STS-135: NASA managers discuss mission outline ahead of approval decision

[jacqmans]

Fairly certain it must go through both the Senate and HOR

The Senate and HOR bills must be reconciled.  Once the reconciled bill passes both houses, it goes to Obama.  If he vetoes it, we need two-thirds of Congress to revote on it in support to override him.  Checks and balances, my friend

How long will all of that take  

[steveS]

3. Like I said - Atlantis would be retired and Discovery would take up the 335/135 role.  I think we'll know more about this next month.

1. If so, what is stopping NASA from doing it immediately or even done it earlier? This would save NASA from doing meticulous work such the leading wing edge remaining inspections on Atlantis?

2. Some time back Discovery was to go on September while Endeavour had a late July launch. In that case NASA could have assigned Endeavour for a rescue mission in December but still it decided to assign Atlantis for the role (reason given by the forum members was Atlantis was the quickest to prepare).

[steveS]

The following article by Chris B gives information about the OMDP issues relating to the 3 orbiters;
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2008/09/nasas-dream-scenario-of-a-13-flight-extension-for-shuttle/

It mentions;

"OMDP is required after eight flights or 5.5 years. For Discovery OMDP 5.5 Year Time Limit Interval is due by September 2010."

1. By November including STS-133, Discovery would have flown 9 missions since its last OMDP.


"OV-104 (Atlantis) Requirements Summary: OV-104 has flown 3 flights since OMDP (STS-115, STS-117, STS-122),’ added the presentation on Atlantis’ status. ‘OMDP required after eight flights or 5.5 years. Five flights remain (with constraints). OMDP 5.5 Year Time Limit Interval is due NET January 21, 2011"

So by now Atlantis has flown 6 missions. However, the article further goes on to say

"Several notes relating to the state of her (Atlantis) Rudder Speed Brake (RSB) actuators and Wing Leading Edge RCC panels are listed as constraints to potentially allowing her to fly into the next decade."

If NASA decides to give STS-135 to Discovery, I wonder whether this is a major reason for that decision? Since it appears that Discovery will be +1 mission past her next OMDP. If so, did Discovery obtained waivers for STS-133?

[psloss]

Shuttle's were designed to have quick turnarounds. STS-51-J with Atlantis on its first launch happened on October 3rd 1985. STS-61-B, Atlantis's next flight happened November 26th 1985. Could be any of the 3 orbiters flying STS-135, with the favorite choice being Atlantis as they could find a way to let fly one more mission without a OMDP.

The current situation is vastly different than 1985 -- which among other things predates the two accidents, the subsequent design/programmatic changes, and 25 years of operational experience.  There's also an upcoming USA layoff at the end of the current fiscal year.  If the level in the Senate bill were appropriated, next year's operating budget will also be significantly smaller than previous years.  I wouldn't assume that the workforce and the budget can support the same schedule flexibility after October that it could at the beginning of this year.

[Skylon]

"OV-104 (Atlantis) Requirements Summary: OV-104 has flown 3 flights since OMDP (STS-115, STS-117, STS-122),’ added the presentation on Atlantis’ status. ‘OMDP required after eight flights or 5.5 years. Five flights remain (with constraints). OMDP 5.5 Year Time Limit Interval is due NET January 21, 2011"

Wait...I thought Atlantis' last OMDP was prior to STS-101, ending in 1999 or 2000. Atlantis did undergo considerable inspections and maintenance prior to STS-115, during the post-Columbia stand-down but as I understand, that was not considered a formal OMDP.

Discovery was in the middle of its last OMDP when Columbia was lost. Endeavour's was started, even though it wasn't due for one for some time (may as well during the stand-down).

[ChrisGebhardt]

"OV-104 (Atlantis) Requirements Summary: OV-104 has flown 3 flights since OMDP (STS-115, STS-117, STS-122),’ added the presentation on Atlantis’ status. ‘OMDP required after eight flights or 5.5 years. Five flights remain (with constraints). OMDP 5.5 Year Time Limit Interval is due NET January 21, 2011"

Wait...I thought Atlantis' last OMDP was prior to STS-101, ending in 1999 or 2000. Atlantis did undergo considerable inspections and maintenance prior to STS-115, during the post-Columbia stand-down but as I understand, that was not considered a formal OMDP.

Discovery was in the middle of its last OMDP when Columbia was lost. Endeavour's was started, even though it wasn't due for one for some time (may as well during the stand-down).

You are correct. Atlantis' last OMDP was in 1998/1999. She is well past due for one. Discovery's last OMDP ended in 2003. Add eight years to that and Discovery is due in 2011. Endeavour's last OMDP ended in 2005. Add eight years to that and she's due in 2013.

[ChrisGebhardt]

And let's stop all conversation right here, right now about SSPTS for STS-135. Management, official documentation, and THE NEWS PART OF THIS SITE (yes, we have a news part to our site) have stated several times that SSPTS is NOT, I repeat, NOT a consideration for STS-135 as the mission's objectives do NOT require a prolonged stay at the ISS. Therefore, an 11+1+2 day flight is MORE THAN ENOUGH TIME to accomplish the STS-135/335 mission objectives.

[steveS]

How does NASA balance the OMDP  duration/flight equation? Because as of STS-132 (Atlantis), 133 (Discovery) and 134 (Endeavour), the three orbiters have/will have flown

Atlantis - 6 missions
Discovery - 9 missions
Endeavour - 6 missions

after return to flight in July 2005. So Discovery has flown 1.5 times more than the other two orbiters during this time. (I thought of asking this because some suggest that OMDP will be a major issue for selecting an orbiter for STS-135)

[ChrisGebhardt]

How does NASA balance the OMDP  duration/flight equation? Because as of STS-132 (Atlantis), 133 (Discovery) and 134 (Endeavour), the three orbiters have/will have flown

Atlantis - 6 missions
Discovery - 9 missions
Endeavour - 6 missions

after return to flight in July 2005. So Discovery has flown 1.5 times more than the other two orbiters during this time. (I thought of asking this because some suggest that OMDP will be a major issue for selecting an orbiter for STS-135)

Time/Cycle requirements v. the needs of the program. Some Time/Cycle requirement inspections and R&Rs can be accomplished during a standard flow turnaround. Others cannot. It's the ones that can't be accomplished without taking the Orbiter out of service that are of prime consideration here for Atlantis.

[10W29]

"OV-104 (Atlantis) Requirements Summary: OV-104 has flown 3 flights since OMDP (STS-115, STS-117, STS-122),’ added the presentation on Atlantis’ status. ‘OMDP required after eight flights or 5.5 years. Five flights remain (with constraints). OMDP 5.5 Year Time Limit Interval is due NET January 21, 2011"

Wait...I thought Atlantis' last OMDP was prior to STS-101, ending in 1999 or 2000. Atlantis did undergo considerable inspections and maintenance prior to STS-115, during the post-Columbia stand-down but as I understand, that was not considered a formal OMDP.

Discovery was in the middle of its last OMDP when Columbia was lost. Endeavour's was started, even though it wasn't due for one for some time (may as well during the stand-down).

You are correct. Atlantis' last OMDP was in 1998/1999. She is well past due for one. Discovery's last OMDP ended in 2003. Add eight years to that and Discovery is due in 2011. Endeavour's last OMDP ended in 2005. Add eight years to that and she's due in 2013.

Not sure where you got 8 years from.  OMDP interval is 5.5 years or 8 flights (whichever comes first).
The 5.5 year OMDP interval clock starts at OPF rollout, so 103 was due in Sep '10.  The PRCB added a 9th flight and 1 year for 103, so 103's new due date is Sep '11.
104 was considered to have completed an OMDP during RTF, giving it a due date of Jan '11.  The PRCB also added 1 year for 104, so 104's new due date is Jan '12.
105's OMDP clock started in Apr '07 so it's good until Oct '12 without any help from the PRCB.

[ChrisGebhardt]

"OV-104 (Atlantis) Requirements Summary: OV-104 has flown 3 flights since OMDP (STS-115, STS-117, STS-122),’ added the presentation on Atlantis’ status. ‘OMDP required after eight flights or 5.5 years. Five flights remain (with constraints). OMDP 5.5 Year Time Limit Interval is due NET January 21, 2011"

Wait...I thought Atlantis' last OMDP was prior to STS-101, ending in 1999 or 2000. Atlantis did undergo considerable inspections and maintenance prior to STS-115, during the post-Columbia stand-down but as I understand, that was not considered a formal OMDP.

Discovery was in the middle of its last OMDP when Columbia was lost. Endeavour's was started, even though it wasn't due for one for some time (may as well during the stand-down).

You are correct. Atlantis' last OMDP was in 1998/1999. She is well past due for one. Discovery's last OMDP ended in 2003. Add eight years to that and Discovery is due in 2011. Endeavour's last OMDP ended in 2005. Add eight years to that and she's due in 2013.

Not sure where you got 8 years from.  OMDP interval is 5.5 years or 8 flights (whichever comes first).
The 5.5 year OMDP interval clock starts at OPF rollout, so 103 was due in Sep '10.  The PRCB added a 9th flight and 1 year for 103, so 103's new due date is Sep '11.
104 was considered to have completed an OMDP during RTF, giving it a due date of Jan '11.  The PRCB also added 1 year for 104, so 104's new due date is Jan '12.
105's OMDP clock started in Apr '07 so it's good until Oct '12 without any help from the PRCB.

Just misspoke. Meant 5.5 years.

But I'm curious how Atlantis can be considered to have completed an OMDP during the RTF stand down. The whole reason for taking Atlantis out of service in 2008 was BECAUSE she was due for OMDP back then. And when did the PRCB add a year to Atlantis' requirements? That has certainly been nowhere in the documentation we have here and does not correspond to notes on L2.

[Skylon]

But I'm curious how Atlantis can be considered to have completed an OMDP during the RTF stand down. The whole reason for taking Atlantis out of service in 2008 was BECAUSE she was due for OMDP back then. And when did the PRCB add a year to Atlantis' requirements? That has certainly been nowhere in the documentation we have here and does not correspond to notes on L2.

Something doesn't gel right with the article. The pre-RTF period I've never seen called an OMDP for Atlantis prior to reading that article. I'd heard the rational for allowing Atlantis two more flights, on STS-129 and 132 as two items:

1) The post-Columbia stand-down inspections were extensive, and close to an OMDP.

2) A "Mini-OMDP" would be conducted after STS-125. I think it ended up being split between the period between STS-125/STS-129 and STS-129/STS-132.

Still, Atlantis has gone over ten years, and now twelve flights without a formal OMDP. Whether she needs one or not, I'll defer to the capable minds of the people who service these vehicles.

[10W29]

But I'm curious how Atlantis can be considered to have completed an OMDP during the RTF stand down. The whole reason for taking Atlantis out of service in 2008 was BECAUSE she was due for OMDP back then. And when did the PRCB add a year to Atlantis' requirements? That has certainly been nowhere in the documentation we have here and does not correspond to notes on L2.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20574.0

[ChrisGebhardt]

But I'm curious how Atlantis can be considered to have completed an OMDP during the RTF stand down. The whole reason for taking Atlantis out of service in 2008 was BECAUSE she was due for OMDP back then. And when did the PRCB add a year to Atlantis' requirements? That has certainly been nowhere in the documentation we have here and does not correspond to notes on L2.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20574.0

OK. I admit I completely missed that document. 

(Not directed at anyone, just thinking out loud) I have to agree with Skylon -- Atlantis' last OMDP was over 10 years ago. I don't see how this document is valid for Atlantis or where along the line it was decide to count the RTF period as an OMDP for Atlantis. Again, the whole reason for wanting to retire her in 2008 was because she was due for OMDP at that time. IF that's true, there's no way a 9 flight/6.5 year OMDP interval can get her all the way to 2012.

[steveS]

But I'm curious how Atlantis can be considered to have completed an OMDP during the RTF stand down. The whole reason for taking Atlantis out of service in 2008 was BECAUSE she was due for OMDP back then. And when did the PRCB add a year to Atlantis' requirements? That has certainly been nowhere in the documentation we have here and does not correspond to notes on L2.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20574.0

OK. I admit I completely missed that document. 

(Not directed at anyone, just thinking out loud) I have to agree with Skylon -- Atlantis' last OMDP was over 10 years ago. I don't see how this document is valid for Atlantis or where along the line it was decide to count the RTF period as an OMDP for Atlantis. Again, the whole reason for wanting to retire her in 2008 was because she was due for OMDP at that time. IF that's true, there's no way a 9 flight/6.5 year OMDP interval can get her all the way to 2012.

Atlantis OMDP-2 was completed in September, 1998. And during 2004 it was again due for an OMDP (5.5 years). By February 2008, Atlantis had done 9 missions since OMDP-2. (6 between OMDP-2 and Columbia diasaster and 3 more after that).

It is curious to know why NASA did not do a full OMDP (if RTF stuff was not a full OMDP) for Atlantis during the Columbia stand-off time (while Discovery and Endeavour was allowed to go through full OMDPs)

[psloss]

Still, Atlantis has gone over ten years, and now twelve flights without a formal OMDP. Whether she needs one or not, I'll defer to the capable minds of the people who service these vehicles.

We're just guessing about definitions like 'formal OMDP' when the Shuttle program has adapted to changing conditions throughout its existence.  The additional level of insight provided to Shuttle Operations here is great, but we're still often only seeing the tip of the iceberg.  There are a lot more variables than there are constants.

Perhaps this continuing tangent is just another type of flight crew assignments thread, but if that's the case, maybe there should be a separate thread for it.

[Skylon]

It is curious to know why NASA did not do a full OMDP (if RTF stuff was not a full OMDP) for Atlantis during the Columbia stand-off time (while Discovery and Endeavour was allowed to go through full OMDPs)

Discovery was in the middle of her OMDP when Columbia was lost. She was also the first orbiter to undergo her OMDP at KSC, not Palmdale.

When Discovery's was completed during the stand-down Endeavour started its OMDP cycle, in spite of not being quite due for one. Keep in mind, Endeavour was the last orbiter to receive its "glass cockpit" upgrade during this OMDP, so it was certainly good use of the post-Columbia stand down.

RTF required two orbiters due to LON (STS-300) constraints and the fact that you couldn't do any serious station assembly with one orbiter. Therefore Discovery and Atlantis, two shuttles, needed to be ready to fly when RTF began. If both Atlantis and Endeavour were in OMDP cycles, you meet none of those criteria. Remember, Endeavour wasn't ready to fly again until STS-118 in 2007.

I'd also guess that there simply isn't the manpower to have two orbiters undergoing an OMDP. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong there.

[steveS]

Will NASA announce about STS-135 this month (August) as speculated or with all ongoing Senate/House authorization, will it be delayed further?

[yg1968]

Will NASA announce about STS-135 this month (August) as speculated or with all ongoing Senate/House authorization, will it be delayed further?

I don't have the answer to your question but given that both bills contain STS-135, I don't think that NASA has to wait for the legislation in order to make a decision on this.

[nathan.moeller]

For what it's worth, the Senate approved their version of the NASA Reauthorization Act of 2010 last night, which includes approval of STS-135.  This is a good step forward but we still need the House and Obama, the latter of which I fear will be very difficult.