI or Bluetooth system could work
« Last Edit: 12/22/2008 01:24 pm by Jim »

Offline ede545

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #863 on: 12/22/2008 05:59 pm »
The shuttle even had a wireless system.  It ended up being a pain, with battery charging, and interference.   Also always wearing it was a pain.

That was years ago, maybe a WIFI or Bluetooth system could work

Well, wearing it all the time really sounds uncomfortable.  I was rather thinking of an option for those tasks where it might be helpful.  But I admit that sophisticated solutions are not always the best choice.

But interesting to learn that it had been used in the past.



I would like to use the opportunity to thank you so much for all the background information you are providing here, Jim.  It's a pleasure to read through the Q&A threads.  Thanks!

Eric

Offline erioladastra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1413
  • Liked: 222
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #864 on: 12/23/2008 12:41 am »
A couple of days ago I watched Sandy Magnus working in one of the new crew quarters.  Since the mic-cable wasn't long enough she had to partly communicate with MCC by hand signals through the video link.

I was just wondering if there ever have been plans to use some sort of wireless headsets on the station.  Not for "normal operations" of course, but for those (rare?) situations where they have either no mic around or need it very frequently.

I totally understand that adding any new radio device to the station environment requires careful evaluation, so it won't be done without having a reasonable benefit.


No plans.  With reliability concerns (e.g., being able to assuredly pass alarms), it has some problems.  Plus there is a real problem getting anything wireless for the RS (the Russians don't like it - plus most signals don't do well on their side).  But there are some decent wireless systems and we are working to improve the system.  So maybe one day.

Online Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1023
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #865 on: 12/23/2008 02:21 pm »
Not sure if this belongs in here or the shuttle Q&A, however I will post here.  In the August 1999 version of Popular Science (yes, a little old!)  There was talk of a proposed double docking module to be built by Spacehab so that Columbia could service the Station, and that it would not use an ODS.  Anyone any more information about this proposed module?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #866 on: 12/23/2008 02:24 pm »
Not sure if this belongs in here or the shuttle Q&A, however I will post here.  In the August 1999 version of Popular Science (yes, a little old!)  There was talk of a proposed double docking module to be built by Spacehab so that Columbia could service the Station, and that it would not use an ODS.  Anyone any more information about this proposed module?

It would have had an APAS in the roof of the aft module. 
What else would you like to know?

Online Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1023
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #867 on: 12/23/2008 07:57 pm »
Not sure if this belongs in here or the shuttle Q&A, however I will post here.  In the August 1999 version of Popular Science (yes, a little old!)  There was talk of a proposed double docking module to be built by Spacehab so that Columbia could service the Station, and that it would not use an ODS.  Anyone any more information about this proposed module?

It would have had an APAS in the roof of the aft module. 
What else would you like to know?

Hmm, well let me tell you first what the general idea of what I think the module would have been, and feel free to correct me.  I beleive it would have been a version of or the modified double module seen on STS-107.  There would have been a hatch near the front section with an extendable APAS ring.  The internal airlock remains and would connect to the Spacehab at the rear of the shuttle by an extended version of the Spacelab tunnel.

Would the Spacehab itself have sat near the rear bulkhead of the payload bay or about midway in the bay?
How wold the shift of docking position affected the shuttle/station complex (clearances, preventing the torque as seen on STS-126,)
Also was the shuttle system so taxed that NASA was looking to this to solve a supply problem (ie spending much more for a unique asset instead of launching Columbia with a lighter MPLM) or was this simply an unsolicited proposal from SpaceHab?

Thanks Jim, this has been kind of bugging me for 9 years.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #868 on: 12/23/2008 08:23 pm »
unsolicited proposal from SpaceHab
APAS in aft module
the module would be in the same position as 107

The STS/ISS integration for this module never got far enough to look at torques and clearances

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #869 on: 12/25/2008 03:51 am »
Not sure if this belongs in here or the shuttle Q&A, however I will post here.  In the August 1999 version of Popular Science (yes, a little old!)  There was talk of a proposed double docking module to be built by Spacehab so that Columbia could service the Station, and that it would not use an ODS.  Anyone any more information about this proposed module?

I saw some of the propaganda for this proposal - the core rationale for the APAS equipped Double Docking Module was to allow the Shuttle to be docked with ISS with the docking adapter in the centerline; this would presumably make attitude control by Shuttle much more efficient. Also, Shuttle would not have to carry ODS, which would increase performance.

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6404
  • Liked: 529
  • Likes Given: 67
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #870 on: 12/25/2008 04:42 am »
Not sure if this belongs in here or the shuttle Q&A, however I will post here.  In the August 1999 version of Popular Science (yes, a little old!)  There was talk of a proposed double docking module to be built by Spacehab so that Columbia could service the Station, and that it would not use an ODS.  Anyone any more information about this proposed module?

I saw some of the propaganda for this proposal - the core rationale for the APAS equipped Double Docking Module was to allow the Shuttle to be docked with ISS with the docking adapter in the centerline; this would presumably make attitude control by Shuttle much more efficient. Also, Shuttle would not have to carry ODS, which would increase performance.


It did have some serious disadvantages, though.

It could not be co-manifested with an assembly flight. The DDM was mounted aft in the payload bay, so nothing could fit behind it, and the tunnel would prevent anything from fitting in front of it.

It could not replace any of the MPLM flights since ISS racks could not fit through the APAS hatch.

It could not even replace the existing Spacehab flights on the ISS manifest. It could not have been made ready in time to replace the 2A.x logistics flights, and it could not have been flown on 12A.1 or 13A.1 due to being co-manifested with the P5 and S5 truss segments.

It did not buy back all the performance cost of the ODS since it still needed an airlock in the tunnel to protect for shuttle-based contingency EVAs (most of the mass of the ODS is the integral airlock).

It would have improved docking performance by minimizing torques on the mechanism, but the current Post-Contact Thrusting scheme already minimizes that fairly well, and even in the cases where it doesn't (such as 126), it is more of an annoyance than a threat to either safety or mission success.

So in the end, it's really hard for me to see what the target market was for the DDM, especially after the loss of Columbia.
JRF

Offline A8-3

  • Member
  • Posts: 50
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #871 on: 01/05/2009 04:28 pm »
Sorry if this is explained elsewhere, just give me a link if it is.

I keep hearing that the station crew is going to be enlarged this year. Since the Soyuz can only hold three crew, what is the plan for lifeboats? Will there be two Soyuz?

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6404
  • Liked: 529
  • Likes Given: 67
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #872 on: 01/05/2009 04:51 pm »
Sorry if this is explained elsewhere, just give me a link if it is.

I keep hearing that the station crew is going to be enlarged this year. Since the Soyuz can only hold three crew, what is the plan for lifeboats? Will there be two Soyuz?


Yes.
JRF

Offline cd-slam

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
  • Singapore
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 315
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #873 on: 01/15/2009 03:47 am »
Sorry if this is explained elsewhere, just give me a link if it is.

I keep hearing that the station crew is going to be enlarged this year. Since the Soyuz can only hold three crew, what is the plan for lifeboats? Will there be two Soyuz?

Read anik's excellent Schedule of ISS events thread which includes the Soyuz docking & undocking events. There will be two Soyuz docked to the station whenever 6 crew are on board.

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17939
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 7692
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #874 on: 01/16/2009 08:11 pm »
I've reached an impasse with this model. I am unable to properly update it because I do not have a copy of Solidworks to import / export the eDrawing.


I have Autodesk Inventor at work. I can't make any promises, but I'll see if I can import the eDrawing file and convert it into something useable. My manager has KeyCreator, which has more options...it might work for him if mine doesn't...

Don't ask why we have 2 different software packages  :(

No joy on this DJ Barney. The only Solidworks import options I have are prt, sldprt, asm, sldasm.

Offline NavySpaceFan

  • Defender of All Things Nautical!!!
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1001
  • Norfolk, VA
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #875 on: 01/16/2009 11:29 pm »
I was watching Mission to MIR (amazing on Blu-Ray BTW) and John Blaha mentioned that going from one module to an other took some getting used to because of the change in orientation (i.e. which way was considered "up") from module to module.  On ISS, all the modules are oriented the same way.  Was this by accident or design?
« Last Edit: 01/16/2009 11:29 pm by NavySpaceFan »
<----First launch of DISCOVERY, STS-41D!!!!

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #876 on: 01/16/2009 11:34 pm »
I was watching Mission to MIR (amazing on Blu-Ray BTW) and John Blaha mentioned that going from one module to an other took some getting used to because of the change in orientation (i.e. which way was considered "up") from module to module.  On ISS, all the modules are oriented the same way.  Was this by accident or design?

By design.  Only Node 3 will be in a different plane

Offline NavySpaceFan

  • Defender of All Things Nautical!!!
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1001
  • Norfolk, VA
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #877 on: 01/16/2009 11:49 pm »
I was watching Mission to MIR (amazing on Blu-Ray BTW) and John Blaha mentioned that going from one module to an other took some getting used to because of the change in orientation (i.e. which way was considered "up") from module to module.  On ISS, all the modules are oriented the same way.  Was this by accident or design?

By design.  Only Node 3 will be in a different plane

Thanks Jim!  Sounds like this was one of the lessons learned from the Shuttle-MIR program.
<----First launch of DISCOVERY, STS-41D!!!!

Offline nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2691
  • Liked: 981
  • Likes Given: 347
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #878 on: 01/17/2009 12:04 am »
By design.  Only Node 3 will be in a different plane

Isn't it going on port unity, how is this a different plane or was the internal up and down 'reference points' set before the move?
« Last Edit: 01/17/2009 12:04 am by nacnud »

Offline Life_Support_32

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 245
  • Houston, TX
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #879 on: 01/17/2009 02:53 am »
By design.  Only Node 3 will be in a different plane

Isn't it going on port unity, how is this a different plane or was the internal up and down 'reference points' set before the move?

It was going to be on Nadir, but now it is being moved to Port.  Interestingly enough, it will need to be clocked 180 degrees in order to line up the ventilation system and also get the lights facing "up", like the other modules.  Makes for some interesting systems integration ;-)

 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0