-
We'll have live updates from pre, during and post MMT meeting for NASA's attempts to evaluate if we can launch tomorrow.
All documentation going on L2. Round ups and news updates in here.
-
Option to fly:
STS-115 Minimum Duration Flight
FD-1 Launch
FD-2 RCC inspection
FD-3 RNDZ with ISS, P3/P4 unberth/Handoff
FD-4 P3/P4 Install, EVA-1 connect umbilicals for survival power
FD-5 transfer mandatory/critical items
FD-6 undock, stow, FCS C/O and RCS Hot Fire
FD-7 Deorbit
-
Meetings have already started. 5am Central: 0500 CT Boeing/USA/EA Chart Review.
-
Hi folks. I'm absolutely amazed at the wealth of incredible information this site offers. I'm nothing more than just a regular, average-joe shuttle fan from saskatchewan, canada (and I think I saw someone else from Saskatchewan on another section of the forums..good stuff :-)). This place makes me wish I'd paid closer attention in my highschool physics/chemistry classes fifteen years ago..HA.
Anyway - regarding the minimum duration, seven day flight timeline. If, on the TPS inspection, they find that the TPS has taken a significant hit, at what point would they do any repairs? Would they extend the P3/P4 truss installation EVA to include any TPS repairs? It seems as though there's only room on the timeline for one EVA (as Wayne Hale alluded to during the news conference yesterday).
I apologize if this has already been dealt with in another thread, but when I read the timeline just now, that question came to mind.
Thanks for creating an incredible place for fans of the space shuttle program :-)
-Ian.
-
A seven day mission (+ 1 weather ??) would result in a launch window until September 12 or 13, am I right? But this is not enough for a fuel cell swap, is it?
-
And this was as short as I could make it ;)
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=4770
Includes some of the poll answers on yesterday's decision. We will get all the MMT documents - errr before the MMT gets them :) - on L2 over the next few hours.
There's a lot more to add, so I'll update as fast as I can, as we go.
-
There's no way prelaunch that they're going with an MDM, this flight is too important for that. Maybe if it was STS-121 then just maybe they would do it.
-
Wisi - 7/9/2006 6:48 AM
A seven day mission (+ 1 weather ??) would result in a launch window until September 12 or 13, am I right? But this is not enough for a fuel cell swap, is it?
I don't think they would launch into a MDF; if there's some increased risk that the fuel cell would need to be shut down, then they are looking at a MDF.
The time issue on-orbit is docked duration -- they have to undock by Sept. 17th. After they are undocked, they could stay up for weather; however, in a MDF scenario they probably have more strict landing rules (which would tend to minimize weather extensions).
Fuel cell swap at the pad would take a couple of weeks, so yes -- they're out of the daylight launch window if they make that choice.
-
-
Welcome to the site, Ian :)
Here's a scan of one image from the Sept, 24 Launch Window Document (on L2)
-
Just a quick comment...my 8-year old has gone overboard on his interest now thanks to this site and NASA-TV on DirecTV...he asked his teacher to be able to watch the launch during class, and has a list of the website he can do so on the classroom computers since NASA-TV is not available on the local cable system. Thanks Chris, esp. for L2...best money I've spent in the last 6-months.
Now a question: The most interesting thing the Go/No Go discussions from yesterday is the (I'm percieving this probably) acknowledgement that outside criticism will come from a GO decision. Is this climate a realtively new opinion inside the Agency (post-Columbia) or is this just me seeing in print/etc. for the first time?
-
gocamels - 7/9/2006 7:53 AM
Now a question: The most interesting thing the Go/No Go discussions from yesterday is the (I'm percieving this probably) acknowledgement that outside criticism will come from a GO decision. Is this climate a realtively new opinion inside the Agency (post-Columbia) or is this just me seeing in print/etc. for the first time?
It's probably more obvious since the decision to fly the existing ET ice-frost ramps as-is. I would imagine that upper management is aware of outside criticism, but it's not a good decision making input (which I think they're also acutely aware of).
-
gocamels - 7/9/2006 12:53 PM
Just a quick comment...my 8-year old has gone overboard on his interest now thanks to this site and NASA-TV on DirecTV...he asked his teacher to be able to watch the launch during class, and has a list of the website he can do so on the classroom computers since NASA-TV is not available on the local cable system. Thanks Chris, esp. for L2...best money I've spent in the last 6-months.
Now a question: The most interesting thing the Go/No Go discussions from yesterday is the (I'm percieving this probably) acknowledgement that outside criticism will come from a GO decision. Is this climate a realtively new opinion inside the Agency (post-Columbia) or is this just me seeing in print/etc. for the first time?
Thanks, that's very nice of you to say. I can't answer that question as they shouldn't be criticised for any decision, they are doing their homework!
-
20 more documents/presentations to today's MMT on L2. Some are fascinating, especially the e-mail from Tim North saying "no go".
Also, 10 new images of the Fuel Cell in questions (some likely taken last night).
-
Update:
L-1 Wx Brief (----)
Weather looks good for tomorrow. 30% chance of weather prohibiting launch. Northrop is still wet, but should dry out if the rain stops.
There was mention of the potential for a Saturday attempt. Not clear what/who has to give in order to get that extra attempt.
-
Obviously we can't see the L2 content here, but can you provide context? Who does Tim North represent?
-
joncz - 7/9/2006 7:47 AM
Obviously we can't see the L2 content here, but can you provide context? Who does Tim North represent?
You can if you join and the presentations today are fabulous!
-
7 Sep 06 Thur Meeting Plan (-----)
- 0500 CT Boeing/USA/EA Chart Review (in MER, no telecon)
- 0630 CT Actionee Chart Review (
- 0800 OPO Telecon Chart Review ( <---we're coming up to this one.
- 1200 MMT
-
joncz - 7/9/2006 1:47 PM
Who does Tim North represent?
The EGIL officer on console for the STS-93 ascent. Could be influential. Might make an article out of this anyway.
It's a very long e-mail (absolutely brilliant if you're into engineering).
Ends with this:
"Given the failure we've already experienced, I don't think you can draw any strong or definite conclusions that fuel cell 1 coolant pump will not experience an additional winding failure. So, I think you essentially drop back to the discussion from the MMT regarding whether you want to go into a flight with the distinct possibility that FC1 may not support an entire mission."
-
Chris Bergin - 7/9/2006 7:36 AM
20 more documents/presentations to today's MMT on L2. Some are fascinating, especially the e-mail from Tim North saying "no go".
Also, 10 new images of the Fuel Cell in questions (some likely taken last night).
Is Tim North on the engineering team?
-
Sounds like North will definitely have some good input for the MMT. What doe EGIL stand for again? That e-mail definitely makes me doubt that they'll go for a launch attempt tomorrow. Press briefing still scheduled for 12 noon EDT?
-
Chris Bergin - 7/9/2006 8:53 AM
joncz - 7/9/2006 1:47 PM
Who does Tim North represent?
The EGIL officer on console for the STS-93 ascent. Could be influential. Might make an article out of this anyway.
FWIW,
EGIL = "Electrical Generation and Illumination Engineer"
References (Google for more):
http://space.balettie.com/MCC.html
http://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/k-4/features/F_People_Behind_the_Astronauts.html
-
I suggest they should restart the cell and reactivate it again. If it's OK, they should proceed with launch with an acceptable risk.
-
nathan.moeller - 7/9/2006 2:03 PM
briefing still scheduled for 12 noon EDT?
No, the MMT is scheduled to start at midday CENTRAL (1pm EDT, 6pm UK). Press conference will be a few hours later.
-
Those Poll comments on the article on site are really interesting. Could go either ways. Griffin "Phase A sucks" :)
-
Svetoslav - 7/9/2006 9:08 AM
I suggest they should restart the cell and reactivate it again. If it's OK, they should proceed with launch with an acceptable risk.
Why is it OK? What are you basing that on?
-
Chris Bergin - 7/9/2006 7:36 AM
20 more documents/presentations to today's MMT on L2. Some are fascinating, especially the e-mail from Tim North saying "no go".
Also, 10 new images of the Fuel Cell in questions (some likely taken last night).
Just been skimming through and I need to work today ;), I won't if I read them all, but the on-pad R&R is superb and should be an article too. Been in the industry 20 years and never seen such an insight into NASA at work than this, but it's also encouraging to see the depth NASA are going to on this.
-
if it's performing as yesterday after the restart, if the output voltage is as expected, if... if it's perfect.
-
Svetoslav - 7/9/2006 8:18 AM
if it's performing as yesterday after the restart, if the output voltage is as expected, if... if it's perfect.
They know the cell is working, but again, they don't want to fly with hardware they know could possibly fail in flight and cut the mission short. They're going to try to develop flight rationale but I wouldn't get my hopes up. They're looking at what COULD happen.
-
Delta Manager - 7/9/2006 9:18 AM
Just been skimming through and I need to work today ;), I won't if I read them all, but the on-pad R&R is superb and should be an article too. Been in the industry 20 years and never seen such an insight into NASA at work than this, but it's also encouraging to see the depth NASA are going to on this.
I agree -- I also liked the accompanying e-mail showing some deviations between the expected physical layout in the area of the fuel cell and what they found looking at the candidate replacement fuel cell.
-
Svetoslav - 7/9/2006 9:18 AM
if it's performing as yesterday after the restart, if the output voltage is as expected, if... if it's perfect.
I don't see that those two data points necessarily lead to the conclusion that the fuel cell is perfect -- it's not that simplistic a choice. There are lots of other factors to consider.
-
I still hope they're launching on Friday. There is neither a violation of LCC nor a safety of flight risk. They could still achieve their major goals (collecting ET data and bolting P4/5 truss segment to ISS) even if they loose FC1 (worst case scenario). A launch in late september looks much more threatening:
- Increased risk in following flights because they cant improve the ET (as planned)
- No guarantee that weather will be fine
- Another storm/hurricane could force them to rollback
-
Felix - 7/9/2006 9:55 AM
I still hope they're launching on Friday. There is neither a violation of LCC nor a safety of flight risk. They could still achieve their major goals (collecting ET data and bolting P4/5 truss segment to ISS) even if they loose FC1 (worst case scenario). A launch in late september looks much more threatening:
- Increased risk in following flights because they cant improve the ET (as planned)
- No guarantee that weather will be fine
- Another storm/hurricane could force them to rollback
- They've already downselected a new IFR design.
- No guarantees on the weather, period. Why is early September better than late September?
-
Felix - 7/9/2006 3:55 PM
and bolting P4/5 truss segment to ISS)
They are going to take the P3/4 segment up....
:)
-
psloss - 7/9/2006 9:04 AM
- They've already downselected a new IFR design.
- No guarantees on the weather, period. Why is early September better than late September?
1. They've downselected the final design?
2. There's a promising (70%) forecast for tomorrow and there is a chance that weather will prohibt launch in late september. It's an unpredictable "risk".
-
I have a question that I have not been able to find an answer on so far. (Might be on L2, dunno.)
This FC is the same one as the one with similar anomalous behaviour on STS-93. Has it been flown on any other flight since then?
If so: Did it perform nominally?
If not: Why not? And why decide to reinstall it for this mission? (And about a million related questions that I'll hold back until these get an answer. ;) )
-
Felix - 7/9/2006 9:55 AM
They could still achieve their major goals (collecting ET data and bolting P4/5 truss segment to ISS) even if they loose FC1 (worst case scenario).
not if they lose it early
-
Jim - 7/9/2006 9:27 AM Felix - 7/9/2006 9:55 AM They could still achieve their major goals (collecting ET data and bolting P4/5 truss segment to ISS) even if they loose FC1 (worst case scenario).
not if they lose it early
'Shannon - have shown this is not a crew safety issue. Sufficient redundancy in fuel cell to get to orbit. Potentially drop controllers offline, but not an abort. Program needs to weigh if can?t complete mission or push to stage. Team needs to keep working. The programmatic risk of delay is not worth it for this issue.
'LeRoy (Cain) - no violation of LCC, launching with full SSME controllers. [..] Program risk not safety of flight risk. No impact to mission for loss of single phase. Fuel cell performance has been very good since start up. [..] Risk to R&R at the PAD is unknown and a concern. [..] Rolling back is even more risk to both programs because of the October launch. Can fly safe and not get much more data anytime soon. We have never had perfect data.
From: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=4770
-
And North is on the team it would appear:
0800 OPO Telecon on AC1 Phase A (-----)
- OV-104 Fuel Cell Performance to date plot (------)
- OV-104 Fuel Cell History (------)
- Worst-case Ascent Performance Margin (--------)
- Motor Dissection (T. North)
- Fuel Cell Photos/Pictures (------)
This telecon has begun.
-
Tomorrow's launch attempt run down now noted:
9/8 FRI (launch attempt, if reqd)
0000 ET Tanking Weather Briefing
0045 Earliest Tanking Operations
0700 Full MER Pre-Launch Team Call to Stations
1035 Launch Window Opens
-
Felix - 7/9/2006 10:22 AM
1. They've downselected the final design?
2. There's a promising (70%) forecast for tomorrow and there is a chance that weather will prohibt launch in late september. It's an unpredictable "risk".
Wayne Hale said they've downselected a foam-based design (vs. a titanium covering). Regarding weather, I don't understand your logic -- there's always a chance that weather will prohibit launch. I don't understand why the weather forecast would inform or influence a technical decision.
If the forecast for Friday was bad, wouldn't that logic suggest standing down for R&R?
-
psloss - 7/9/2006 9:39 AM Felix - 7/9/2006 10:22 AM
1. They've downselected the final design?
2. There's a promising (70%) forecast for tomorrow and there is a chance that weather will prohibt launch in late september. It's an unpredictable "risk".
Wayne Hale said they've downselected a foam-based design (vs. a titanium covering). Regarding weather, I don't understand your logic -- there's always a chance that weather will prohibit launch. I don't understand why the weather forecast would inform or influence a technical decision. If the forecast for Friday was bad, wouldn't that logic suggest standing down for R&R?
There's a risk that they loose FC1 and there is a risk that they can not launch in late september (for whatever reasons). NASA has to weigh these risks and I (personally) think launching tomorrow is much less risky because it's quite predictable and on the other hand trying to launch in september (and replacing that fuel cell) isn't.
-
Felix - 7/9/2006 10:48 AM
There's a risk that they loose FC1 and there is a risk that they can not launch in late september (for whatever reasons). NASA has to weigh these risks and I (personally) think launching tomorrow is much less risky because it's quite predictable and on the other hand trying to launch in september (and replacing that fuel cell) isn't.
OK, so you think the fuel cell R&R is risky. Got it.
Can you explain what about tomorrow you think is less risky and quite predictable?
-
If I would have anything to say about it, I realize I don't obviously, delay and replace the fuel cell. ;)
-
What time can we expect a press briefing? I'm gonna try to catch it in the architecture building.
-
psloss - 7/9/2006 9:53 AM OK, so you think the fuel cell R&R is risky. Got it. Can you explain what about tomorrow you think is less risky and quite predictable?
There are favourable conditions tomorrow and it looks like NASA is wait for perfect ones.
-
I'd just like to say how much I appreciate the jobs of those of you who work on the actual launch. Thanks to this site, I've gotten an unprecedented look into how this stuff happens beyond what we get to see on NASA TV or CNN. And I must say, it's been pretty nerve-wracking! You guys wait for mission meetings, prep for a launch that may not happen, and it's what may be the tiniest thing - a problem that may not even exist - that will push the results of all your work for back days, weeks, or longer.
It's like preparing for your own huge birthday party and then finding that someone has changed your party date on you due to rain, or (in this example) because one of the candles on your cake MIGHT not have enough wick to stay lit for as long as you need it. I realize that this sort of thing is the name of the game for you guys, but as someone newly observing how this works in so much detail, I must say that it seems to be pretty frustrating!
Mark
-
Update:
"There are some actions coming out of the meeting, don't know if they are already actioned but UTC has an action to Verify that coolant pump and hydrogen separator can be run indefinitely on 2 phases"
-
Felix - 7/9/2006 11:26 AM
There are favourable conditions tomorrow and it looks like NASA is wait for perfect ones.
OK. We'll have to agree to disagree, then. I disagree with the idea that weather forecasts should factor into a technical decision.
-
nathan.moeller - 7/9/2006 11:21 AM
What time can we expect a press briefing? I'm gonna try to catch it in the architecture building.
The MMT meeting is said to start at 1 pm Eastern. No idea how long it will take. NASA TV page currently says TBD.
(I also find that an STS-121 Crew Presentation at HQ is scheduled for broadcast at 1 pm Eastern.)
-
psloss - 7/9/2006 10:37 AM OK. We'll have to agree to disagree, then. I disagree with the idea that weather forecasts should factor into a technical decision.
Wasn't weather-related!
There's a clean shuttle at launch pad. No voilations, no safety issues. All they have are indications that something might go wrong and i think it's not worth it to stay on the ground for another month.
-
Felix - 7/9/2006 11:55 AM
psloss - 7/9/2006 10:37 AM OK. We'll have to agree to disagree, then. I disagree with the idea that weather forecasts should factor into a technical decision.
Wasn't weather-related!
There's a clean shuttle at launch pad. No voilations, no safety issues. All they have are indications that something might go wrong and i think it's not worth it to stay on the ground for another month.
That is the key "All they have are indications that something might go wrong". That's why they are paid to make the descisions and you/we watch
Also, it isn't clean, they have an unexplained anomaly
-
Mark Nguyen - 7/9/2006 11:29 AM
I'd just like to say how much I appreciate the jobs of those of you who work on the actual launch. ...
I need to join with Mark in thanking all of you NASA, USA and other contractor folks for all you're doing for the space program! What I'm learning from this site has been an absolute eye opener. It's wonderful watching the back & forth, coming to understand the pro's & con's of different options and actually understanding the risks involved. Compared to the mainstream media, I feel like I'm sitting an observation lounge over looking the MCC with full audio feeds from all loops and full data feeds on the lounge's own display bank! Something I doubt any such lounge ever had ... or has assuming there is such a room in the new facilities (I've seen the old one in the old Apollo & early shuttle era footage, but don't recall having seen an observation room in any footage of the new MCC).
And to get this SOMEwhat on topic ... based on what I've read here and on L2 ... *I* would feel more comfortable with an R&R. But I'm just a DBA, not an engineer, so I shall bow to the expertise of those who know & support these systems.
Again, thanks for all your doing and to the folks running this site - thank YOU for giving us this chance to listen in and learn!
pat----
-
I have to join in praising all those involved with the Shuttle Program. I don't know how you people sleep at night. Being an outside observer of the program, I even come upstairs just to check the latest news whenever I happen to wake up during the night. I salute every single one of you Shuttle Program people. I wish I could have coffee with Wayne Hale and/or Leroy Cain, or Mike Leinbach. Just to meet with one of you thousands of shuttle workers would be a thrill of a lifetime.
My hat's off to you!!
:) :)
-
-
Heading into MMT now. Called OPO Pre-MMT. Should all be on time.
-
Any thoughts on the time of the Post MMT briefing?
-
dutch courage - 7/9/2006 5:51 PM
Any thoughts on the time of the Post MMT briefing?
Yeah, we just published the pre-MMT overview (second most important doc, as the only other is the actual MMT decision).
Only R&R options are being noted.
And: "No spares are available, therefore replacement LRU will be taken from OV-105" So Endeavour gets to donate to her sister.
Still reading it, so will update when we see more...but only seeing R&R here.
-
Crikey. MOD come up with what looks like a dissenting option, asking to "isolate Phase A" - Reccomendation for Flight!
-
MMT Live:
"No change to 09/06/06 MOD Recommendation
- Isolate Phase A prelaunch and potentially for duration of mission "
-
do u think there will be a LCC waiver issued
-
TFGQ - 7/9/2006 6:03 PM
do u think there will be a LCC waiver issued
Good call, I'd rather see it than guess though.
Looks like we're in a push for a Go for launch situation here:
Currently being presented: "Probability of Effect on Phase B & Phase C?"
-
Looks like two options on the table.
Proceed to launch (tomorrow and the launch schedule charts are now complete).
R&R on the pad. No word on daylight restrictions yet (as in Sept. 24 window).
-
FWIW,
NASASpaceflightWeb (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/main/index.html) and others are reporting the MMT meeting start was pushed back to 2 pm Eastern...
-
For us acronym-impaired - R&R stands for what??
-
psloss - 7/9/2006 6:13 PM
FWIW,
NASASpaceflightWeb (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/main/index.html) and others are reporting the MMT meeting start was pushed back to 2 pm Eastern...
Must still be pre-MMT then, but all the players are there round a table.
-
mheney - 7/9/2006 6:14 PM
For us acronym-impaired - R&R stands for what??
Remove and Replace.
-
mheney - 7/9/2006 7:14 PM
For us acronym-impaired - R&R stands for what??
Either Remove&Repair or Remove&Replace.
-
psloss - 7/9/2006 12:13 PM
FWIW,
NASASpaceflightWeb (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/main/index.html) and others are reporting the MMT meeting start was pushed back to 2 pm Eastern...
Yes is was indeed pushed back, It starts at 1 pm central 2 eastern!!!!
Mark Kirkman
-
The KSC site says Friday is the day, currently on NASA TV it's a repeat of the conference yesterday.
-
MarkD - 7/9/2006 1:47 PM
The KSC site says Friday is the day
That's because the launch was delayed to Friday morning as of yesterday afternoon, you can watch that press conference or scan through yesterday's thread for more of that info.
-
MarkD - 7/9/2006 1:47 PM
The KSC site says Friday is the day, currently on NASA TV it's a repeat of the conference yesterday.
What I see is "NET Friday" -- I don't see any indication of a decision. How about a corroborating source?
-
I'm going to put my money of go for launch, seen as everything has been set for a go decision with the latest charts.
-
I think they are asking for trouble if they launch. The hardware is trying to tell them something.
- Ed Kyle
-
I really don't think hardware "communicates" in any fashion like that. It either works or it does, this one has a phase missing in the electrical flow, but the hardware still works.
-
Might be 2pm Central, 3pm EDT now.
1300 MMT for AC1 Phase A (==)
Delayed 1 hour at OPO's request for additional time
- launch weather - probability of go 70%, 80%, 80% next 3 days
And there's notes of "We need more printer toners" :)
-
I still think it's amazing that it would be of greater risk to the vehicle if they swap out the fuel cell than just flying it as-is. I'm still trying to wrap my head around what exactly the immediate danger to the mission is now that I heard Hale say yesterday that they were not in violation of their launch commit criteria. If the risk of changing the fuel cell out now is greater than just flying then I'll have to side with Svetoslav now and say 'go!' Go Atlantis!
-
I don't think hardware talks like that either.
But if one fuel cell fails, they have to come home STS-83 style. Whether or not they've completed the TPS inspections, or whether or not they have docked to the ISS. I don't see how they can justify taking that chance - waiving the ET lighting inspections seem much less sketchier in comparison.
-
yinzer - 7/9/2006 2:05 PM
I don't think hardware talks like that either.
But if one fuel cell fails, they have to come home STS-83 style. Whether or not they've completed the TPS inspections, or whether or not they have docked to the ISS. I don't see how they can justify taking that chance - waiving the ET lighting inspections seem much less sketchier in comparison.
Yeah I got that part, but those letters from Cain and Shannon were pretty clear that it's a greater risk to swap out the cell. I'm just really confused as to what's going on. I know the dangers that they would face if it fails, but what is the realistic chance of it happening with one (out of three) possibly bad phase?
-
nathan.moeller - 7/9/2006 9:03 PM
I still think it's amazing that it would be of greater risk to the vehicle if they swap out the fuel cell than just flying it as-is. I'm still trying to wrap my head around what exactly the immediate danger to the mission is now that I heard Hale say yesterday that they were not in violation of their launch commit criteria. If the risk of changing the fuel cell out now is greater than just flying then I'll have to side with Svetoslav now and say 'go!' Go Atlantis!
It is not an issue of flight safety, but an issue of flight success. If the FC#1 dies on FD1, then they're Minimum Duration Flight(MDF) which calls for a landing on FD7, cutting the mission by 4 days!
-
I know all the possibilities of what can go wrong and cutting the mission short, but I guess the bigger question is how dangerous swapping the cell out can be. Cain and Shannon seemed very concerned about the idea.
-
So what is the best option. IMO given the worry over FC1, I'd say replace it with a new one. Even though it would delay the launch, it's better to be safe than sorry. I want to see OV-104 launch, but if it make so much of a worry, then fix the problem to get it out of the way.
-
I've watched all the briefings and understand enough about 3 phase motors but I'm still confused. Is one phase totally out or dropped out and is back?
Three phase motors can't run very long on only two phases (if one is out completely). The motor will overheat assuming this motor is running when one phase is lost. IN most cases, the motor can't event start itself if only two phases exist.
I heard a manager say the FC#1 runs fine so I'm totally confused?
-
We have source information, not official and not documented (which is what we've been going off) claiming they are preparing for a go for launch decision. Wait until we get official news...these things have been known to change, but that info is from pretty high up.
-
MarkD - 7/9/2006 2:15 PM
So what is the best option. IMO given the worry over FC1, I'd say replace it with a new one. Even though it would delay the launch, it's better to be safe than sorry. I want to see OV-104 launch, but if it make so much of a worry, then fix the problem to get it out of the way.
This is what I'm wondering. I'd stand down for a few weeks, swap out the cell and THEN go fly. So what if it requires a rollback? It sounds like it'd be less risky to R&R the cell and fly with hardware they know works. I'm confused as to where Cain and Shannon are coming from so I guess we'll just have to wait and see what they say during the press briefing.
-
yinzer - 7/9/2006 3:05 PM
I don't think hardware talks like that either.
But if one fuel cell fails, they have to come home STS-83 style.
MDF was developed before CSCS. There was discussion of still going to ISS, at least getting the truss mounted and doing EVA1 before returning even if the FC went out on liftoff.
-
As an ET engineer at KSC all i can say is its nice to not have the tank be the source of the drama for once. As for all the orbiter folks.....i know first hand that they are all working hard to get us cleared for flight.
Looking forward to reporting to console in the LCC tonight for the pre-tanking meeting.....assuming all the rumors im hearing in the OSB are true :)
-
If the flight rules say "come home as soon as possible" vs. "come home right away", then it might be worth giving it a shot. I'd think that they could do the first two EVAs and have the station crew do the tasks of the 3rd over the time between now and the next shuttle mission.
-
galileo - 7/9/2006 2:27 PM
As an ET engineer at KSC all i can say is its nice to not have the tank be the source of the drama for once. As for all the orbiter folks.....i know first hand that they are all working hard to get us cleared for flight.
Looking forward to reporting to console in the LCC tonight for the pre-tanking meeting.....assuming all the rumors im hearing in the OSB are true :)
I hear ya! But let's not jinx those damn tanks just yet!
-
Speaking of tanks, how did those three anomolous cracks/scratches turn out?
-
Yesterday in the press briefing they made it clear they were not thinking this was a flight risk. If it went out on the way up so be it, then they would impliment the MDF of 7 days, hook the panels up and come home. Subsequent ISS/shuttle crews would be assigned the remaining tasks to catch up. So as I understand it, it is a come home as soon as possible scenerio
-
I'm for us proceeding to launch.
-
nathan.moeller - 7/9/2006 2:34 PM
Speaking of tanks, how did those three anomolous cracks/scratches turn out?
MR Fly-as-is
-
galileo - 7/9/2006 2:35 PM
nathan.moeller - 7/9/2006 2:34 PM
Speaking of tanks, how did those three anomolous cracks/scratches turn out?
MR Fly-as-is
Good to know! Still looking at 2 PM CDT for the MMT?
-
nathan.moeller - 7/9/2006 3:22 PM
This is what I'm wondering. I'd stand down for a few weeks, swap out the cell and THEN go fly. So what if it requires a rollback? It sounds like it'd be less risky to R&R the cell and fly with hardware they know works.
FYI, the turnaround time for horizontal changeout in the OPF was on the order of 50 days, due to the amount of work that has to be undone and then redone.
-
Yeah but I was under the impression that they'd do the changeout in the VAB.
-
Or at the pad.
So any confirming that Friday is a Go for launch?
-
Yeah hopefully at the pad if at all. No word yet. MMT's still meeting.
-
Ok. I do recall once on an orbiter something was changed out in the aft compartment while in the VAB or at the pad, Endeavour I believe.
-
Don't forget swapping out the avionics in the aft for Discovery after it scrubbed for STS-114. Also the many engine swaps that took place at the pad! :D
-
As the FCs are located under the payload bay, FC R&R can only be done at the pad or in the OPF where the necessary GSE exists for opening the payload bay doors.
The VAB doesn't have it.
-
nathan.moeller - 7/9/2006 2:45 PM
Yeah but I was under the impression that they'd do the changeout in the VAB.
You cant open the payload bay doors in the VAB....only in the OPF or at the Pad. So a VAB R&R is not an option. Its either do it at the Pad or destack Atlantis and roll her back to the OPF.
-
Yet another dumb thought from Nate. Oh well. Let's hope they do it at the pad if they opt for a swapout!
-
If it can be done at the pad, then I'm happy with that. I at first thought if they had to change out a fuel cell, they have to bring the vehicle back, destack it, then start all over again after the change out. Whew, good news to me. :)
-
MarkD - 7/9/2006 3:49 PM
Ok. I do recall once on an orbiter something was changed out in the aft compartment while in the VAB or at the pad, Endeavour I believe.
Not just once. There's a long history of it going back to the early flights.
-
A friend of mine said that the clock should be reset at t mines 11 hours. That means they should decide go or no go for tomorrow very soon, or they'll be too late.
-
if the external airlock needs to come out for access , that sounds like it needs to be done in the OFP, therefore missing the oct window too.
-
The length of the MMT decision is a bit worrying.
-
Svetoslav - 7/9/2006 3:12 PM
A friend of mine said that the clock should be reset at t mines 11 hours. That means they should decide go or no go for tomorrow very soon, or they'll be too late.
yeah. they have to come up with a decision and quick because if the plan on launching on tomorrow, they need to do t-11 hours at AROUND 9:40pm (CST) or so...
-
gordo - 7/9/2006 4:14 PM
if the external airlock needs to come out for access , that sounds like it needs to be done in the OFP, therefore missing the oct window too.
It doesn't.
-
psloss - 7/9/2006 9:21 PM
gordo - 7/9/2006 4:14 PM
if the external airlock needs to come out for access , that sounds like it needs to be done in the OFP, therefore missing the oct window too.
It doesn't.
Fingers crossed then, but does sound like a bugger for access!
-
gordo - 7/9/2006 4:24 PM
Fingers crossed then, but does sound like a bugger for access!
If they go down that road, hopefully Chris can do a write-up -- the L2 document on that is great.
-
shuttle_buff - 7/9/2006 2:19 PM
I've watched all the briefings and understand enough about 3 phase motors but I'm still confused. Is one phase totally out or dropped out and is back?
Three phase motors can't run very long on only two phases (if one is out completely). The motor will overheat assuming this motor is running when one phase is lost. IN most cases, the motor can't event start itself if only two phases exist.
I heard a manager say the FC#1 runs fine so I'm totally confused?
They are thinking about opening the Phase A circuit breaker for the pump motor on purpose and letting the pump run on two phases only, the thinking being that they would isolate the problem to prevent it recurring on ascent. Perhaps the motor was designed to be able to run this way since NASA needed all kinds of built-in redundancy, etc., but I doubt it. Normal AC motors in normal use should never be run this way.
- Ed Kyle
-
Shuttle Man - 7/9/2006 1:19 PM
The length of the MMT decision is a bit worrying.
I wouldn't read anything into the MMT meeting duration. If anything, I am encouraged by it. I am glad that they are having a thorough discussion here.
-
edkyle99 - 7/9/2006 10:28 PM
They are thinking about opening the Phase A circuit breaker for the pump motor on purpose and letting the pump run on two phases only, the thinking being that they would isolate the problem to prevent it recurring on ascent. Perhaps the motor was designed to be able to run this way since NASA needed all kinds of built-in redundancy, etc., but I doubt it. Normal AC motors in normal use should never be run this way.
- Ed Kyle
Not at all a normal AC motor you plug into the outlet at home only uses 2 phases.
The motors NASA is using is certified to operate with only 2 phases.
-
MMT Press Conference NET 5:30pm EDT (10:30pm UK) - meeting not concluded at this time.
-
spaceshuttle - 7/9/2006 4:19 PM
yeah. they have to come up with a decision and quick because if the plan on launching on tomorrow, they need to do t-11 hours at AROUND 9:40pm (CST) or so...
According to my clock, that's still many hours away. And here in the US we use Daylight Saving Time - so that would be CDT
-
T-11 hours and counting is in 1 hour 45 minutes from now (at 224500 GMT)
-
rdale - 7/9/2006 3:52 PM
spaceshuttle - 7/9/2006 4:19 PM
yeah. they have to come up with a decision and quick because if the plan on launching on tomorrow, they need to do t-11 hours at AROUND 9:40pm (CST) or so...
According to my clock, that's still many hours away. And here in the US we use Daylight Saving Time - so that would be CDT
yeah. less than 6 hours from now. they still have quite a bit of time. they're scheduled to tell us the scoop at around 4:30 cst (i'll give'em 5:30 cst since they're reasonably not ready on time).
-
GLS - 7/9/2006 4:03 PM
T-11 hours and counting is in 1 hour 45 minutes from now (at 224500 GMT)
SNAP! i forgot the holds...then they need to hurry the hell up if anything!
-
spaceshuttle - 7/9/2006 3:19 PM
they have to come up with a decision and quick because if the plan on launching on tomorrow, they need to do t-11 hours at AROUND 9:40pm (CST) or so...
I just inquired about this at the press site and T-11 picks up around 6:30 p.m. CDT. Exact time forthcoming if someone doesn't beat me to it...
-
the conference is about half an hour away. that means that soon we will know .
-
Svetoslav - 7/9/2006 11:08 PM
the conference is about half an hour away. that means that soon we will know .
The 5:30 pm EDT is a No Earlier Than time.
-
Briefing is now NET 6:00 p.m. EDT.
-
NASA TV is also reporting the briefing to be NET 6:00pm EDT.
-
A question for those in the know:
How is it that there are no spare/backup fuel cells? Does the program only have nine flight certified units? (3 x each orbiter)?
Also how does the maintenance and inspection work for something like a fuel cell? Does the vendor provide a 'service schedule' like one would receive with a new car, or does NASA use some vendor recommendation to draw up its own maintenance and inspection processes?
Pete
-
NASA spokesman Bill Johnson has just announced at the press site that they are going forward with a launch attempt tomorrow, Friday at 10:40 a.m. CDT. A press briefing to discuss the attempt will begin at 5:00 p.m. CDT.
-
Great news!
-
Hold on.
"PENDING motor 2 phase analysis which will be presented at the ET tanking telecon scheduled for 12:00 am Central."
Go for launch, but there's still one more hurdle.
-
Woohah! I'm curious to see what they say.
-
collectspace - 7/9/2006 2:42 PM
NASA spokesman Bill Johnson has just announced at the press site that they are going forward with a launch attempt tomorrow, Friday at 10:40 a.m. CDT. A press briefing to discuss the attempt will begin at 5:00 p.m. CDT.
If true, that is great news indeed!
-
Robert...pass on that "pending" note to anyone who gets to ask a question.
Full text:
"2006:250:21:38:11
09/07/06 16:38:11 MER MGR L-1 MMT Decision (saucela)
The MMT has decided to fly with the current FC1 Coolant pump configuration, pending motor 2 phase analysis which will be presented at the ET tanking telecon scheduled for 12:00 am Central"
-
-
That's not a go for launch, that's a go to proceed as if we are launching Friday, but there's a midnight go/no go.
-
Peter NASA - 7/9/2006 10:52 PM
That's not a go for launch, that's a go to proceed as if we are launching Friday, but there's a midnight go/no go.
Waiting on expanded notes. At least we can say they are "proceeding" to a Friday launch attempt. Better than not.
-
The "three times in a row" statement was for three consequtive attempts(Wednesday, Thursday and Friday).
Targeted launch time is 11:40:47 EDT.
-
Bill Harwood reporting that Saturday is an option too:
http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/current.html
Sounds like they are going to give up another contingency day if they need to...
-
collectspace - 7/9/2006 4:08 PM
spaceshuttle - 7/9/2006 3:19 PM
they have to come up with a decision and quick because if the plan on launching on tomorrow, they need to do t-11 hours at AROUND 9:40pm (CST) or so...
I just inquired about this at the press site and T-11 picks up around 6:30 p.m. CDT. Exact time forthcoming if someone doesn't beat me to it...
The Count picks up around 7:45 eastern at T-11!!!
Mark Kirkman
-
psloss - 7/9/2006 5:02 PM
Bill Harwood reporting that Saturday is an option too:
http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/current.html
Sounds like they are going to give up another contingency day if they need to...
Keep up, that was reported here four days ago.
-
MMT briefing is now starting.
-
Peter NASA - 7/9/2006 6:04 PM
psloss - 7/9/2006 5:02 PM
Bill Harwood reporting that Saturday is an option too:
http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/current.html
Sounds like they are going to give up another contingency day if they need to...
Keep up, that was reported here four days ago.
That they'd try Saturday and that they'd give up a second contingency day?
Can you post a link after the briefing?
Thanx.
-
So cool. Glad they were able to build flight rationale for this one!
-
the picture shown on NASA TV of the pump was already on L2 before this briefing, so cool !
-
Looks good, and 20% due to weather for 24 hour delay happens.
-
-
i heard somewhere that there are 2 sets of launch replays. anyone know when (how long from MECO) the replays air?
-
Peter NASA - 7/9/2006 11:04 PM
psloss - 7/9/2006 5:02 PM
Bill Harwood reporting that Saturday is an option too:
http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/current.html
Sounds like they are going to give up another contingency day if they need to...
Keep up, that was reported here four days ago.
No, we broke the news that it was being considered. Hale's only said it "now looks good" today.
-
Chris Bergin - 7/9/2006 6:35 PM
No, we broke the news that it was being considered. Hale's only said it "now looks good" today.
I didn't hear Mike Suffredini's explanation about Saturday clearly, but it sounded like they are going to accept undocking as late as Sept. 18th, which would preserve at least a day for focused inspections.
Anybody catch that clearly?
-
Was that Sam Gemar asking a question?
-
psloss - 7/9/2006 5:41 PM
Was that Sam Gemar asking a question?
Sure appeared to me to be him. So anyone know which media outlet he's working for?
-
Melroy Fan - 7/9/2006 6:47 PM
psloss - 7/9/2006 5:41 PM
Was that Sam Gemar asking a question?
Sure appeared to me to be him. So anyone know which media outlet he's working for?
Did a little digging, he's working for HDNet:
http://www.hd.net/pressrelease.html?2006-08-25-01.html
Just don't recall seeing him at any of the recent briefings...
-
psloss - 7/9/2006 6:39 PM
I didn't hear Mike Suffredini's explanation about Saturday clearly, but it sounded like they are going to accept undocking as late as Sept. 18th, which would preserve at least a day for focused inspections.
Anybody catch that clearly?
The short answer is that the original mission "requirement" had them undocking prior to the Soyuz launch. Upon further review, their analysis shows that they can remain docked until the 18th and undock some hours after the Soyuz launches, with the knowledge that they will be clear of the ISS vicinity in sufficient time to allow the Progress to undock and clear the vicinity before the Soyuz reaches ISS.
-
That briefing was great, and allayed most of my concerns with launching tomorrow. If anything, I'm more worried now about the Expedition 13 crew being too overworked in their final days!
Mark
-
joncz - 7/9/2006 6:53 PM
The short answer is that the original mission "requirement" had them undocking prior to the Soyuz launch. Upon further review, their analysis shows that they can remain docked until the 18th and undock some hours after the Soyuz launches, with the knowledge that they will be clear of the ISS vicinity in sufficient time to allow the Progress to undock and clear the vicinity before the Soyuz reaches ISS.
Thanks, I was able to queue that up to review it again, too. He also noted again the issue that the orbiter causes for the KURS.
-
It would've been cool to see the shuttle there as expedition 14 arrives, to say good bye to Atlantis. A nice photo from Soyuz of ISS with Atlantis undocking. It'd be like the first Shuttle/Mir mission where Soyuz filmed the undocking a good distance away.
-
Let's hope the thousands of other element of a Shuttle play ball tomorrow.
-
T - 11 and counting!!
-
Any updates on how the count is going?
-
nathan.moeller - 7/9/2006 10:11 PM
Any updates on how the count is going?
I always say " No news is good news!" :) :)
-
None would be posted here, we're on to the launch day thread...
-
I'll say!
-
Is it just because of the great job NasaSpaceFlight.com does or is NASA much more open about it's processes as it makes the critial go/no-go decisions?
Or both?
-
NASA has been very open since Columbia, I'm not sure that the existance of this website makes Wayne Hale more likely to spill all than if this site didn't exist. Remember 99% of the media still has no idea (or care) that L2 is around, nor the documents on it are available publicly.
-
I think it is both, NASA is much more open after Columbia, but I am pretty sure this site helps to ensure it stays that way :)
-
astrobrian - 8/9/2006 12:48 AM
I think it is both, NASA is much more open after Columbia, but I am pretty sure this site helps to ensure it stays that way :)
Perhaps, but it depends on what scope one means. I think "NASA" or the shuttle program or USA (as a whole) are largely unaware of the existence of this site, even though it's obvious that via this site we see the cooperation of many personnel from those organizations.