NASASpaceFlight.com Forum
International Space Station (ISS) => ISS Section => Topic started by: Chris Bergin on 10/10/2011 10:30 pm
-
Massive ISS update via Pete Harding!
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/10/iss-managers-possible-de-crew-launches-resume/
-
Massive ISS update via Pete Harding!
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/10/iss-managers-possible-de-crew-launches-resume/
Wow, that was quite an impressive read, thanks for posting!
Interesting to read what would possibly happen in the decrew situation. I hope that it won't come to that, however.
A question - why isnt the Dragon returning filled to the brim with trash? Center of gravity constraints?
-
Exellent material !
-
Quick correction inserted into the article (which you quoted Prober, ironically).
Article is now very up to date.
-
Great article. Why is the Dragon flight called D2/D3 and not C2/C3?
-
Quick correction inserted into the article (which you quoted Prober, ironically).
Article is now very up to date.
Big Grin
Let's continue with some advanced thinking......
"A major area of concern relates to the atmosphere of the ISS, both in event of a Micro Meteoroid Orbital Debris (MMOD) strike"
The robotics should be left in a ‘standby” mode if they can be controlled from the ground. Connected to a decent camera this could serve as a decent set of eyes on the condition of the ISS.
-
Great article. Why is the Dragon flight called D2/D3 and not C2/C3?
Demo 2/3 vs. COTS Demo 2/3. The abbreviations are used interchangeably within NASA.
-
Gotta make sure no one locks the keys inside...
-
Gotta make sure no one locks the keys inside...
ISS purchased a subscription to OnStar to compensate for the strategic mistake made by politicos.
-
Gotta make sure no one locks the keys inside...
ISS purchased a subscription to OnStar to compensate for the strategic mistake made by politicos.
Gotta hand it to the ISS team - they're always on the ball!
-
Quick correction inserted into the article (which you quoted Prober, ironically).
Article is now very up to date.
The robotics should be left in a standby mode if they can be controlled from the ground. Connected to a decent camera this could serve as a decent set of eyes on the condition of the ISS.
The plan is that camcorders will be left connected in various modules internally so there is visual insight into the hardware (just in case ROBONAUT decides to go AWOL ;-)). This is more to provide visual in case there was a fire event.
I don't believe the Robotics will remain active, but there are many cameras on the outside of the station (they're the ones you get good views of during crew sleep), so those will be active to provide insight. You get more data of a rapid depress from the IMV Valves closing, thus isolating the modules, and also potential hardware failing, than external visual imagery.
-
Only six days margin to keep the ISS occupied. 8 days margin to keep the ten year space occupancy record going.
-
What astounded me was the following statement:
"One CTBE of common trash per three crewmembers or two CTBE per six crewmembers is created every day on the ISS."
Note : 1 CTBE corresponds to a volume of 1.86 cubic feet
So upmass is limited by the ability to dispose of trash, with three occupants of the US and International Partners segments filling the equivalent of a Dragon every 50 days. (The Dragon vehicle has the capacity to dispose of 50 CTBE.)
What they need is a way to dump trash into a quickly decaying orbit. Perhaps they could put them in a tool bag. :P (http://www.physorg.com/news146985103.html)
-
How about a spring-loaded or mass driver system reachable through the JEM airlock? Reboost as well as trash disposal!
-
Nobody in orbit might be a good thing.
Save the astronauts some exposure. :D
We already know that the zero G weakens their bones. Stop harming these wonderful people that work in space and give them their centrifuge accommodations module.
-
Nobody in orbit might be a good thing.
Save the astronauts some exposure. :D
We already know that the zero G weakens their bones. Stop harming these wonderful people that work in space and give them their centrifuge accommodations module.
CAM wasn't meant for the crew members.
-
We've come to expect no less from Pete, but wow! Covering both plans in detail and still making it coherent is quite something.
Regarding the software problem that Orbital had in the sim, the article seems to indicate that it was caused because "they do not have any telemetry in X2_R9,″ and "Orbital thought their software update would solve the problem..." Does that mean that they tested with R11 and the problem still exists, or that Orbital had upgraded Cygnus to try and compensate for the problems in R9, but were unable?
If it's just a matter of waiting for R11, that would be unfortunate but not unexpected. Or, ideally, if it's a problem spacecraft side then they should have time to fix it, since that wouldn't require crew involvement.
-
...
What they need is a way to dump trash into a quickly decaying orbit. Perhaps they could put them in a tool bag. :P (http://www.physorg.com/news146985103.html)
;D
-
Why can't they fill each departing vehicle with trash? What are the constraints?
-
How about a spring-loaded or mass driver system reachable through the JEM airlock? Reboost as well as trash disposal!
I'm sure NASA engineers have done quite a few back of the envelope designs for different trash disposal systems. I would imagine such ideas never see the light of day because of funding issues. In a nominally functioning situation, there's no need for supplementary trash disposal, so why spend money on one?
Having said all that, and after reading Pete's article, I imagine that engineers will have to come up with a just-in-case plan. They probably already have such a plan. I suppose they could always throw trash overboard, like they do with the ammonia tanks.
-
Thanks folks. :)
How about a spring-loaded or mass driver system reachable through the JEM airlock? Reboost as well as trash disposal!
NASA is already considering a proposal to deploy small re-entry capsules from the JEM A/L in order to return regular science samples, so conceivably a similar process could be used for small amounts of trash.
Regarding the software problem that Orbital had in the sim, the article seems to indicate that it was caused because "they do not have any telemetry in X2_R9,″ and "Orbital thought their software update would solve the problem..." Does that mean that they tested with R11 and the problem still exists, or that Orbital had upgraded Cygnus to try and compensate for the problems in R9, but were unable?
That's a good question, one which I myself thought of when writing the article. The L2 notes don't specify whether the telemetry problems are limited to R9 or not - so I don't know.
Why can't they fill each departing vehicle with trash? What are the constraints?
Centre of Mass constraints, which affect the thruster performance of the spacecraft - especially for Dragon, which must re-enter and land.
-
NASA is already considering a proposal to deploy small re-entry capsules from the JEM A/L in order to return regular science samples, so conceivably a similar process could be used for small amounts of trash.
I wonder if inflatables would make sense for trash disposal.
-
NASA is already considering a proposal to deploy small re-entry capsules from the JEM A/L in order to return regular science samples, so conceivably a similar process could be used for small amounts of trash.
I wonder if inflatables would make sense for trash disposal.
I had the same thought, using a ballon of some sort to increase the cross section and decrease the balistic coefficient, speeding up descent. The big issue, however, is probably getting it out of the pressurized environment and released in a stable manner, without doing an EVA. Can the SSRMS reach into an airlock?
Of course, this is OT for the discussion of a possible "de-crew"
-
Why can't they fill each departing vehicle with trash? What are the constraints?
CG, as noted, constraints imposed by the vehicle (for example, ATV is EXTREMLY conservative in their vehicle constraints so we can hardly get much in it) and available trash. We are actually pretty clean at the moment.
-
Let's continue with some advanced thinking......
"A major area of concern relates to the atmosphere of the ISS, both in event of a Micro Meteoroid Orbital Debris (MMOD) strike"
The robotics should be left in a standby mode if they can be controlled from the ground. Connected to a decent camera this could serve as a decent set of eyes on the condition of the ISS.
A great comment!
If there is a de-crew, what is the capability of robonaut in so far as 1) scouting (or more accurately being able to visually inspect the entire habitable space in the ISS), 2) passive reading of the surrounding, and 3) active manipulation of possibly needed buttons, or switches in the ISS from the ground?
-
Let's continue with some advanced thinking......
"A major area of concern relates to the atmosphere of the ISS, both in event of a Micro Meteoroid Orbital Debris (MMOD) strike"
The robotics should be left in a standby mode if they can be controlled from the ground. Connected to a decent camera this could serve as a decent set of eyes on the condition of the ISS.
A great comment!
If there is a de-crew, what is the capability of robonaut in so far as 1) scouting (or more accurately being able to visually inspect the entire habitable space in the ISS), 2) passive reading of the surrounding, and 3) active manipulation of possibly needed buttons, or switches in the ISS from the ground?
No need for Robonaut to do anything. ISS can be controlled from the ground to maintain attitude control and environmental systems ect. Cameras would be hooked up to display areas that would be of interest.
-
Let's continue with some advanced thinking......
"A major area of concern relates to the atmosphere of the ISS, both in event of a Micro Meteoroid Orbital Debris (MMOD) strike"
The robotics should be left in a standby mode if they can be controlled from the ground. Connected to a decent camera this could serve as a decent set of eyes on the condition of the ISS.
A great comment!
If there is a de-crew, what is the capability of robonaut in so far as 1) scouting (or more accurately being able to visually inspect the entire habitable space in the ISS), 2) passive reading of the surrounding, and 3) active manipulation of possibly needed buttons, or switches in the ISS from the ground?
No need for Robonaut to do anything. ISS can be controlled from the ground to maintain attitude control and environmental systems ect. Cameras would be hooked up to display areas that would be of interest.
Not what the external Robotic Arm can see with a decent camera.
-
Let's continue with some advanced thinking......
"A major area of concern relates to the atmosphere of the ISS, both in event of a Micro Meteoroid Orbital Debris (MMOD) strike"
The robotics should be left in a standby mode if they can be controlled from the ground. Connected to a decent camera this could serve as a decent set of eyes on the condition of the ISS.
A great comment!
If there is a de-crew, what is the capability of robonaut in so far as 1) scouting (or more accurately being able to visually inspect the entire habitable space in the ISS), 2) passive reading of the surrounding, and 3) active manipulation of possibly needed buttons, or switches in the ISS from the ground?
Also, even if Robonauts could reliably throw switches, there are none to throw. The only siwtches on ISS are the power on/off for the lights. No need to have him do anything.