Author Topic: Shuttle Q&A Part 5  (Read 1542434 times)

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3220 on: 07/06/2014 03:07 am »
Watching video of some pre-Challenger launches I noticed the test director using the callsign "LTD" instead of "NTD". Was this designation used for all pre-Challenger launches? Or was it changed away from NTD in anticipation of SLC-6 launches where the test director wouldn't actually be a "NASA Test Director" and instead be an Air Force officer?


They got rid of the position in a few years.  There was no reason to have an integration position that took status from OTC, TBC, STM, SRO, PTC, Safety, etc and then report to the NTD.

The USAF position was AFTD.  Which also existed on the east coast for shuttle payloads and USAF ELV launches.

Offline thomasafb

  • Shuttle Hugger
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 130
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3221 on: 07/08/2014 08:21 pm »
At some point during the post Columbia stand-down, there was a news item regarding an upside-down installed actuator in the rudder/speed brake of Discovery. Is there any documentation about this and/or the work to replace it available?
Visited Shuttles (so far):
OV-104, OV-105

Offline Specifically-Impulsive

  • Member
  • Posts: 55
  • Formerly of the Nexus of Evil
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3222 on: 07/08/2014 09:13 pm »
At some point during the post Columbia stand-down, there was a news item regarding an upside-down installed actuator in the rudder/speed brake of Discovery. Is there any documentation about this and/or the work to replace it available?


It's discussed in "Space Shuttle Program Action 11" in the Implementation Plan, which can be found at this link:

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/58541main_RTF_rev2.pdf
« Last Edit: 07/08/2014 09:15 pm by Specifically-Impulsive »

Offline thomasafb

  • Shuttle Hugger
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 130
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3223 on: 07/09/2014 06:23 pm »
It's discussed in "Space Shuttle Program Action 11" in the Implementation Plan, which can be found at this link:

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/58541main_RTF_rev2.pdf

thanks a bunch!
Visited Shuttles (so far):
OV-104, OV-105

Offline sivodave

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 164
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3224 on: 07/10/2014 10:10 am »
Hello all.

Question about the Malarkey Milkshake performed during STS-39. I'm reading from the mission press information that the OMS firings for plum observations by the SPAS/IBSS were done with only one engine and that this was the first time that a single OMS engine firing was performed.

I'd like to know why they decided to do the firing with only one engine? Was only for fuel savings or for what else?

Thanks very much

Davide

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3225 on: 07/10/2014 01:46 pm »
Hello all.

Question about the Malarkey Milkshake performed during STS-39. I'm reading from the mission press information that the OMS firings for plum observations by the SPAS/IBSS were done with only one engine and that this was the first time that a single OMS engine firing was performed.

I'd like to know why they decided to do the firing with only one engine? Was only for fuel savings or for what else?

Thanks very much

Davide

Only a plume was needed and not thrust. 

Offline spacecane

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 106
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3226 on: 07/18/2014 06:05 pm »
When I was at the Atlantis exhibit a few months ago I noticed the "No Step" markings on the elevons.  This would imply that, like an airliner, walking on the other parts of the wing was OK.  Was it normal for technicians to walk on the orbiter wings for normal repairs and maintenance? 

Also, if I recall, Columbia and Challenger had tiles on part of the wing surface.  Were technicians allowed to walk on these?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3227 on: 07/18/2014 06:53 pm »
When I was at the Atlantis exhibit a few months ago I noticed the "No Step" markings on the elevons.  This would imply that, like an airliner, walking on the other parts of the wing was OK.  Was it normal for technicians to walk on the orbiter wings for normal repairs and maintenance? 

Also, if I recall, Columbia and Challenger had tiles on part of the wing surface.  Were technicians allowed to walk on these?

Yes and no tiles on top of wing.
« Last Edit: 07/18/2014 06:55 pm by Jim »

Offline OV135

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3228 on: 07/20/2014 09:19 pm »
The elevon flipper doors have the No Step markings. 

Offline sivodave

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 164
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3229 on: 07/23/2014 10:18 am »
When the USAF was developing SLC-6 for Space Shuttle launches there were concerns that gaseous  hydrogen could fill up the main engine ducts provoking a detonation during lift off, possibly damaging the shuttle.

I don't understand this issue. Why a shuttle on SLC-6 would have this problem? Couldn't they use burnoff preigniters as on the launch pad at the KSC?

Thanks

Davide

Offline DaveS

  • Shuttle program observer
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8526
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 1199
  • Likes Given: 65
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3230 on: 07/23/2014 10:28 am »
When the USAF was developing SLC-6 for Space Shuttle launches there were concerns that gaseous  hydrogen could fill up the main engine ducts provoking a detonation during lift off, possibly damaging the shuttle.

I don't understand this issue. Why a shuttle on SLC-6 would have this problem? Couldn't they use burnoff preigniters as on the launch pad at the KSC?

Thanks

Davide
They did. The H2 burn-off ignitors only combust GH2 that is expelled at engine ignition. However there is GH2 that is expelled during the countdown which at SLC-6 would have accumulated in the closed exhaust duct. KSC's LC-39 pads have an open flame trench which blows the GH2 away preventing dangerous build ups.
"For Sardines, space is no problem!"
-1996 Astronaut class slogan

"We're rolling in the wrong direction but for the right reasons"
-USA engineer about the rollback of Discovery prior to the STS-114 Return To Flight mission

Offline rayleighscatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1098
  • Maryland
  • Liked: 565
  • Likes Given: 238
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3231 on: 07/28/2014 09:10 pm »
Where are the SRB casings now?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3232 on: 07/28/2014 10:04 pm »
Where are the SRB casings now?

Utah, at the ATK plant

Offline OV135

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3233 on: 07/29/2014 02:04 pm »
What is this feed line next to the  LO2 gaseous  press line on the ET for STS-1?  http://images.ksc.nasa.gov/photos/1981/high/KSC-381C-2366.03.jpg

It's not on the tank for STS-7, which is the same SWET as that for STS-1. http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/2163main_sts7_et_hi.jpg

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3234 on: 07/29/2014 02:11 pm »
What is this feed line next to the  LO2 gaseous  press line on the ET for STS-1?  http://images.ksc.nasa.gov/photos/1981/high/KSC-381C-2366.03.jpg

It's not on the tank for STS-7, which is the same SWET as that for STS-1. http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/2163main_sts7_et_hi.jpg

anti-geyser line, which was removed for STS-4

Offline roma847

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2327
  • Be part of it
  • Germany
  • Liked: 2191
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3235 on: 07/29/2014 03:54 pm »
What is this feed line next to the  LO2 gaseous  press line on the ET for STS-1?  http://images.ksc.nasa.gov/photos/1981/high/KSC-381C-2366.03.jpg

It's not on the tank for STS-7, which is the same SWET as that for STS-1. http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/2163main_sts7_et_hi.jpg

Wow, nice old pics, very interesting. I could use similar shots of Challenger's STS-6.

***************
Regards from Germany

Manfred

Under construction:
1:144 Launch Pad 39A with Challenger STS-6

Offline OV135

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3236 on: 07/29/2014 05:44 pm »
I see. Is there a diagram of it to show how far down the tank it went and if it connected to the orbiter? I'm building STS-1 in 1/72 scale.

Offline roma847

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2327
  • Be part of it
  • Germany
  • Liked: 2191
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3237 on: 07/29/2014 07:42 pm »
Maybe this will help you further here.

This is the thread of Mike (egt95) in ARC Forums, who has built an impressive stack of Columbia STS-1, however 1:144, but he did a really fantastic job.



***************
Regards from Germany

Manfred

Under construction:
1:144 Launch Pad 39A with Challenger STS-6

Offline OV135

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3238 on: 07/30/2014 10:21 pm »
I've seen that thread. :)  Though in the photos I linked, it looks like the anti-geyser line is thicker than the two pressurization lines are.

I wish there was a diagram of this line and how it fit with the first 3 ETs.

Offline TJL

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1368
  • Liked: 94
  • Likes Given: 159
Re: Shuttle Q&A Part 5
« Reply #3239 on: 07/31/2014 10:58 pm »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1