Author Topic: General ISS Q&A thread  (Read 879755 times)

Offline DMeader

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 959
  • Liked: 103
  • Likes Given: 48
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #900 on: 02/23/2009 07:08 pm »
I am currently reading two books on Soyuz and the Salyut/Mir programs, and something does not make sense to me. All of the dockings described there between Soyuz as well as the TKS-based Mir addon modules refer to retracting the docking probe to achieve hard dock. No mention is made in the books of the engines being needed. is this incorrect?

Except for Kvant-1 and the docking module, Mir Modules had their own engines to approach and dock to the station (Kvant-1 had a tug ala Progress)

I'm aware of that, but that is not my question.

I know the addon modules were based on the TKS resupply module that Chelomei designed for use with his Almaz military space station. As such they had their own engine systems, and had the conventional Soyuz probe-and-drogue docking system. What I am trying to determine is whether or not those engines were required for hard docking. Based on everything that I have read, they were not. After soft dock with the Konus drogue on the Mir baseblock, hard dock was achieved by retracting the docking probe, not by firing the engines. Also, after the difficulty with hard dock when Kvant was installed on the Mir baseblock, the spacewalking cosmonauts removed the errant trashbag that was fouling the port, and then the probe was commanded to retract for hard dock. No mention in that situation is made of an engine firing.

The docking port on the Kristall module was of the APAS type as was the port on the docking module. As such, it did require impulse from the client spacecraft for hard dock. If this is all wrong, please correct me with references, but this is how I understand it to work.
« Last Edit: 02/23/2009 07:11 pm by DMeader »

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1023
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #901 on: 02/23/2009 07:15 pm »
I am currently reading two books on Soyuz and the Salyut/Mir programs, and something does not make sense to me. All of the dockings described there between Soyuz as well as the TKS-based Mir addon modules refer to retracting the docking probe to achieve hard dock. No mention is made in the books of the engines being needed. is this incorrect?

Except for Kvant-1 and the docking module, Mir Modules had their own engines to approach and dock to the station (Kvant-1 had a tug ala Progress)

I'm aware of that, but that is not my question.

I know the addon modules were based on the TKS resupply module that Chelomei designed for use with his Almaz military space station. As such they had their own engine systems, and had the conventional Soyuz probe-and-drogue docking system. What I am trying to determine is whether or not those engines were required for hard docking. Based on everything that I have read, they were not. After soft dock with the Konus drogue on the Mir baseblock, hard dock was achieved by retracting the docking probe, not by firing the engines. Also, after the difficulty with hard dock when Kvant was installed on the Mir baseblock, the spacewalking cosmonauts removed the errant trashbag that was fouling the port, and then the probe was commanded to retract for hard dock. No mention in that situation is made of an engine firing.

The docking port on the Kristall module was of the APAS type as was the port on the docking module. As such, it did require impulse from the client spacecraft for hard dock. If this is all wrong, please correct me with references, but this is how I understand it to work.

Other way around, impulse is needed for soft docking, hard dock is established by pulling in hooks

Offline DMeader

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 959
  • Liked: 103
  • Likes Given: 48
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #902 on: 02/23/2009 07:23 pm »
We seem to be talking at cross purposes so I'll let it go. I know the active spacecraft has to fly up to the target with its own engines. By citing other examples I was trying to diplomatically correct...

Quote
...However, doesn't the docking system require a large momentum to engage ala APAS?

....which I do not think is correct.  "The hybrid docking system of the Soyuz/Progress vein" does not require what is described as "a large momentum".
« Last Edit: 02/23/2009 07:42 pm by DMeader »

Offline axmor61

  • Member
  • Posts: 41
  • Port Saint Lucie, Fl
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #903 on: 03/11/2009 12:42 am »
Question regarding the S6 truss:
 Will this truss have the Visual Target dots as the P6 truss?

Alfonso
www.axmpaperspacescalemodels.com

Offline axmor61

  • Member
  • Posts: 41
  • Port Saint Lucie, Fl
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #904 on: 03/11/2009 12:48 am »
Question regarding the Node 3 module:

Now that the Node 3 final location has changed from the nadir to the port side of Unity, how will the Node 3 Umbilical tray be placed for this new configuration?

Offline anik

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7776
  • Liked: 955
  • Likes Given: 368
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #905 on: 03/11/2009 02:35 pm »
Question regarding the S6 truss:
Will this truss have the Visual Target dots as the P6 truss?

No, according to photos of both trusses made before their installation in payload canister.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #906 on: 03/14/2009 06:07 pm »
Concerning the hard dock/hybrid/probe and cone impulse vs hooks question, everyone should remember that MRM-1 will be mated to FGB Nadir via the ISS RMS, not using a propulsion system. Therefore, after soft dock, there will be no engine firings, the hard dock will be accomplished using the docking hooks. MRM-1 will use a probe and cone docking system. The best way to describe this attachment method is "berthing" as opposed to "docking".

Also, MLM will have a radial docking port, again probe and cone, to which something may be berthed using some sort of arm, maybe the ERA.

Concerning hybrid vs probe and cone, in this particular aspect, I believe the capabilities are similar to interface using what is effectively berthing vs docking.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #907 on: 03/14/2009 06:09 pm »
I am currently reading two books on Soyuz and the Salyut/Mir programs, and something does not make sense to me. All of the dockings described there between Soyuz as well as the TKS-based Mir addon modules refer to retracting the docking probe to achieve hard dock. No mention is made in the books of the engines being needed. is this incorrect?

This brings up an interesting point: since the Mir node was on the end of the station, if a TKS module attaching to a node radial port via the Lyappa arm had fired its engine, the impulse would not travel anywhere near the station c/g, so the engine firing, instead of accomplishing a hard dock, should have simply imparted a spin to the station.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #908 on: 03/14/2009 06:10 pm »
Discovery will deliver the Mini-Research Module 1 to the Russian segment.  As I understand, it will use the hybrid docking system of the Soyuz/Progress vein and will be lifted out of the shuttle bay and installed on Zarya by the SSRMS.  However, doesn't the docking system require a large momentum to engage ala APAS?

MRM-1 will use probe and cone, not hybrid.

Offline vt_hokie

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3054
  • Hazlet, NJ
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 436
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #909 on: 03/14/2009 08:36 pm »
Question regarding the Node 3 module:

Now that the Node 3 final location has changed from the nadir to the port side of Unity, how will the Node 3 Umbilical tray be placed for this new configuration?


When did this happen?  Somehow I missed that!  So, is this representation no longer correct?  (Most recent assembly manifest graphic I could find - scroll down to the bottom)

http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts117/fdf/manifest.html

I take it Node 3 will be directly across from the Quest airlock now.
« Last Edit: 03/15/2009 02:11 am by vt_hokie »

Offline Spacenick

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #910 on: 03/14/2009 09:58 pm »
On another thread it was stated that the ISS would be lost if unmanned for a longer period of time without proper preparations, so I wonder, what exactly could happen to it that can be prevented by preparation but not by ground commandment?

Offline erioladastra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1413
  • Liked: 222
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #911 on: 03/18/2009 01:44 am »
On another thread it was stated that the ISS would be lost if unmanned for a longer period of time without proper preparations, so I wonder, what exactly could happen to it that can be prevented by preparation but not by ground commandment?

A lot of things but if I recall I think a failure in the internal cooling system would be the most critical failure where a crew would be needed to respond quickly or you lose everything.  For the USOS, we jumper the cooling system in a way that we have two seperate loops so one failure can't do that - but it takes a while for the crew to do that and it couldn't be done last week.  The next would probably be a loss of attitude control where we lose comm and again would need the crew to respond quickly.

Offline cd-slam

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
  • Singapore
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 315
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #912 on: 03/18/2009 03:56 am »
Question regarding the Node 3 module:

Now that the Node 3 final location has changed from the nadir to the port side of Unity, how will the Node 3 Umbilical tray be placed for this new configuration?


When did this happen?  Somehow I missed that!  So, is this representation no longer correct?  (Most recent assembly manifest graphic I could find - scroll down to the bottom)

http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts117/fdf/manifest.html

I take it Node 3 will be directly across from the Quest airlock now.
Actually Node 3 attachment was changed some time ago from nadir to port side, and reported on another thread. But just recently this appeared on Anik's schedule of ISS events:

end of June (TBD) - PMA-3 relocation from nadir to left port of Unity module with SSRMS help

So not sure if this indicates a change in plans or if the PMA-3 will be relocated back again before Node 3 arrives.

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6404
  • Liked: 529
  • Likes Given: 67
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #913 on: 03/18/2009 04:01 am »
Question regarding the Node 3 module:

Now that the Node 3 final location has changed from the nadir to the port side of Unity, how will the Node 3 Umbilical tray be placed for this new configuration?


When did this happen?  Somehow I missed that!  So, is this representation no longer correct?  (Most recent assembly manifest graphic I could find - scroll down to the bottom)

http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts117/fdf/manifest.html

I take it Node 3 will be directly across from the Quest airlock now.
Actually Node 3 attachment was changed some time ago from nadir to port side, and reported on another thread. But just recently this appeared on Anik's schedule of ISS events:

end of June (TBD) - PMA-3 relocation from nadir to left port of Unity module with SSRMS help

So not sure if this indicates a change in plans or if the PMA-3 will be relocated back again before Node 3 arrives.

The latter.
JRF

Offline MikeMi.

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 601
  • Gd, Poland
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #914 on: 03/18/2009 03:42 pm »
I have the question regarding to the yestarday reorientation of the ISS from +XVV to -XVV. Was it made by usin of CMG (Control Moment Gyroscope)? Or by thrusters (Progress, RCS of shuttle)?

I think that first option is correct. Never heard any word about this manevour and how it is done..

Thanks for answer!

Offline MKremer

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4034
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 1275
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #915 on: 03/18/2009 03:52 pm »
I have the question regarding to the yestarday reorientation of the ISS from +XVV to -XVV. Was it made by usin of CMG (Control Moment Gyroscope)? Or by thrusters (Progress, RCS of shuttle)?

I think that first option is correct. Never heard any word about this manevour and how it is done..

Thanks for answer!

The orbiter takes over station maneuvering after docking - getting the station under control from free drift and into the new orientation after docking would overtax the CMGs and use up too much Russian segment propellants.
« Last Edit: 03/18/2009 03:55 pm by MKremer »

Offline MikeMi.

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 601
  • Gd, Poland
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #916 on: 03/18/2009 06:30 pm »
Thanks Kremer.. now I understand it very well and people from my astro/astronautic forum in Pl also  ;)

Have the next one :
SSRMS moving away for mobile base relocation

Why it had to move to starboard side, I mean it wouldnt be easier to grapple S6 from stb side and then move with it to Workstation-1? I guess that for mobile transporter S6 would be to heavy, thats the reason of making this handoff movements (SSRMS-SRMS-SSRMS)?
« Last Edit: 03/18/2009 06:35 pm by MikeMi. »

Offline Ben E

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1134
  • Liked: 100
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #917 on: 03/19/2009 05:41 pm »
With the current installation of S-6 ongoing, I have a query:

Why is the central truss piece known as 'S-0' (Starboard-0)? Surely its central position atop Destiny makes it neither port or starboard?

Offline parham55

Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #918 on: 03/20/2009 05:05 pm »
Can someone please describe the way the mast/mast motor deploy the arrays?  I can't visualize the way the folded mast is pushed out and made ridged.  What's going on inside that canister?  Thanks

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #919 on: 03/20/2009 05:10 pm »
Can someone please describe the way the mast/mast motor deploy the arrays?  I can't visualize the way the folded mast is pushed out and made ridged.  What's going on inside that canister?  Thanks

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=6062.0

 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1