are the EF payloads designed to be transfered through the JEM-PS airlock??
is there a special reason the three EF payloads flying in STS-127 are flying in the JEM-ELM and not in a future HTV mission??
The simplest answer is simply that NASA has agreed to launch them on the shuttle. More specifically, and IANAE, my understanding is that one of the JLE payloads (the ICS-EF) needs to be on-orbit before the HTV can be berthed. I believe it handles communication between the ISS and the HTV.
I don't think you can. You can simulate the outbound trip, but Mars is 0.38g so how do you simulate that on Earth?
The other thing is that a balloon doesn't remove gravity from your organs and thats what we really care about/ We don't care so much about walking in 0.38g but we care about what your blodd circulation and your organs feel aboiut 0.38g
A while ago there was talk of building new mini CMGs to replace the current units. Three minis would replace each full size unit, and would be small enough to be launched as pressurised cargo (PMA/Quest AL hatch limits). Has this progressed any further.
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-104/lores/jsc2001e19791.jpgIf the problem is with the crew lock (small diameter section), they can depress the equipment lock (large diameter section) and complete ingress there. The equipment lock is fully equipped to handle EVAs. It has all the same umbilical hookups as the crew lock and the equipment can handle repeated depress/repress cycles.If there is a orbiter docked, they can ingress through the orbiter airlock, though that takes more work. The shuttle crew will have to return to the shuttle, close hatches between orbiter/ISS, leak checks, depress shuttle lock, ingress, repress shuttle lock, re-open hatches. I think Pirs also has some ability to support contingency ingress by US EMUs but I don't know the degree of that ability.
Quote from: bobthemonkey on 06/19/2009 12:17 amA while ago there was talk of building new mini CMGs to replace the current units. Three minis would replace each full size unit, and would be small enough to be launched as pressurised cargo (PMA/Quest AL hatch limits). Has this progressed any further. No.
Does the ISS use the RMS Situational Awareness Display (RSAD), tested during STS-85, to maneuver loads out of direct view of the SSRMS operator, or is it another system? If it is diferent, was it derived from RSAD?
Quote from: NavySpaceFan on 06/24/2009 06:34 pmDoes the ISS use the RMS Situational Awareness Display (RSAD), tested during STS-85, to maneuver loads out of direct view of the SSRMS operator, or is it another system? If it is diferent, was it derived from RSAD?ISS uses DOUG (Dynamic Onboard Ubiquitous Graphics) rather than RSAD. I think some of the information displayed on RSAD is already available on the ISS robotics workstation anyway.
Quote from: Jorge on 06/24/2009 07:30 pmQuote from: NavySpaceFan on 06/24/2009 06:34 pmDoes the ISS use the RMS Situational Awareness Display (RSAD), tested during STS-85, to maneuver loads out of direct view of the SSRMS operator, or is it another system? If it is diferent, was it derived from RSAD?ISS uses DOUG (Dynamic Onboard Ubiquitous Graphics) rather than RSAD. I think some of the information displayed on RSAD is already available on the ISS robotics workstation anyway.Okay, so I guess my next question would be is DOUG derived from RSAD, or was it developed independently?