NASASpaceFlight.com Forum
NASA Shuttle Specific Sections => Atlantis (Post STS-135, T&R) => Topic started by: smndk on 07/29/2008 06:48 pm
-
Is there a place where I can find a list of possible lauch windows for STS-125?
They have now talked about lauch on October 2nd, October 5th, and October 8th. Is launch possible every day? If so for how long?
/Svend
-
launch window is 1 hour
so if there is a scrub take 25 minutes off give or take
-
launch window is 1 hour
so if there is a scrub take 25 minutes off give or take
Thanks for the reply.
What do you mean by "take 25 minutes off"?
-
launch window is 1 hour
so if there is a scrub take 25 minutes off give or take
that is only for ISS missions. It is different for HST missions.
-
Is there a place where I can find a list of possible lauch windows for STS-125?
They have now talked about lauch on October 2nd, October 5th, and October 8th. Is launch possible every day? If so for how long?
/Svend
Launch is possible every day
-
launch window is 1 hour
so if there is a scrub take 25 minutes off give or take
that is only for ISS missions. It is different for HST missions.
Right, closer to -30 minutes per day for HST's altitude and inclination.
-
launch window is 1 hour
so if there is a scrub take 25 minutes off give or take
that is only for ISS missions. It is different for HST missions.
Right, closer to -30 minutes per day for HST's altitude and inclination.
Hey Jorge,
Do you know why STS-103 only had approx. 40-minute long launch windows vs. the ~65-minute windows for the other servicing missions?
Thanks.
-
launch window is 1 hour
so if there is a scrub take 25 minutes off give or take
that is only for ISS missions. It is different for HST missions.
Right, closer to -30 minutes per day for HST's altitude and inclination.
Hey Jorge,
Do you know why STS-103 only had approx. 40-minute long launch windows vs. the ~65-minute windows for the other servicing missions?
Haven't the foggiest - the charts from the Flight Operations Panel just say "BASED ON THERMAL AND ET IMPACT CONSTRAINTS" but don't explain how those differed between STS-103 and the servicing missions before and after it. But I know who to ask.
-
Haven't the foggiest - the charts from the Flight Operations Panel just say "BASED ON THERMAL AND ET IMPACT CONSTRAINTS" but don't explain how those differed between STS-103 and the servicing missions before and after it. But I know who to ask.
Are the charts from the Flight Operations Panel you are refering to available somewhere on L2, by any chance? :)
-
Haven't the foggiest - the charts from the Flight Operations Panel just say "BASED ON THERMAL AND ET IMPACT CONSTRAINTS" but don't explain how those differed between STS-103 and the servicing missions before and after it. But I know who to ask.
Are the charts from the Flight Operations Panel you are refering to available somewhere on L2, by any chance? :)
'Fraid not. :)
-
launch window is 1 hour
so if there is a scrub take 25 minutes off give or take
that is only for ISS missions. It is different for HST missions.
Right, closer to -30 minutes per day for HST's altitude and inclination.
Hey Jorge,
Do you know why STS-103 only had approx. 40-minute long launch windows vs. the ~65-minute windows for the other servicing missions?
Haven't the foggiest - the charts from the Flight Operations Panel just say "BASED ON THERMAL AND ET IMPACT CONSTRAINTS" but don't explain how those differed between STS-103 and the servicing missions before and after it. But I know who to ask.
STS-103's unique launch window size was caused by a combination of larger ET debris footprint for the SLWT vs the LWT used on the previous servicing missions, and a high insertion altitude (315 nmi vs 297 for STS-125) that caused the debris footprint to impinge on the Guadalupe Island constraint. Had sufficient time been available in the design cycle, an adjustment to the MECO targets could have moved the footprint enough to avoid the constraint and allow a full 65-minute planar window, but STS-103 was called up on (relatively) short notice.
STS-61 LWT 310 nmi 72 min
STS-82 LWT 313 nmi 65 min
STS-103 SLWT 315 nmi 42 min
STS-109 SLWT 308 nmi 65 min
STS-125 SLWT 297 nmi 66 min
-
STS-103's unique launch window size was caused by a combination of larger ET debris footprint for the SLWT vs the LWT used on the previous servicing missions, and a high insertion altitude (315 nmi vs 297 for STS-125) that caused the debris footprint to impinge on the Guadalupe Island constraint. Had sufficient time been available in the design cycle, an adjustment to the MECO targets could have moved the footprint enough to avoid the constraint and allow a full 65-minute planar window, but STS-103 was called up on (relatively) short notice.
STS-61 LWT 310 nmi 72 min
STS-82 LWT 313 nmi 65 min
STS-103 SLWT 315 nmi 42 min
STS-109 SLWT 308 nmi 65 min
STS-125 SLWT 297 nmi 66 min
Interesting. Thanks, Jorge.
-
Haven't the foggiest - the charts from the Flight Operations Panel just say "BASED ON THERMAL AND ET IMPACT CONSTRAINTS" but don't explain how those differed between STS-103 and the servicing missions before and after it. But I know who to ask.
Are the charts from the Flight Operations Panel you are refering to available somewhere on L2, by any chance? :)
'Fraid not. :)
Something will be done to change that.
-
STS-103's unique launch window size was caused by a combination of larger ET debris footprint for the SLWT vs the LWT used on the previous servicing missions, and a high insertion altitude (315 nmi vs 297 for STS-125) that caused the debris footprint to impinge on the Guadalupe Island constraint. Had sufficient time been available in the design cycle, an adjustment to the MECO targets could have moved the footprint enough to avoid the constraint and allow a full 65-minute planar window, but STS-103 was called up on (relatively) short notice.
STS-61 LWT 310 nmi 72 min
STS-82 LWT 313 nmi 65 min
STS-103 SLWT 315 nmi 42 min
STS-109 SLWT 308 nmi 65 min
STS-125 SLWT 297 nmi 66 min
Interesting. Thanks, Jorge.
Looks like this mission will have the second longest launch window of any Hubble Mission.
-
STS-103's unique launch window size was caused by a combination of larger ET debris footprint for the SLWT vs the LWT used on the previous servicing missions, and a high insertion altitude (315 nmi vs 297 for STS-125) that caused the debris footprint to impinge on the Guadalupe Island constraint. Had sufficient time been available in the design cycle, an adjustment to the MECO targets could have moved the footprint enough to avoid the constraint and allow a full 65-minute planar window, but STS-103 was called up on (relatively) short notice.
STS-61 LWT 310 nmi 72 min
STS-82 LWT 313 nmi 65 min
STS-103 SLWT 315 nmi 42 min
STS-109 SLWT 308 nmi 65 min
STS-125 SLWT 297 nmi 66 min
Interesting. Thanks, Jorge.
Looks like this mission will have the second Longest launch window of any Hubble Mission.
Looks like that Hubble is losing the altitude as it has not been touched by the shuttle since 2002.
The launch window could be a bit longer by the time the Shuttle is due to launch in October due to the Hubble losing the altitude further.
-
STS-103's unique launch window size was caused by a combination of larger ET debris footprint for the SLWT vs the LWT used on the previous servicing missions, and a high insertion altitude (315 nmi vs 297 for STS-125) that caused the debris footprint to impinge on the Guadalupe Island constraint. Had sufficient time been available in the design cycle, an adjustment to the MECO targets could have moved the footprint enough to avoid the constraint and allow a full 65-minute planar window, but STS-103 was called up on (relatively) short notice.
STS-61 LWT 310 nmi 72 min
STS-82 LWT 313 nmi 65 min
STS-103 SLWT 315 nmi 42 min
STS-109 SLWT 308 nmi 65 min
STS-125 SLWT 297 nmi 66 min
Interesting. Thanks, Jorge.
Looks like this mission will have the second Longest launch window of any Hubble Mission.
Looks like that Hubble is losing the altitude as it has not been touched by the shuttle since 2002.
The launch window could be a bit longer by the time the Shuttle is due to launch in October due to the Hubble losing the altitude further.
Possibly. The 125 data I quoted above was for the OCF design cycle, which was built to an August 14 launch date.
-
FYI, Bill Harwood has posted HST launch windows for about a fortnight in October...
http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/currentglance.html#WINDOWS
-
FYI, Bill Harwood has posted HST launch windows for about a fortnight in October...
http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/currentglance.html#WINDOWS
Great that was just what I was looking for. :) Thanks to both of you. :)
-
Sorry for sounding... well, dumb, but I'm a bit confused.
If the PRCB does allow the October 5th launch of Atlantis (hope they do, would be able to cover launch as it's a non-school night), would they launch on the early hours of that Sunday, or the pre-dawn hours of the Monday?
Bill Harwood's launch time:
DATE...WINDOW OPEN...WINDOW CLOSE
10/05/08...03:02:14 AM...04:04:06 AM
-
Sorry for sounding... well, dumb, but I'm a bit confused.
If the PRCB does allow the October 5th launch of Atlantis (hope they do, would be able to cover launch as it's a non-school night), would they launch on the early hours of that Sunday, or the pre-dawn hours of the Monday?
Bill Harwood's launch time:
DATE...WINDOW OPEN...WINDOW CLOSE
10/05/08...03:02:14 AM...04:04:06 AM
All of the launch window times are EDT, so that time makes 3:02:14 am on Sunday, not Monday as Monday is the 6th.
-
Sorry for sounding... well, dumb, but I'm a bit confused.
If the PRCB does allow the October 5th launch of Atlantis (hope they do, would be able to cover launch as it's a non-school night), would they launch on the early hours of that Sunday, or the pre-dawn hours of the Monday?
Bill Harwood's launch time:
DATE...WINDOW OPEN...WINDOW CLOSE
10/05/08...03:02:14 AM...04:04:06 AM
All of the launch window times are EDT, so that time makes 3:02:14 am on Sunday, not Monday as Monday is the 6th.
Thanks. I figured that, but the early dawn hour launches confuse the heck out of me. Thanks.
-
What is the maximum number of days that STS-125 can be delayed that still allows STS-126 to be launched in 2008 before solar beta angle cutoff?
-
I'm not sure there is a 1-for-1 connection between the two?
-
For ISS missions, NASA targets the middle of the window to set the launch time. Is it the same for a Hubble Mission ?
-
For ISS missions, NASA targets the middle of the window to set the launch time. Is it the same for a Hubble Mission ?
No, opening of the window.
-
I'm not sure there is a 1-for-1 connection between the two?
Probably the wrong thread, but when exactly is solar beta angle cutoff for STS-126?
-
I'm not sure there is a 1-for-1 connection between the two?
Probably the wrong thread, but when exactly is solar beta angle cutoff for STS-126?
Solar beta cutoff kicks in November 26 and lasts until December 17.
-
I'm not sure there is a 1-for-1 connection between the two?
Probably the wrong thread, but when exactly is solar beta angle cutoff for STS-126?
Solar beta cutoff kicks in November 26 and lasts until December 17.
Just to be sure, does this mean that STS-126 must be undocked from the ISS before November 26th? If so, and you calculate with a mission of 18 days, the absolutely latest launch date for STS-126 is November 10th?
Or is November 26th the latest possible launch date?
-
Just to be sure, does this mean that STS-126 must be undocked from the ISS before November 26th? If so, and you calculate with a mission of 18 days, the absolutely latest launch date for STS-126 is November 10th?
No, it's a launch date cutout. The Shuttle and Station programs have decided not to launch between mid-December and New Year's either.
-
Just to be sure, does this mean that STS-126 must be undocked from the ISS before November 26th? If so, and you calculate with a mission of 18 days, the absolutely latest launch date for STS-126 is November 10th?
No, it's a launch date cutout.
OK, thank you very much for the answer. :)