Author Topic: The EOM spacelab mission  (Read 6477 times)

Offline nethegauner

  • Awaiting flight assignment since 1975
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 998
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
The EOM spacelab mission
« on: 11/16/2005 11:33 AM »
OK -- this may be a tough one to answer, but what was the original payload configuration for EOM-01, the cancelled spacelab flight that later evolved into the ATLAS series of missions?

I've always thought it was a short core module, a pallet and two MPESS carriers as depicted on the spacelab brochure that the KSC visitor center used to distribute. But I found the following in the Rogers Report:

"An excellent example of the need to change the manifest because of operational constraints is reflected by the landing weight on STS 61-K. This mission, an Earth Observation Mission (EOM) Spacelab flight, first was planned for OV-102 because of the desire for a high-power, long-duration mission (i.e., only OV-102 has the capability to carry a fifth cryoset to provide extra power). As the payload definition matured, the payload configuration changed from only a long module to a long module plus a mission peculiar experiment support structure (MPESS)."

Huh? Why would they need a long module only on an Earth observing flight? A core module in support of external elements holding all the instrumentation would make sense. Does anyone know what this is all about?

Offline Ben E

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 991
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #1 on: 11/16/2005 04:14 PM »
Nethegauner,

I'm not sure. I'd heard long ago that EOM-1 was the only manifested Shuttle mission ever to have only the short module - ie the forward segment which just contained instrumentation and few scientific 'racks'. The remainder was to be attached to two pallets. I also wasn't aware that MPESS carriers were assigned to EOM-1. I've certainly never heard of any plans to ever fly EOM-1 with a long module because, as you say, it was an Earth observation mission featuring a lot of pallet-mounted hardware.

To confuse the issue still further, I wasn't aware that EOM-1 was assigned to Columbia at all, but rather Atlantis. In fact, the final Shuttle manifest published in late 1985 before the 51L disaster lists EOM-1 on 61K/Atlantis in August 1986. Vance Brand, I believe, would have been its CDR.

I think a similar configuration was planned with the SDI's Starlab mission, which would have had some pretty hefty laser tracking equipment on an external pallet, but I think this mission was assigned with a long module.

BTW Does anyone know why the mission was changed from a short-module-and-pallets EOM-1 to the pallets-only ATLAS-1? Other than the experiments (ATMOS, GRILLE, ISO etc), what was the short module 'needed for' on EOM-1 that it wasn't needed for on ATLAS-1?

Ben


Offline nethegauner

  • Awaiting flight assignment since 1975
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 998
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #2 on: 11/17/2005 07:25 AM »
Quote
Ben E - 16/11/2005  6:14 PM

I also wasn't aware that MPESS carriers were assigned to EOM-1. I've certainly never heard of any plans to ever fly EOM-1 with a long module because, as you say, it was an Earth observation mission featuring a lot of pallet-mounted hardware.

I'll try and dig out that brochure. If I can find it, I'll post a scan of its cover. There seem to be many EOM/ATLAS instruments on the pallet/MPESS combination and as a short module was shown, I believed it to be the EOM-01 payload configuration.

Quote
Ben E - 16/11/2005  6:14 PM
To confuse the issue still further, I wasn't aware that EOM-1 was assigned to Columbia at all, but rather Atlantis. In fact, the final Shuttle manifest published in late 1985 before the 51L disaster lists EOM-1 on 61K/Atlantis in August 1986. Vance Brand, I believe, would have been its CDR.

Maybe the Rogers people confused it with a microgravity mission like SLS-01? That would make sense, would it not? Do You have a link to that manifest You mention?

Quote
Ben E - 16/11/2005  6:14 PMI think a similar configuration was planned with the SDI's Starlab mission, which would have had some pretty hefty laser tracking equipment on an external pallet, but I think this mission was assigned with a long module.
The laser system would have been installed in a long module. Its beam would then pass through a window at the end of the module and be reflected by a mirror on a single pallet.

Offline Ben E

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 991
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #3 on: 11/17/2005 08:34 AM »
Yes, you can find the pre-51L schedule at:

http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sat/sts_can.htm

Sorry, EOM-1 was scheduled for October 1986, not August.

I am trying to research a number of articles for this site about cancelled Shuttle missions and was intrigued by your knowledge of both the EOM-1 and SDI Starlab missions. Do you have access to any information or links about these two, or other, flights, as the info I've dug out so far from NASA is patchy to say the least?

Further, do you know why EOM-1 had a module and ATLAS-1 didn't, when their experiments/objectives were more-or-less the same?

Regards,

Ben


Offline nethegauner

  • Awaiting flight assignment since 1975
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 998
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #4 on: 11/17/2005 09:04 AM »
Quote
Ben E - 17/11/2005  10:34 AM

Yes, you can find the pre-51L schedule at:

http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sat/sts_can.htm

Thanks! That's quite an interesting topic. I think I'll also conduct a web search myself for more information regarding the pre-Challenger schedule.

Quote
Ben E - 17/11/2005  10:34 AM

I am trying to research a number of articles for this site about cancelled Shuttle missions and was intrigued by your knowledge of both the EOM-1 and SDI Starlab missions. Do you have access to any information or links about these two, or other, flights, as the info I've dug out so far from NASA is patchy to say the least?

I'd love to read such an article!

For details on STARLAB, I'd recommend the following:

http://ax.losangeles.af.mil/axf/eaapgs/_docs/starlab.pdf

Quote
Ben E - 17/11/2005  10:34 AM

Further, do you know why EOM-1 had a module and ATLAS-1 didn't, when their experiments/objectives were more-or-less the same?
Maybe someone thought the Igloo was providing sufficient flight electronics? ATLAS-01 flew five or six years later than planned -- so there was plenty of time for reviews and redesigns ...

Offline nethegauner

  • Awaiting flight assignment since 1975
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 998
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #5 on: 11/18/2005 09:55 AM »
It's me again. I have uncovered that brochure -- just took me half the night ...  :)

It is from the "Information Summaries" series and is entitled "Spacelab". Its document no. is "PMS 021 (MSFC)" and it is dated April, 1987 -- the post-Challenger year.

I'll attach a scan of the cover illustration. Everybody take a look please: those are ATLAS instruments on the pallet and the MPESS elements, right? Even the spheres from the electron beam experiment are there.

So my guess is: that's EOM-01.


Offline Avron

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4920
  • Liked: 150
  • Likes Given: 151
RE: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #6 on: 11/20/2005 12:54 AM »
Was that the Lab that was in the back of Columbia? I always wonder just how much impact the large mass had on the Orbiter as it headed back to earth, in terms of added stress on the TPS and structure? That ill fated flight was the heaviest to return from orbit.

Offline Ben E

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 991
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #7 on: 11/20/2005 11:52 AM »
Avron,

No, you're thinking of the Spacehab module, not Spacelab. The Spacehab carried on Columbia's fateful STS-107 mission was actually a commercial replacement-of-sorts for Spacelab, which was retired in 1998.

I don't think the EOM-1 configuration would have 'overloaded' the orbiter in terms of CoG. Rather, with only a short module, one pallet and an MPESS, it would have been quite 'light', bearing in mind that many later Spacelabs had long modules, pallets, MPESS trusses and EDO pallets aboard. Certainly, with the big Spacehab and the FREESTAR aboard, STS-107 was one of the heaviest missions yet flown and would have suffered additional re-entry heating as a result.

Eitherway, sadly, even if Columbia hadn't had such a heavy payload on STS-107, with a severely crippled wing it would have made no difference to the outcome...


Offline Ben E

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 991
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #8 on: 11/20/2005 01:43 PM »
A few more details about the original EOM-1 mission. Nine experiments from Spacelab-1, apparently, were aboard. This is from a June 1984 press release announcing the original EOM-1 crew for 51H. It later became 61K and a few different astronauts were assigned (Smith was replaced by Griggs and Springer by Stewart).

Release No. 84-029 June 7, 1984
NASA ANNOUNCES CREW MEMBERS FOR FUTURE SPACE SHUTTLE FLIGHTS
The flight crew for Space Shuttle flight 51-H and mission specialist
astronauts for mission 61-E were announced today by NASA.
Veteran astronaut Vance D. Brand will command mission 51-H, scheduled for
launch in November 1985, using the orbiter Atlantis. Brand was
commander of STS-5, the first operational Shuttle flight in
November 1982 and mission 41-B, the first use of the manned
maneuvering unit in February 1984.
Other members of the 51-H crew are Michael J. Smith, pilot;
Robert C. Springer, Dr. Owen K. Garriott and European Space Agency
astronaut, Dr. Claude Nicollier, mission specialists; and Dr.
Michael L. Lampton and Dr. Byron K. Lichtenberg, payload specialists.
Payload on Flight 51-H will be Earth Observation Mission-1
(EOM-I), a reflight of nine Spacelab-1 experiments in the areas of
space plasma physics, solar physics, atmospheric physics,
astronomy and earth observations. A short Spacelab habitable
module and a pallet of experiment hardware will occupy the
cargo bay.

Ben

Online jacqmans

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16844
  • Houten, The Netherlands
  • Liked: 2499
  • Likes Given: 168
Re: RE: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #9 on: 10/17/2008 08:03 PM »
Further, do you know why EOM-1 had a module and ATLAS-1 didn't, when their experiments/objectives were more-or-less the same?
Regards,
Ben

Ok this is from Dirk Frimout's book, he wrote after the STS-45 mission...Atlas-1...

The short Spacelabmodule was canceled, because after the Challenger accident NASA changed the maximal payload weight that any Shuttle would and could carry to orbit, so they wanted to be flexible, and every shuttle had to take up any payload..a module and a pallet was to heavy...

and also, the name EOM was changed to ATLAS because the Americans could not prounouce EOM... according to Frimout...

His book is called: Op zoek naar de Blauwe planeet ( In search of the Blue planet)

« Last Edit: 10/17/2008 08:14 PM by jacqmans »

Online jacqmans

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16844
  • Houten, The Netherlands
  • Liked: 2499
  • Likes Given: 168
Re: RE: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #10 on: 10/17/2008 08:06 PM »

It is from the "Information Summaries" series and is entitled "Spacelab". Its document no. is "PMS 021 (MSFC)" and it is dated April, 1987 -- the post-Challenger year.


Can you scan that document for me, or is that available online somewere ?

And is it possible to get an High Res. scan of the payload bay, that you posted a part of...

If anyone has more info about EOM-1 mission please let me know, I.m looking for info about it

Thanks,

Offline faustod

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 323
  • Italy
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #11 on: 10/20/2008 05:00 PM »
I find the EOM/Atlas Spacelab history very interesting, thanks to all.

Offline brahmanknight

  • I don't have all the right answers, but I do have all the right questions
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 687
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 94
Re: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #12 on: 10/20/2008 08:04 PM »
I love canceled shuttle manifest discussions. 

Now, Ben E, just dig up a little more about those Vandenberg missions ( I've already read the old features on this site...I want more! ). 

Offline History Buff

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #13 on: 10/20/2008 09:07 PM »
I love canceled shuttle manifest discussions. 

Now, Ben E, just dig up a little more about those Vandenberg missions ( I've already read the old features on this site...I want more! ). 

Yes please.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31500
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9866
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: The EOM spacelab mission
« Reply #14 on: 10/21/2008 02:56 AM »
Ask away in the shuttle Q&A thread.  I was in the USAF shuttle program office

Tags: Spacelab