Very interesting. I wonder if they can return with all of that. If not, I wonder what gets priority - the PMA or the AP (I'm thinking the AP).
Can they fit the BGA motor on the LMC, or would they need a separate carrier?
Well, they plan for contingency and AOA cases with a full payload, so I think they can return fully loaded as long as CG and safety margins are within limits.
With the new short-term appropriations bill signed on Dec. 22 through March 4, several Internet sites say that STS-135 will not have funding problems. (since $3.1 billion appropriated for the space shuttle program in 2010 in sufficient for STS-133, 134 and 135) 1. Since at least in current belief is that the lauch will take place in late June, when will NASA officially manifest it?2. When will the tank swap decision between STS-134 and STS-135 be official? (or are they waiting till ET-137 investigations are over so that anything learnt from it can be applied here)
The NASA Authorization Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-267) directs NASA to conduct the above referenced mission. As of this date, the Congress has not cleared final FY 2011 appropriations for the Federal government, including NASA. However, the FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act provides funding for most Federal departments and agencies, including NASA, through March 4, 2010, at FY 2010 enacted levels. Funding made available in this measure will enable NASA to work towards the STS-135 mission.For this reason, I ask that you continue planning and preparations efforts to execute this mission in late June 2011 as currently planned. This includes maintaining the requisite workforce to safely conduct this mission and extending contracts if necessary. We must focus on STS-135 as a real mission as well as a Launch-On-Need capability for the STS-134. Without clarity in focus now we reduce the probability of safely executing this critical mission. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide clear direction for the teams. STS-135 is critical to health of the International Space Station.
NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden today reiterated a commitment to fly a third shuttle mission this year and said the agency has determined the mission would be safe.The 2010 NASA Authorization Act requests the flight pending an assessment of its safety, which Bolden said is not yet final.
Something doesn't compute in that article... Bolden says that they determined the mission would be safe, but they can't formally approve the flight until they determine the mission will be safe?
Quote from: rdale on 01/05/2011 05:19 PMSomething doesn't compute in that article... Bolden says that they determined the mission would be safe, but they can't formally approve the flight until they determine the mission will be safe?Sounds like he said something to the effect that the safety assessment isn't final. Perhaps in a formal sense and perhaps the assessment process isn't complete.
Wait... I thought the assessment process for safety was completed back in September? What am I missing here? I clearly remember that in the Congressional bill (now law) that provided direction to fly STS-135 we had discussions on the fact that the safety assessments were already complete.
Quote from: ChrisGebhardt on 01/05/2011 06:58 PMWait... I thought the assessment process for safety was completed back in September? What am I missing here? I clearly remember that in the Congressional bill (now law) that provided direction to fly STS-135 we had discussions on the fact that the safety assessments were already complete.The NESC report was completed in September, but the Shuttle and ISS programs reviewed and responded to findings and recommendations subsequent to that. And then oversight bodies like the ASAP reviewed both the report and subsequent responses.This doesn't sound like a big deal, more along the lines that the process of vetting the report and subsequent actions isn't formally complete yet.