so i know i dont post much.. i just like to sit back and read what all you awsome minds bring to the table.. but i was adding some detail to my Intermountain railway model of the ISS and i was playing around moving modules in differnt configs and i put node 3 on the nadar port of harmony... i know they wanna use this module for mplms and later the htvs and dragons ect.... but couldnt they use unitys nadar for those actions and throw node 3 there for the cupolas views, maybe put cupola on the back port of node 3 facing the russian segment...
Interesting; I've been on a Node 3 kick recently but I hadn't thought of attaching it to Node 2. What about putting Node 3 on Node 2 zenith?Or here's an idea: put Node 3 on the end of Node 2, where PMA-2 currently is! PMA-2 would then go on the end of Node 3.
Node-3 cooling and power connections come from S0 (they are already on S0). They are not long enough to go all the way from S0 via the lab to Node-2.All this Node-3 / Cupola stuff has been already discussed in many threads ad infinitum.Analyst
Surely the connections from S0 can be extended along Destiny to Node 2 to support Node 3 on Node 2 zenith?
In this position the cupola could go on the rear caing CBM, so the entire station is visible (apart from Columbus and Kibo), meaning it would be fantastic for robotics.
Quote from: ShuttleDiscovery on 04/19/2009 06:45 pmSurely the connections from S0 can be extended along Destiny to Node 2 to support Node 3 on Node 2 zenith?Yes, they can. And don't call me Shirley.Quote In this position the cupola could go on the rear facing CBM, so the entire station is visible (apart from Columbus and Kibo), meaning it would be fantastic for robotics.But absolutely lousy for robotics involving HTV/Dragon capture operations, which is why it's now on the nadir side.Look, of *course* it *can* be done. What none of you have bothered to do so far is to provide justification for why it *should* be done that is even remotely worth the hassle, expense, and EVA risk.
In this position the cupola could go on the rear facing CBM, so the entire station is visible (apart from Columbus and Kibo), meaning it would be fantastic for robotics.
Quote from: Jorge on 04/19/2009 07:03 pmQuote from: ShuttleDiscovery on 04/19/2009 06:45 pmSurely the connections from S0 can be extended along Destiny to Node 2 to support Node 3 on Node 2 zenith?Yes, they can. And don't call me Shirley.Quote In this position the cupola could go on the rear facing CBM, so the entire station is visible (apart from Columbus and Kibo), meaning it would be fantastic for robotics.But absolutely lousy for robotics involving HTV/Dragon capture operations, which is why it's now on the nadir side.Look, of *course* it *can* be done. What none of you have bothered to do so far is to provide justification for why it *should* be done that is even remotely worth the hassle, expense, and EVA risk.Well from a robotics point of view it would be far better than looking down at the Earth (like almost every other ISS window)
Is that the real reason, or is the Cupola going to be put in the place where it provides the most beautiful view, not the most useful view?
Or is it urgently needed to support Dragons?
It is the real reason. Why would you think otherwise?
Do you think I'm making this stuff up?
How many times do I need to repeat this:
Quote from: Jorge on 04/19/2009 07:35 pmIt is the real reason. Why would you think otherwise? Because I think there may be good reasons to put the Cupola there even if it weren't for the robotics aspect. Just curious what the real reason was, because it isn't always the obvious one or even the stated one.
You don't have to repeat it, because I saw it the first time. You have given an argument for why the planned location is a good one. I have suggested two other potential reasons why the same location might be a good one. Maybe there are even more reasons. Or maybe my potential reasons aren't good reasons after all. I asked my question because I was interested in NASA's motivation to put it there, not necessarily your reasons for supporting that decision, although I'm interested in that as well.
"It is, strictly speaking, not a *requirement* - the first HTV capture will be performed without the benefit of the Cupola - but in the long run, if free-flyer capture is to become a regular event, having a direct view of the capture is a huge operational and safety win."
i just asked the question.. i was not implying that i thought the node should be placed there.. but i think that with all those extra places to berth modules.. putting node 3 where its going is a waste of a perfectly good node..
as far as the cupola.. the cameras on the endefector on the canadarm 2 is perfect capable of doing its job and we have all seen this time and time again from the flawless robotics work of our nations astronauts..
besides the MMOD risk and the loss of visabilty for the cargo vessals, the nadar port of harmony would give the ISS an extensive expansion capabilty and if NASA was smart they would leave themselves that kind of option for the future..
Slightly off-topic question: I know keeping MPLMs permanently stationed has been considered (and not adopted), how about a permanently attached ATV as a small ISS extension? Has that ever been considered?
Can the ATV dock at more than one position?
With the cancellation of the Hab, Node 3 now provides primary life support and crew habitability for the USOS. That is its main purpose now. And with the cancellation of the components originally scheduled to be attached to it (X-38, Hab), it is unlikely those CBMs will ever be needed.