The aft endcone is being removed from MPLM FM-1/PMM "Leonardo". Once removed, the racks inside the MPLM will be removed with the Rack Insertion Device (RID), which can be seen at the top-left of the image.
Quote from: Space Pete on 04/27/2010 08:53 pmThe aft endcone is being removed from MPLM FM-1/PMM "Leonardo". Once removed, the racks inside the MPLM will be removed with the Rack Insertion Device (RID), which can be seen at the top-left of the image.This belongs and is already being posted in the STS-133 thread.
This is the Node 1 STA (Structural Test Article).
Quote from: Space Pete on 05/11/2010 12:44 pmThis is the Node 1 STA (Structural Test Article).Ah, so that's what they brought into the SSPF a few days back...Edit: nope, looks like it came in a little while ago...
For those interested, here's a picture I took from the observation area of the Space Station Processing Facility on the Leonardo MPLM, as it undergoes its transformation to a PMM.
“BREAKING NEWS: The US space agency NASA have agreed to send a fourth Node to the ISS on an additional Shuttle mission, designated STS-135. This new Node, named Node 4, will be berthed to the zenith port of Node 2.”Ha! I WISH! I’m just kidding. This is the Node 1 STA (Structural Test Article).
Quote from: Space Pete on 05/11/2010 12:44 pm“BREAKING NEWS: The US space agency NASA have agreed to send a fourth Node to the ISS on an additional Shuttle mission, designated STS-135. This new Node, named Node 4, will be berthed to the zenith port of Node 2.”Ha! I WISH! I’m just kidding. This is the Node 1 STA (Structural Test Article).You kid...but ask yourself: why is it out on the floor?? Phillip says cleaning...but why would you clean it in a clean room?
Of course, this is all purely speculation – but can you think of a better reason for congress to approve STS-135 - adding a new module to allow for future expansion of the ISS by private industry? They wouldn't be able to argue that it goes against Obama's new vision, would they?
Setting aside other hurdles (such as the cost), one year wouldn't be nearly enough lead time to (among other things) fabricate the parts, outfit the test article, integrate it into current station operations (probably breaking some existing procedures/protocols), and test it for flight in its current configuration.
Quote from: psloss on 05/23/2010 09:12 pmSetting aside other hurdles (such as the cost), one year wouldn't be nearly enough lead time to (among other things) fabricate the parts, outfit the test article, integrate it into current station operations (probably breaking some existing procedures/protocols), and test it for flight in its current configuration. How long would it take to prepare it for duty as the first element of a BLEO station?
Quote from: sdsds on 05/24/2010 01:18 amHow long would it take to prepare it for duty as the first element of a BLEO station? [...] pointless. [...] Better to start with a new design optimized for the intended launch vehicle
How long would it take to prepare it for duty as the first element of a BLEO station?