Author Topic: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010) - Includes ETCS Updates  (Read 181637 times)

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9891
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #220 on: 08/01/2010 06:57 PM »
ETCS Loop A is down, Loop B is rejecting heat just fine. Team is watching temps on MBSU 1 & 4, all within limits and holding steady. Biggest impact is Node 2 MTL being down, which causes us to turn off half of JEM/Columbus nodes, including Node 2-1 MTM.

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9891
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #221 on: 08/01/2010 06:57 PM »
Jumper gives full redundancy on Tier 1 & 2 MDM's.

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9891
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #222 on: 08/01/2010 06:59 PM »
MCC Ground reconfig takes place at 23Z tonight, it means no comms for 1.5 hours. This puts us back in normal config, we were downgraded this weekend. We picked that time because it's in sleep period, and will be over Russian ground assets if needed.

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9891
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #223 on: 08/01/2010 07:00 PM »
Shannon: talked earlier about JEM reconfigure to get PCS back up and running. Ground: we're talking about best way to do that and will get words up after DPC.

Offline psloss

  • Veteran armchair spectator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16883
  • Liked: 980
  • Likes Given: 400
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #224 on: 08/01/2010 07:02 PM »
There is a time-line for Pump Module R&R for STS-116 (where the spare is stored on ESP2).
Question is how closely that timeline fits the current situation.  The PAO reports hint that it could take more than one EVA to do everything, and it may be that there are different setup / cleanup steps now, compared to the plan for 12A.1.

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9891
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #225 on: 08/01/2010 07:02 PM »
Nothing from the other ground controllers, on to Russia but apparently the translator is on dinner break so no English.

Offline psloss

  • Veteran armchair spectator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16883
  • Liked: 980
  • Likes Given: 400
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #226 on: 08/01/2010 07:04 PM »
Will this EVA officially be classified as an Unplanned EVA or a Contingency EVA?

If it is classed as a Contingency EVA, then this will be the first ever US Contingency EVA in history (excluding the whole STS-27 business).
Edit: it might be a contingency EVA for station, but that would be different than a contingency EVA for a Shuttle mission in an 'apples to oranges' way.
« Last Edit: 08/01/2010 07:21 PM by psloss »

Offline psloss

  • Veteran armchair spectator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16883
  • Liked: 980
  • Likes Given: 400
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #227 on: 08/01/2010 07:26 PM »
Bill Harwood has updated his article on this:
http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/recent.html

"11:50 PM, 7/31/10, Update: Coolant problem triggers powerdowns aboard space station  (UPDATED at 1:30 AM and 7:25 AM with additional details; pump restart attempt fails; UPDATED at 1;45 PM with plans for repair spacewalk)"

Offline PahTo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1488
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 136
  • Likes Given: 390
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #228 on: 08/01/2010 07:26 PM »

As usual, the great info on this site sparks even more questions.

STS-116 did not include transport of ESP2--it arrived on ISS aboard STS-114.  I wonder why STS-116 had the procs for replacement?

Anyway, clearly the steps here will be different from those drafted for that mission, but also there will be some similarities (robotics and fluid QDs seem to be the biggest, and also those most similar).  Fact is, imagine gearing up for a week of work, and then having the team come to you with a 500 page doc and say--"Needs to be read, understood, and executed in about a week--thanks!"

Again, impressed with how the teams work together--this is going to be a very challenging week and I'm confident our professionals with get it done.  Thanks for the efforts everyone!


There is a time-line for Pump Module R&R for STS-116 (where the spare is stored on ESP2).
Question is how closely that timeline fits the current situation.  The PAO reports hint that it could take more than one EVA to do everything, and it may be that there are different setup / cleanup steps now, compared to the plan for 12A.1.


Offline psloss

  • Veteran armchair spectator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16883
  • Liked: 980
  • Likes Given: 400
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #229 on: 08/01/2010 07:35 PM »
As usual, the great info on this site sparks even more questions.

STS-116 did not include transport of ESP2--it arrived on ISS aboard STS-114.  I wonder why STS-116 had the procs for replacement?
As noted last night in this thread, STS-121 brought up a spare that was moved to the ESP during one of the mission EVAs.

The 12A.1 mission (STS-116) activated the primary thermal control system.  Prior to that, an "early" system was being used.  The pump modules were critical path for activating each loop for the first time on that mission; if the pumps didn't activate successfully, they wanted to be ready to switch them out immediately.

Offline PahTo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1488
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 136
  • Likes Given: 390
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #230 on: 08/01/2010 07:39 PM »

Good stuff--thanks!

As usual, the great info on this site sparks even more questions.

STS-116 did not include transport of ESP2--it arrived on ISS aboard STS-114.  I wonder why STS-116 had the procs for replacement?
As noted last night in this thread, STS-121 brought up a spare that was moved to the ESP during one of the mission EVAs.

The 12A.1 mission (STS-116) activated the primary thermal control system.  Prior to that, an "early" system was being used.  The pump modules were critical path for activating each loop for the first time on that mission; if the pumps didn't activate successfully, they wanted to be ready to switch them out immediately.


Offline vt_hokie

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3012
  • Hazlet, NJ
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 179
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #231 on: 08/01/2010 07:50 PM »
If the other loop were to be lost before this one is restored, what are the implications?  Can the Russian segment continue to support crew independently?

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9891
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #232 on: 08/01/2010 07:59 PM »
WHC (toilet) actions: WPA is now working and processing water, so switch WHC back to UPA so we can start processing. Give us a flush count when you are done.
« Last Edit: 08/01/2010 07:59 PM by rdale »

Offline JimO

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1813
  • Texas, USA
  • Liked: 215
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #233 on: 08/01/2010 08:34 PM »
If the other loop were to be lost before this one is restored, what are the implications?  Can the Russian segment continue to support crew independently?

I am advised that the current failure is one of the "Big Fourteen" -- the most serious contingencies which leave the ISS no-fault-tolerant in other areas. It would imply quick evacuation of at least half the crew.

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6633
  • Liked: 899
  • Likes Given: 136
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #234 on: 08/01/2010 09:20 PM »
Can replacement spares for the pump be brought up, in the future, without shuttle missions? Specifically, would such equipment fit on the HTV external rack?

Yes, Pump Modules can fit on the HTV EP (Exposed Pallet).

Is there a way to return a damaged pump module for analysis without Shuttle?

Offline hop

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3175
  • Liked: 357
  • Likes Given: 691
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #235 on: 08/01/2010 09:34 PM »
Is there a way to return a damaged pump module for analysis without Shuttle?
Answer to this should be obvious. The only other operational vehicle with any down mass capability is Soyuz, and that's limited to tens of kg inside the DM. No way the pump is going there.

If the problem is in a removable sub component (it's suggested in NASA statements that mechanical pump failure is judged unlikely for the symptoms) maybe that could be removed and returned.

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9891
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #236 on: 08/01/2010 09:41 PM »
Regardless, I think they have a few opportunities over the next few flights to get it down for analysis.

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6633
  • Liked: 899
  • Likes Given: 136
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #237 on: 08/01/2010 10:08 PM »
Is there a way to return a damaged pump module for analysis without Shuttle?
Answer to this should be obvious.

Okay, alright, I give.  What I meant was, is there a long-term solution to this in the plans of any of the current or future (ATV/HTV/OSC/SpaceX, not including any future NASA HLV) providers of services to the ISS?  I wouldn't ask the question if I already knew the answer.

Offline psloss

  • Veteran armchair spectator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16883
  • Liked: 980
  • Likes Given: 400
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #238 on: 08/01/2010 10:12 PM »
Regardless, I think they have a few opportunities over the next few flights to get it down for analysis.
Given the current situation, it's an interesting question about how high a priority it would be to bring that ORU down.  The two flights committed to aren't currently bringing back any unpressurized cargo, so there may only be one opportunity and that's not official yet.

Offline erioladastra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1246
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Expedition 24 thread (June 2 - September 24, 2010)
« Reply #239 on: 08/02/2010 01:50 AM »
There is a time-line for Pump Module R&R for STS-116 (where the spare is stored on ESP2).
Question is how closely that timeline fits the current situation.  The PAO reports hint that it could take more than one EVA to do everything, and it may be that there are different setup / cleanup steps now, compared to the plan for 12A.1.


Thre will be 2 EVAs.  Likel #1 Thurs or Fri and #2 around Sun.

Tags: