Instead of these tanks, they should be designing and testing new types of water recovery systems from different suppliers, to see what works and to develop the system for Mars missions etc... but money and crew time talks, and we get this relief effort.
I have heard that this had less to do with cost than with (I think) bureaucracy. The key aspect of the tanks was that they were already certified for flight, whereas any new hardware would have to be certified. I think (my memory is hazy on this) that it was not really a cost issue, but the time required to certify any new hardware.After ISS is pushed into the Indian Ocean the Navy can go and retrieve the tanks for Endeavour.
After ISS is pushed into the Indian Ocean the Navy can go and retrieve the tanks for Endeavour.
Photo gallery providing a look at the water tanks' extraction from Endeavour and Atlantis:http://www.collectspace.com/news/news-082615a-shuttle-endeavour-water-tanks.html
Quote from: collectSPACE on 08/27/2015 12:50 pmPhoto gallery providing a look at the water tanks' extraction from Endeavour and Atlantis:http://www.collectspace.com/news/news-082615a-shuttle-endeavour-water-tanks.htmlFrom the text, it appears that NASA now has eight water tanks from Endeavor and Atlantis that will be launched full.Do they plan on disposing of them when they are empty or return them for reuse? Single use would mean the whole effort would bring up about 800 liters of potable water.How does that compare to the annual water budget?How much water is being sent up each year?Will it just be easier for the astronauts to plumb in these tanks than it is to transfer water from the bags in which it is currently launched?
Quote from: Comga on 08/28/2015 02:51 pmQuote from: collectSPACE on 08/27/2015 12:50 pmPhoto gallery providing a look at the water tanks' extraction from Endeavour and Atlantis:http://www.collectspace.com/news/news-082615a-shuttle-endeavour-water-tanks.htmlFrom the text, it appears that NASA now has eight water tanks from Endeavor and Atlantis that will be launched full.Do they plan on disposing of them when they are empty or return them for reuse? Single use would mean the whole effort would bring up about 800 liters of potable water.How does that compare to the annual water budget?How much water is being sent up each year?Will it just be easier for the astronauts to plumb in these tanks than it is to transfer water from the bags in which it is currently launched?from Robert's article:"The Endeavour waste water tank was shipped to the Kennedy Space Center for removal of some sensor and wiring components that will serve as spares for the storage system,"It looks to be a permanent fixture for the ISS. I would imagine they will create a new plumbing system and use them (likely) in lieu of the PWC they now use (which do tend to leak, new or used).So the question is (since space is at a premium on board the ISS): where will they be mounted? It has to be inside, and though they 'could' move them into position for re-filling the system, one would imagine a permanent location is best.
I'm guessing a ZSR
The eight shuttle potable water tanks, each with a capacity of almost 20 gallons (75 liters) would provide 158 gallons (600 liters) of water storage capacity. Crew members on station typically consume about a gallon (3.8 liters) of water a day, so this new storage capability would provide roughly 25 days of reserve water for a typical U.S. segment crew of three.
The water storage system rack will most likely reside in the U.S. laboratory due to available connectivity to the station’s existing potable water plumbing.Deployment of the system currently is targeted within the next three to five years. Project details and plans still are being finalized,
Quote from: Darren_Hensley on 08/28/2015 04:31 pmI'm guessing a ZSR Those are only for soft goods and such. An ISPR or similar would be more likely.
I have over 20 empirical evidence documents on the subject...A ZSR will likely be emptied to accommodate modification for use with the water tanks as noted above.It was and still is an educated guess. "Project details and plans still are being finalized"What evidence do you have to support your "similar" rack?
Hard ZSR (CHeCS)
.The MPLM (Shuttle2008)shot illustrates both types, and Piggy Back Pallets (6 soft type with containment boxes)and bungee restraint. There is also a net(web) restraint. I doubt they would use any of these methods for the water tanks.