Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/03/2007 07:59 pm
Orbiter power up in work
Payload transfer to PCR in work
SSB rollback preps in work
85217 rollback CTS still scheduled for is 03:00 Sunday
Anticipated first motion 07:00 Sunday
Article to come. HUGE amount of presentations and memos etc in L2, with more to follow during this repair process.
Post by: Lee Jay on 03/03/2007 08:06 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/03/2007 09:01 pm
Quote
Lee Jay - 3/3/2007 3:06 PM
Will the payload be left in the payload changeout room or will it be lowered into its container and driven back to one of the payload facilities?
It will be left in the PCR.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/03/2007 09:21 pm
Orbiter remains powered up until payload door closure
Expect power down at 20:00 local
Expect payload transfer complete at 18:00
SSV rollback preps in work
85217 CTS still scheduled 03:00 Sunday
Expected first motion 07:00 Sunday
Post by: Lee Jay on 03/03/2007 10:35 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 3/3/2007 3:01 PMQuoteLee Jay - 3/3/2007 3:06 PM
Will the payload be left in the payload changeout room or will it be lowered into its container and driven back to one of the payload facilities?
It will be left in the PCR.
Thanks. Next question. Are there consumables in the payload that need to be replaced given the long launch delay?
Lee Jay
Post by: DaveS on 03/03/2007 10:45 pm
Quote
Lee Jay - 4/3/2007 12:35 AMNo.
Thanks. Next question. Are there consumables in the payload that need to be replaced given the long launch delay?
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/03/2007 10:46 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 3/3/2007 4:21 PM
STS 118 / OV 104 / Pad A
Orbiter remains powered up until payload door closure
Expect power down at 20:00 local
Expect payload transfer complete at 18:00
SSV rollback preps in work
85217 CTS still scheduled 03:00 Sunday
Expected first motion 07:00 Sunday
Chris, does "85217 CTA......." mean when the crawler transporter will be positioned under the MLP?Can the crawler be positioned while the Rotating Service Structure is still up against the shuttle or does the RSS have to be retracted first?
Post by: DaveS on 03/03/2007 10:49 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 4/3/2007 12:46 AM2: No. RSS have to be rotated to park position(currently in mate position).QuoteChris Bergin - 3/3/2007 4:21 PM
STS 118 / OV 104 / Pad A
Orbiter remains powered up until payload door closure
Expect power down at 20:00 local
Expect payload transfer complete at 18:00
SSV rollback preps in work
85217 CTS still scheduled 03:00 Sunday
Expected first motion 07:00 Sunday
Can the crawler be positioned while the Rotating Service Structure is still up against the shuttle or does the RSS have to be retracted first?
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/03/2007 11:43 pm
Quote
Lee Jay - 3/3/2007 5:35 PM
Are there consumables in the payload that need to be replaced given the long launch delay?
Lee Jay
I suppose it's possible they'll give the batteries a reboost from time to time prior to launch. For some reason I want to say they need a reboost every couple of weeks. Other than that, I believe there are no components that need to be R&R'd before liftoff. Someone feel free to correct me if that is incorrect.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/03/2007 11:45 pm
Quote
DaveS - 3/3/2007 5:49 PM
2: No. RSS have to be rotated to park position(currently in mate position).
Can't the crawler be placed beneath the MLP prior to RSS retraction to park position? Or is there not enough clearance to drive underneath while the RSS is mated?
Post by: DaveS on 03/04/2007 12:41 am
Post by: Jim on 03/04/2007 12:59 am
Post by: jmjawors on 03/04/2007 01:01 am
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/04/2007 02:58 am
Quote
jmjawors - 3/3/2007 8:01 PMWhere can we watch these video views of the White Room?
Post by: jmjawors on 03/04/2007 03:04 am
http://webcams.ksc.nasa.gov/ImgCap/camera1/Camera1Java.htm
Post by: DaveS on 03/04/2007 06:04 am
Post by: jupiter on 03/04/2007 06:13 am
Post by: jupiter on 03/04/2007 06:15 am
Post by: norm103 on 03/04/2007 06:28 am
Post by: Michael22090 on 03/04/2007 06:31 am
Quote
norm103 - 4/3/2007 1:28 AM
rss retact is at 300 am est its only 230 so 30 more mints pls its been raining all night here in central fla.
The weather radar images have some rain over KSC at the moment. It looks like it should be gone by the time for RSS retract, but is there more on the way?
Post by: jupiter on 03/04/2007 06:36 am
Post by: norm103 on 03/04/2007 06:38 am
Post by: Michael22090 on 03/04/2007 06:40 am
Quote
norm103 - 4/3/2007 1:38 AM
nope that looks and seems like the last of it but i was only saying it as it might have slow things down as it has in the past
Thanks, just wondering! ;)
Post by: jupiter on 03/04/2007 06:47 am
Post by: Michael22090 on 03/04/2007 06:47 am
EDIT: And it now appears to be in park position...
Post by: jupiter on 03/04/2007 07:38 am
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/04/2007 10:13 am
Quote
jmjawors - 3/3/2007 10:04 PMThanks for directing me to the site!! :cool:
Not exactly video. Just stills from a webcam:
http://webcams.ksc.nasa.gov/ImgCap/camera1/Camera1Java.htm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 12:06 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 12:08 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 12:13 pm
Post by: dutch courage on 03/04/2007 12:13 pm
Oh wait, update after 15 minutes. :(
Post by: Chandonn on 03/04/2007 12:16 pm
Post by: DaveS on 03/04/2007 12:17 pm
Quote
dutch courage - 4/3/2007 2:13 PMNo, they update nicely for me. No motion observed as of 08:14 am EST.
Is it me or have the KSC cameras updates stopped?
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/04/2007 12:17 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 4/3/2007 7:06 AMAny weather constraints in affect? Doesn't look like any rain or t'storms in the area, according to the radar. :laugh:
Seems we're a bit late with the move off the pad. No reason yet.
Is it just me, or are the clouds getting more ominous down there? Looks darker than the last view...
Post by: Chandonn on 03/04/2007 12:19 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 4/3/2007 8:17 AMQuoteChris Bergin - 4/3/2007 7:06 AMAny weather constraints in affect? Doesn't look like any rain or t'storms in the area, according to the radar. :laugh:
Seems we're a bit late with the move off the pad. No reason yet.
Is it just me, or are the clouds getting more ominous down there? Looks darker than the last view...
Might be the crawler... sometimes they're finicky...
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/04/2007 12:34 pm
Quote
Chandonn - 4/3/2007 7:19 AMQuoteshuttlefan - 4/3/2007 8:17 AMQuoteChris Bergin - 4/3/2007 7:06 AMAny weather constraints in affect? Doesn't look like any rain or t'storms in the area, according to the radar. :laugh:
Seems we're a bit late with the move off the pad. No reason yet.
Is it just me, or are the clouds getting more ominous down there? Looks darker than the last view...
Might be the crawler... sometimes they're finicky...
Imagine if there would be a major problem with the crawler now and it would take them a very long time to get it back to the VAB?! Also, will the technicians start looking at the tank damage right as soon as it gets into the VAB, even though it's Sunday?
Post by: DaveS on 03/04/2007 12:36 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 12:39 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 12:40 pm
LO2 platforms and scaffolding installation will be continuing through Sunday night.
Engineering Evaluation Team Pretest Briefing is scheduled for Monday @ 0830 hrs (VAB 2K6).
Inspections and grid marking will be continuing throughout Monday (03/05).
Remaining platforms and scaffolding will be in work through Monday (03/05) night.
QC inspections are scheduled to begin on lower platforms (B & D) on 2nd shift Monday.
ET-124 Damage Assessment & Repair
Initial planning is complete for platforms, access control, initial engineering inspection, tank grid mapping and quality inspection. Details are currently being worked.
Post by: DaveS on 03/04/2007 12:49 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 01:04 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 01:05 pm
Post by: DaveS on 03/04/2007 01:09 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 01:12 pm
Quote
DaveS - 4/3/2007 2:09 PM
"...but for the right reasons."
Exactly, and to say I'm annoyed by the media reports using this rollback as another excuse to blurt their Nowak/bad year for NASA crap is an understatement.
What the hell has become of the US media? I thought the UK tabloids were bad enough.
Post by: jmjawors on 03/04/2007 01:15 pm
Oh... and:
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 01:18 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 01:28 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 4/3/2007 8:12 AMQuoteDaveS - 4/3/2007 2:09 PM
"...but for the right reasons."
Exactly, and to say I'm annoyed by the media reports using this rollback as another excuse to blurt their Nowak/bad year for NASA crap is an understatement.
What the hell has become of the US media? I thought the UK tabloids were bad enough.
It really is sad Chris. I refuse to watch the news here for these very reasons. They focus in on all the crap that comes out of Hollywood and the White House and try to deal NASA one from time to time and say it's not worth it. Very much a travesty.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 01:31 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 01:35 pm
Post by: haywoodfloyd on 03/04/2007 01:38 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 01:38 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 01:40 pm
Quote
haywoodfloyd - 4/3/2007 8:38 AM
Is that a large white scratch on the lower portion of the ET or is it just a camera artifact?
Newer foam that was applied in the VAB checkout cell.
Post by: Flightstar on 03/04/2007 01:42 pm
Quote
haywoodfloyd - 4/3/2007 8:38 AM
Is that a large white scratch on the lower portion of the ET or is it just a camera artifact?
Newer foam, nothing to worry about.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 01:43 pm
Post by: haywoodfloyd on 03/04/2007 01:43 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 01:44 pm
For those on L2, it's page nine of the "Hail Damage to STS-117 ET - Internal notes and images pages."
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 01:56 pm
Post by: Chandonn on 03/04/2007 02:03 pm
Post by: Chandonn on 03/04/2007 02:16 pm
Post by: Chandonn on 03/04/2007 02:17 pm
Post by: haywoodfloyd on 03/04/2007 02:20 pm
Post by: Chandonn on 03/04/2007 02:27 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 02:45 pm
Atlantis rolling back - six week ET repair plan drawn up
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5040
Post by: Lee Jay on 03/04/2007 02:55 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 03:06 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 03:07 pm
Rollback in work
1st motion 08:47
Hard down expected at 15:45
Post by: bsegal on 03/04/2007 03:08 pm
Post by: bsegal on 03/04/2007 03:14 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 03:16 pm
Post by: Michael22090 on 03/04/2007 03:53 pm
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 03/04/2007 04:00 pm
Quote
Michael22090 - 4/3/2007 4:53 PM
Getting closer to the VAB...
Not far now. Very good time, good weather, what more could you want? :)
Post by: psloss on 03/04/2007 04:29 pm
Quote
ShuttleDiscovery - 4/3/2007 12:00 PMI'll settle for mediocre weather if someone takes back the hailstorm.
Not far now. Very good time, good weather, what more could you want? :)
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/04/2007 04:48 pm
Quote
ShuttleDiscovery - 4/3/2007 11:00 AM--For it to be going the opposite direction, out to the pad!! :laugh: :laugh:QuoteMichael22090 - 4/3/2007 4:53 PM
Getting closer to the VAB...
Not far now. Very good time, good weather, what more could you want? :)
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 04:53 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 05:22 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 05:39 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 05:52 pm
Post by: Michael22090 on 03/04/2007 05:57 pm
Post by: Space Shrew on 03/04/2007 06:02 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 06:03 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 06:04 pm
Post by: Michael22090 on 03/04/2007 06:10 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 4/3/2007 1:03 PM
Wow they made great time. Back into HB 1 I see!
Yep, but it will be a while before we see her outside again. :(
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/04/2007 06:18 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 06:19 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 4/3/2007 1:18 PM
I'm watching the KSC video feed which shows the side of the VAB with the Nasa meatball on it. It seems that the shuttle hasn't moved the last few times the image has refreshed....
Possibly one last stop to cool the engines before making that final drive inside.
Post by: Michael22090 on 03/04/2007 06:21 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 06:23 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 06:24 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 06:31 pm
Post by: Avron on 03/04/2007 06:35 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 4/3/2007 2:31 PM
Looks like they've paused again.
Break for some tea.. They may be checking alignment
Post by: Michael22090 on 03/04/2007 06:37 pm
Quote
Avron - 4/3/2007 1:35 PMQuotenathan.moeller - 4/3/2007 2:31 PM
Looks like they've paused again.
Break for some tea.. They may be checking alignment
Yeah, thats what I was thinking. Checking to see if the position is right for all the scaffolds.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 06:38 pm
Quote
Avron - 4/3/2007 1:35 PMQuotenathan.moeller - 4/3/2007 2:31 PM
Looks like they've paused again.
Break for some tea.. They may be checking alignment
I'm sure that's it. Very tight clearances getting in there as usual. And some ice tea never hurts out there in that Florida sun and humidity.
Post by: Michael22090 on 03/04/2007 06:42 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 06:43 pm
Post by: Flightstar on 03/04/2007 06:47 pm
Post by: Michael22090 on 03/04/2007 06:53 pm
EDIT: And she is in, all ready for repairs. See you next month Atlantis!
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 06:56 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 06:58 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/04/2007 07:11 pm
Post by: Michael22090 on 03/04/2007 07:22 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 4/3/2007 2:11 PM
For future reference please avoid so many pictures in the same post. It makes it hard for people to view the threads....but thanks all the same :)
Sorry, Chris. Kind of new to posting pictures. In the future I will keep this advice in mind. Thanks! :o
Post by: Mark Dave on 03/04/2007 09:56 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 10:20 pm
Quote
MarkD - 4/3/2007 4:56 PM
Based on the damage to the tPS of the ET and some orbiter tiles when will re-rollout back to 39A be?
They're looking at a six-week stay in the VAB for repairs. That is quite tentative, considering the choice course of action depends on the upcoming assessments to see if the tank can be saved in the VAB. Remember, there are three options.
1. Repair ET-124 without destacking. Option allows for possible late-April, early May launch.
2. Destack Atlantis and ET-124 and move ET-124 into the vertical checkout cell in the VAB for repairs. Option allows possible late-May launch.
3. Destack Atlantis and ET-124 and await arrival of ET-117 (next tank, currently set for use on STS-118). Swap ET-124 with ET-117. Send ET-124 back to MAF for repairs and fly ET-117 with STS-117 stack. Option allows for July launch at the earliest. STS-118 moves to August 26.
Post by: Mark Dave on 03/04/2007 10:37 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 10:49 pm
Quote
MarkD - 4/3/2007 5:37 PM
Option 1 sounds doable. Some foam spraying in here and there spots. And from what I recall only some coating for the tiles needs to be taken care of.
I think it's a matter of time. ET-100 (STS-96 tank damaged by hail) had about 700 dings and it repaired rather quickly. ET-124 has about 7000 dings so it's obviously more complicated. But I believe it can be repaired, based on presentations I've seen on L2. As for Atlantis TPS, I imagine it can be repaired in the VAB as well. The only concern I know of (at this point) is possible damage to the RCC panels that isn't visible to the naked eye. Assessments will be made to confirm that they are undamaged or not, but at this time I don't see anything facilitating the need for a return to the OPF. Launch is delayed for a good while, but I think the stack can be repaired and flown with ET-124. In any case, it's a matter of time. Probably a few months at the most.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/04/2007 10:51 pm
Post by: c.steven on 03/04/2007 10:57 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/05/2007 12:35 pm
"First motion occurred at 0867E after a delay due to IPR PadA-2363 Orbiter Access Arm power supply issue and Crawler Transporter JEL (Jack, Equalization and Leveling) issues. The stack was hard down in VAB HB-1 at 1747 hrs"
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/05/2007 01:46 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/05/2007 01:48 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 5/3/2007 2:46 PM
Should we have a preliminary indication by late-today about the extent of the hail damage to the tank? :cool:
The major meeting is Tuesday now. Walkdown was last night and on-going today.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/05/2007 02:20 pm
Post by: Rocket Guy on 03/05/2007 02:46 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/05/2007 02:49 pm
Quote
Ben - 5/3/2007 3:46 PM
Umm, you cannot just post those photos! Come on guys, you know better than this. You link if you want to show. Please delete Chris.
Done, and post left on to remind people that it's not only stupidly obvious, but it's totally against copyright rules to post images that are the work of someone else. NASA TV screenshots = ok. NASA.gov images = ok...everything else, not ok - so post a link.
It's the same as theft. Don't do it.
Post by: NASA_Twix_JSC on 03/05/2007 03:18 pm
Post by: Andy USA on 03/05/2007 05:57 pm
Post by: triddirt on 03/05/2007 08:31 pm
http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/search.cfm?cat=4
Post by: psloss on 03/05/2007 10:07 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/05/2007 10:14 pm
Regardless, nearly all launches are slipping. by a month or so.
Manifests to go on L2. Article to follow this evening.
Post by: DaveS on 03/05/2007 10:39 pm
Quote
psloss - 5/3/2007 12:07 AMNope. Same as the media-channel version. Also, it's new as the videos always seems to be made available at the same time as the photos.
The NASA TV Public Channel is running some nice video in their dumbed-down video file that I assume already ran on the Media Channel...
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/05/2007 11:32 pm
Orbiter powered down
Next power up Thursday 08:00
TPS ET 124 damage assessment inspection preparations in work
Post by: E_ E_ H on 03/06/2007 11:05 am
I am relatively new here, and have not been active before, although I'd like to thank the team at NSF for the info. Is it just me that gets annoyed with NASA.gov because of the complete lack of timely information? For such a transparent organisation, their website is somewhat lacking in information!
I think I express it for everyone when I say how disappointing this hail storm is. Since the return to flight, I have taken to putting the launch schedule in my diary so I can make sure I get to watch the launches online. To see such a smooth processing (before the "golfballs"), was really reassuring, and I was really looking forward to the 15th.
I'm certainly with you all when I read the press. This is the new NASA, and they have to do it right. When the press bang on at them for rolling back, what hope do they have. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Now for a couple of questions, and sorry if I missed the answers in the other threads! Firstly, what impact is this likely to have on the Ares time line - as in the work on Pad B, and general development. Secondly, President Bush's vision called for the retirement of the Shuttle. I wonder how this will affect the retirement plan?!
Again, sorry if this has been answered elsewhere. I can't afford L2 at the moment because of my imminent wedding!!!
Best wishes to all...
A complete Space Nut.
Post by: SimonShuttle on 03/06/2007 12:44 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/06/2007 02:16 pm
Quote
SimonShuttle - 6/3/2007 1:44 PM
Let's hope the meetings go well this week and there's no need for a tank swap.
As per launch ops today, they are still building platforms/access, so I think it will take most of the week to gain the full assessment.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/06/2007 05:10 pm
Post by: tofarout on 03/06/2007 06:03 pm
what is the MSBLS?
Thanks!
Post by: DaveS on 03/06/2007 06:11 pm
Quote
tofarout - 6/3/2007 8:03 PMMicrowave Scan Beam Landing System.
what is the MSBLS?
Post by: Zpoxy on 03/06/2007 09:31 pm
Quote
SimonShuttle - 6/3/2007 8:44 AM
Let's hope the meetings go well this week and there's no need for a tank swap.
How about we just hope the problems are fixed so we can have a successful flight, and not worry about how long it takes?
Post by: Mark Nguyen on 03/06/2007 10:26 pm
Regarding the MSBLS, can we assume that a test of the unit would have been done on the pad anyway? Is this part of the standard maintenance testing, and would a pad swapout have been possible if Atlantis were still out there?
Mark
Post by: Ducati94 on 03/06/2007 11:04 pm
Post by: Jim on 03/06/2007 11:30 pm
Quote
Mark Nguyen - 6/3/2007 6:26 PM
would a pad swapout have been possible if Atlantis were still out there?
Mark
yes
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/07/2007 12:24 am
Post by: Andy USA on 03/07/2007 02:56 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/07/2007 03:01 pm
Quote
Andy USA - 7/3/2007 3:56 PM
Have they actually started any repairs yet?
As of yesterday they were half way through Orbiter tile repairs. ET work will commence once the full evaluations have concluded.
Post by: Mark Dave on 03/07/2007 05:27 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/07/2007 05:34 pm
Quote
MarkD - 7/3/2007 6:27 PM
How will the delay affect the 2010 timeline?
It won't. There's lots of stretch in the manifest.
Post by: DaveS on 03/07/2007 09:07 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/09/2007 01:38 pm
Orbiter Hail Damage Status:
20 of 28 tiles damaged by hail have been repaired.
Post by: paulhbell07 on 03/09/2007 03:15 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/09/2007 03:27 pm
Quote
paulhbell07 - 9/3/2007 4:15 PM
Have they started to repair the ET yet or are they still inspecting it.
Inspection infrastructure complete today...many, many presentations and slides and notes going into L2 right now.
Will write up an article.
Post by: psloss on 03/09/2007 05:49 pm
Quote
DaveS - 7/3/2007 5:07 PMThere are newer photos on the site today...
Photos of the inspection activties is now available: http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/search.cfm?cat=4
Post by: jacqmans on 03/09/2007 09:25 pm
S3/S4 Truss Segment Solar Arrays
Vehicle: Atlantis (OV-104)
Location: Vehicle Assembly Building
Launch Date: Targeted for April 2007
Launch Pad: 39A
Crew: Sturckow, Archambault, Reilly, Swanson, Forrester and Olivas
Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles
On Sunday, Atlantis rolled from Launch Pad 39A to the Vehicle Assembly
Building, where employees spent the week positioning platforms around
the shuttle to allow for inspections and repairs to hail-damaged
areas. Inspections of the external tank are expected to be completed
next week. Some foam sanding has begun in the nose cone area of the
tank.
Inspections are finished for the solid rocket boosters and nearly
complete for the orbiter, with 20 of 28 hail-damaged areas, all on
the left side of the vehicle, already repaired.
Post by: paulhbell07 on 03/09/2007 10:58 pm
Post by: DaveS on 03/09/2007 11:17 pm
Quote
paulhbell07 - 10/3/2007 12:58 AMWell, it's to early to tell as sanding is used to detect deeper laying cracks and deformations in the foam by first applying red dye and then carefully sanding it away.
So they are already sanding the foam, does this mean that they not going to change the tank.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/09/2007 11:20 pm
Quote
paulhbell07 - 9/3/2007 11:58 PM
So they are already sanding the foam, does this mean that they not going to change the tank.
"Some sanding" could be one of several things. Waiting for some guys to get off shift and mail back the latest, for the article that'll round it all up. As far as the NASA status reports, they tend to be pretty useless for decent info.
But so far it looks like they can repair ET-124.
Post by: jmjawors on 03/09/2007 11:22 pm
http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/170421main_sanding-lg.jpg
Post by: paulhbell07 on 03/09/2007 11:32 pm
But on the tank I assume they are letting the dye soak into the foam and sanding the cracks out that way.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/10/2007 02:24 am
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5044
Post by: jajoslon on 03/10/2007 11:33 am
Post by: eeergo on 03/10/2007 02:54 pm
Some interesting images from http://webcams.ksc.nasa.gov/ImgCap/default.htm:
Post by: shuttlepilot on 03/10/2007 07:22 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/10/2007 07:51 pm
Quote
shuttlepilot - 10/3/2007 8:22 PM
Which launch date is most possible at this time? Late April or early May or later?
Impossible question at this time. The earliest option (quick repair) is second half of April. What is most likely is impossible to say at this point of repairs.
Post by: William Graham on 03/10/2007 10:30 pm
Post by: Gekko0481 on 03/11/2007 10:02 am
Quote
Chris Bergin - 6/3/2007 6:10 PM
"IPR 117V-0096 MLS 3 Fail during MSBLS Testing Update: Engineering will upgrade to a PR and perform an R&R of the MSBLS. The newly installed unit will come from Discovery."
Hi, newbie here, so please dont eat me.
I'm assuming that Discovery is the LON Rescue Vehicle for STS-117. If they are going to remove her MSBLS to install on Atlantis, how would that affect a rescue mission?
Thanks,
James
Post by: DaveS on 03/11/2007 10:38 am
Quote
Gekko0481 - 11/3/2007 1:02 PMEndeavour is the LON vehicle.
Hi, newbie here, so please dont eat me.
I'm assuming that Discovery is the LON Rescue Vehicle for STS-117.James
Post by: Gekko0481 on 03/11/2007 10:39 am
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/11/2007 04:28 pm
Quote
Gekko0481 - 11/3/2007 6:39 AM
ah right, that would explain it, Thanks
Welcome to the site Gekko. As Dave said, Endeavour is the LON vehicle (LON-318) for STS-117. Atlantis will pick up the duties of the rescue ship when she lands and begins processing for STS-120. She will be on stand-by as LON-320 to rescue a stranded STS-118 Endeavour crew. Once Endeavour lands after STS-118, the role of LON-vehicle will fall to Discovery, currently being readied to fly at the end of this year. She will be on stand-by to rescue a stranded STS-120 crew should Atlantis suffer entry-critical damage.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/12/2007 01:24 pm
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 03/12/2007 07:35 pm
Quote
jajoslon - 10/3/2007 12:33 PM
According to pictures there will be a bright red ET on STS-117 mission :)
Will the tank actually will be bright red due to the dye or will it all be sanded away?
Thanks :)
Post by: jmjawors on 03/12/2007 07:46 pm
http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/detail.cfm?mediaid=31527
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 03/12/2007 07:52 pm
Quote
jmjawors - 12/3/2007 9:46 PM
It's being sanded away.
http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/detail.cfm?mediaid=31527
Thanks :)
Does this mean more foam will have to be applied to the sanded area?
Post by: jmjawors on 03/12/2007 07:55 pm
Post by: jmjawors on 03/12/2007 09:49 pm
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/space/03/12/space.shuttle.reut/index.html
Also, nasa.gov has updated on their Shuttle site... but I don't know why. Nothing new is being reported.
Post by: sawtooth on 03/12/2007 10:33 pm
Post by: James Lowe1 on 03/12/2007 11:07 pm
Quote
jmjawors - 12/3/2007 5:49 PM
An update coming from an unusual source:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/space/03/12/space.shuttle.reut/index.html
Also, nasa.gov has updated on their Shuttle site... but I don't know why. Nothing new is being reported.
A rehash of what was on here last week.
Post by: jmjawors on 03/13/2007 01:00 am
However, what was NOT on the site last week is what NASA has said to the press TODAY. The news has not gotten worse... it has not changed. But I think that is post-worthy, because it has been reported since the story here last week.
Post by: James Lowe1 on 03/14/2007 03:49 am
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5047
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/14/2007 06:13 pm
OV-104 (STS-117)/VAB HB-1
The Mini Portable Purge Unit 2 (MPPU-2) continues to maintain orbiter moisture requirements with compressor 4 isolated. The crane crew is scheduled to support a swap to MPPU-1 tomorrow.
The SRB solid state video recorder R&R is currently scheduled for today and tomorrow contingent on access; a retest is scheduled for Thursday.
RH SRB igniter RTD (resistance temperature detector) R&R scheduled for today.
PR OEL-4-28-5135, LO2/LH2 Engine Cut-Off (ECO) sensor wiring routing violation was discovered; all four sensors are routed together and spot tied to each other. This item went to the ERB on 3/12. The position is to field route new wiring and separate all four sensors. This item went to OCCB yesterday.
Post by: Gekko0481 on 03/14/2007 06:21 pm
If the SRB does require changeout, would that mean both would need to be changed? I remember seeing something about the propellant being produced in batches to ensure consistency between the left and right boosters. If so, or even if only one needs replacing, what work would this entail, how would it affect a target launch date, and would it affect the decision to repair or replace the tank (might as go all the way if they need to demate and wait for replacement SRB being my line of thought)
Post by: MKremer on 03/14/2007 06:48 pm
Quote
Gekko0481 - 14/3/2007 2:21 PMThe accumulator mentioned is part of the TVC hydraulic hardware inside the aft skirt - no need to swap out an entire booster just for that.
"troubleshoot on the SRB hydraulic accumulator may require changeout" Quoted from L2.
If the SRB does require changeout, would that mean both would need to be changed?
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/14/2007 10:26 pm
Quote
Gekko0481 - 14/3/2007 2:21 PM
"troubleshoot on the SRB hydraulic accumulator may require changeout" Quoted from L2.
If the SRB does require changeout, would that mean both would need to be changed? I remember seeing something about the propellant being produced in batches to ensure consistency between the left and right boosters. If so, or even if only one needs replacing, what work would this entail, how would it affect a target launch date, and would it affect the decision to repair or replace the tank (might as go all the way if they need to demate and wait for replacement SRB being my line of thought)
We're not talking about the whole Solid Rocket Booster here, just a component of it. ;)
Post by: Gekko0481 on 03/14/2007 10:29 pm
Post by: on 03/14/2007 11:41 pm
Post by: mkirk on 03/14/2007 11:52 pm
Quote
Justin Wheat - 14/3/2007 7:41 PM
When are they going to release the plan of repairing the tank? And is it still likely for a late April launch?
Smart Money is on early-mid May, but still too early to call.
Nothing is off the table yet!
Mark Kirkman
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/15/2007 04:35 pm
STS 117 / VAB HB1 / OV 104
ET engineering assessment and quality inspections in work
Orbiter TPS inspections and repairs in work
SRB op corrosion cleanup and RTD R&R is complete
SRB SSVR R&R in work
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/15/2007 06:59 pm
Article to follow this evening.
Post by: shuttlepilot on 03/15/2007 07:53 pm
Post by: Gekko0481 on 03/15/2007 08:16 pm
EDIT: Oh, and new images on Kennedy Media Gallery
Post by: Flightstar on 03/15/2007 08:28 pm
Post by: Gekko0481 on 03/15/2007 08:31 pm
Post by: Flightstar on 03/15/2007 09:21 pm
Post by: on 03/15/2007 10:15 pm
Post by: DaveS on 03/15/2007 10:20 pm
Post by: on 03/15/2007 11:09 pm
Post by: DaveS on 03/15/2007 11:17 pm
Quote
Justin Wheat - 16/3/2007 1:09 AMNo. Just standard prelaunch preparations from that Atlantis is harddown at 39A again.
Will there be another TCDT for the crew?
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/15/2007 11:41 pm
As Dave said, there's no new NET date set. It all appears to be heading to May, but April is still on the table at this time. It will be an ongoing process.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/16/2007 03:40 am
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5049
Post by: Captain Scarlet on 03/16/2007 09:17 am
Post by: C5C6 on 03/16/2007 05:28 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/16/2007 05:37 pm
Quote
C5C6 - 16/3/2007 6:28 PM
so the decision is to repair, good news!!!!
Yes, but there's another meeting next week, this is ongoing and they could decide to swap tanks and move to June.
However, they have now started full repairs on ET-124, so that's more hopeful.
More info today points towards May, not April, launch targets.
Post by: DaveS on 03/16/2007 05:43 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 16/3/2007 7:37 PMBut what could get them is the manual SOFI spraying. This is normally done by a machine at MAF. But now they will have to do it manually.
However, they have now started full repairs on ET-124, so that's more hopeful.
It all comes down to if they feel comfortable doing the spraying manually or if they feel better by shipping ET-124 to MAF and respraying it there.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/16/2007 06:08 pm
I don't think the application process will be a problem, though challenging, but ensuring the process keeps the tank within the thermal and aerodynamic parameters will be the kicker.
It's not been mentioned, but I keep thinking about the repair on the STS-114 ET PAL Ramp, which then - though never confirmed - popoed off due to cryopumping.
Post by: TJL on 03/16/2007 07:48 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/16/2007 08:20 pm
Quote
TJL - 16/3/2007 8:48 PM
Chris...because of that, do you think they'll do a tanking test prior to the countdown?
I would say that is highly doubtful, but I prefer to work off documented data/info, rather than give my opinion.
Post by: jacqmans on 03/16/2007 08:43 pm
S3/S4 Truss Segment Solar Arrays
Vehicle: Atlantis (OV-104)
Location: Vehicle Assembly Building
Launch Date: Targeted for April 2007
Launch Pad: 39A
Crew: Sturckow, Archambault, Reilly, Swanson, Forrester and Olivas
Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles
Space Shuttle Atlantis, now parked in high bay No. 1 of the Vehicle
Assembly Building, continues to undergo inspection for hail damage.
Special scaffolding and access platforms have been erected to allow
for the mapping and inspection of the external fuel tank, and repair
methods and criteria are being developed.
Repairs to the orbiter's thermal protection system tiles are nearly
complete, and technicians are preparing to conduct non-destructive
evaluation of the vehicle's reinforced carbon-carbon panels on the
left wing leading edge using thermography equipment.
Shuttle program managers plan to meet next week to assess the damage
and repair status.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/18/2007 02:24 am
Post by: ETEE on 03/18/2007 01:00 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/18/2007 06:01 pm
Quote
ETEE - 18/3/2007 2:00 PM
Would splitting and re-routing a length of wiring be a big issue then?
It's about 10 meters of wiring x 4.
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/18/2007 06:10 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 18/3/2007 2:01 PMIs there a potential for a longer delay because of this and could it involve demating the vehicleQuoteETEE - 18/3/2007 2:00 PM
Would splitting and re-routing a length of wiring be a big issue then?
It's about 10 meters of wiring x 4.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/18/2007 06:19 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 18/3/2007 7:10 PMQuoteChris Bergin - 18/3/2007 2:01 PMIs there a potential for a longer delay because of this and could it involve demating the vehicleQuoteETEE - 18/3/2007 2:00 PM
Would splitting and re-routing a length of wiring be a big issue then?
It's about 10 meters of wiring x 4.
No.
Post by: Mark Dave on 03/18/2007 10:42 pm
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/18/2007 11:20 pm
Quote
MarkD - 18/3/2007 6:42 PM
So when might at best guess be Atlantis be moved back to 39A?
Probably mid-April
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/18/2007 11:22 pm
Quote
MarkD - 18/3/2007 11:42 PM
So when might at best guess be Atlantis be moved back to 39A?
Will know more on Wednesday. Right now they are following a 45 days in the VAB /22 days at the pad. So mid April for rollout is a guess.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/19/2007 02:27 pm
Post by: paulhbell07 on 03/19/2007 03:25 pm
Post by: sts1canada on 03/19/2007 03:49 pm
Here is a listing of the launch windows for STS-117 from Bill Harwoods' Space Page site:
For April and May in GMT time and Eastern Daylight time (for KSC in Florida)
DATE/GMT...TIME/GMT.......TIME/EDT
04/21/07...19:23:51.068...03:23:51 PM
04/22/07...18:58:06.322...02:58:06 PM
04/23/07...18:32:24.020...02:32:24 PM
04/24/07...18:09:52.881...02:09:53 PM
04/25/07...17:44:10.000...01:44:10 PM
04/26/07...17:21:39.351...01:21:39 PM
04/27/07...16:55:56.138...12:55:56 PM
04/28/07...16:33:25.992...12:33:26 PM
04/29/07...16:07:42.409...12:07:42 PM
04/30/07...15:45:12.819...11:45:13 AM
05/01/07...15:19:28.665...11:19:29 AM
05/02/07...14:56:59.956...10:57:00 AM
05/03/07...14:31:14.982...10:31:15 AM
05/04/07...14:05:32.387...10:05:32 AM
05/05/07...13:43:01.570...09:43:02 AM
05/06/07...13:17:18.427...09:17:18 AM
05/07/07...12:54:48.271...08:54:48 AM
05/08/07...12:29:04.690...08:29:05 AM
05/09/07...12:06:35.486...08:06:35 AM
05/10/07...11:40:51.407...07:40:51 AM
05/11/07...11:18:22.586...07:18:23 AM
05/12/07...10:52:37.841...06:52:38 AM
05/13/07...10:26:55.171...06:26:55 AM
05/14/07...10:04:24.631...06:04:25 AM
05/15/07...09:38:41.300...05:38:41 AM
05/16/07...09:16:11.446...05:16:11 AM
05/17/07...08:50:27.700...04:50:28 AM
05/18/07...08:27:58.776...04:27:59 AM
05/19/07...08:02:14.637...04:02:15 AM
05/20/07...07:39:46.485...03:39:46 AM
05/21/07...07:14:01.406...03:14:01 AM
Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/currentglance.html#WINDOWS
For a window in June, opening around June 8th, the launch time would be around 7:30 PM EDT or 11:30 PM GMT with the launch time moving earlier 23 minutes per day. Hope this helps you out. Thanks.
Richard
Post by: paulhbell07 on 03/19/2007 03:55 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/19/2007 04:51 pm
NASA will host a media teleconference no earlier than 5 p.m. EDT Wednesday, March 21 to discuss the status of space shuttle Atlantis' upcoming mission, STS-117. The teleconference follows a meeting to review options to repair the shuttle's external fuel tank, which was damaged Feb. 26 during a hail storm at NASA's Kennedy Space Center, Fla.
The briefing participants are:
-- Bill Gerstenmaier, associate administrator, Space Operations
-- Wayne Hale, manager, Space Shuttle Program
-- John Honeycutt, deputy manager, External Tank Project
-- Mike Leinbach, NASA launch director
To participate, reporters must R.S.V.P. to Katherine Trinidad at ********** by 1 p.m. EDT Wednesday. Live audio of the event will be streamed at:
http://www.nasa.gov/newsaudio
For STS-117 crew and mission information, visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/shuttle
Contact: Katherine Trinidad of NASA Headquarters, Washington, +1-202-358-3749, or Kyle Herring of Johnson Space Center, Houston, +1-281-483-5111.
PRNewswire-FirstCall -- March 19
First Call Analyst:
FCMN Contact:
Post by: sts1canada on 03/19/2007 05:39 pm
Richard
Post by: rdale on 03/19/2007 06:06 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/20/2007 03:41 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/21/2007 04:24 pm
Here's where we all stand right now:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5053
Post by: ETEE on 03/21/2007 05:01 pm
Post by: Launch Fan on 03/21/2007 05:10 pm
Quote
ETEE - 21/3/2007 1:01 PM
I'm getting a bad feeling about this tank repair. I wonder whether it will need to be returned to New Orleans? Otherwise why would they call a high profile teleconference?
I think they set it just to update where they stand.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/21/2007 05:13 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/21/2007 05:27 pm
Post by: Gerald Andrew Richli on 03/21/2007 05:59 pm
Post by: Orbiter Obvious on 03/21/2007 06:40 pm
Post by: DaveS on 03/21/2007 06:43 pm
Post by: rdale on 03/21/2007 07:37 pm
Quote
Gerald Andrew Richli - 21/3/2007 2:59 PM
Hello! It is most unfortunate that a Hailstorm has caused a potential 3 month delay.
Could I suggest maybe checking out this website before posting information? Click on the 'home' button above, or better yet subscribe to L2 and you'll have more knowledge than you can get from any other location...
Post by: ETEE on 03/21/2007 08:26 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/21/2007 08:40 pm
"They've laid out a very good plan"
"The ultimate goal is to get the best tank to fly. No schedule pressure.
"No Launch Date set.
"No decisions made on which tank to fly."
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/21/2007 08:41 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/21/2007 08:42 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/21/2007 08:47 pm
"The next tank arrives on April 10, and that date will decide if we continue with repairs on ET-124, or whether we switch to the new tank."
"Our manifest expects to get back on to the manifest as scheduled within 12 months."
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/21/2007 08:50 pm
"I'm hesitant to say what the dates will be, but maybe before the end of the May launch window. If we swap tanks, then June."
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/21/2007 08:51 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/21/2007 08:52 pm
Post by: Martin FL on 03/21/2007 08:58 pm
Nothing being said on this that we don't mainly know already. Nice work Chris :)
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/21/2007 09:01 pm
Post by: Gekko0481 on 03/21/2007 09:14 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 21/3/2007 9:42 PM
"No one really had any dissenting opinions" - some emphasis, that'll be MSFC ;)
Urmm...MSFC?
Post by: DaveS on 03/21/2007 09:19 pm
Quote
Gekko0481 - 21/3/2007 11:14 PMMarshall Spaceflight Center. Usually the wining center of the three manned spaceflight centers of NASA(JSC, KSC and MSFC).QuoteChris Bergin - 21/3/2007 9:42 PM
"No one really had any dissenting opinions" - some emphasis, that'll be MSFC ;)
Urmm...MSFC?
Post by: landofgrey on 03/21/2007 09:25 pm
Post by: Martin FL on 03/21/2007 09:31 pm
Post by: Martin FL on 03/21/2007 09:33 pm
Post by: Gekko0481 on 03/21/2007 09:34 pm
Quote
DaveS - 21/3/2007 10:19 PMQuoteGekko0481 - 21/3/2007 11:14 PMMarshall Spaceflight Center. Usually the wining center of the three manned spaceflight centers of NASA(JSC, KSC and MSFC).QuoteChris Bergin - 21/3/2007 9:42 PM
"No one really had any dissenting opinions" - some emphasis, that'll be MSFC ;)
Urmm...MSFC?
cheers, they always look so obvious afterwards ;)
Post by: landofgrey on 03/21/2007 09:35 pm
Post by: Ducati94 on 03/21/2007 11:40 pm
Post by: Jim on 03/21/2007 11:59 pm
Quote
Ducati94 - 21/3/2007 8:40 PM
Ouch! That could leave a mark. But there are four space flight centers you forgot SSC.
It is not a spaceflight center nor a manned spaceflight center.
Post by: Austin on 03/22/2007 12:15 am
Quote
Martin FL - 21/3/2007 3:31 PM
Wayne slaps down Spaceflightnow for asking a question already asked with a five word reply. Go Wayne :)
GO WHUM!!
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/22/2007 12:29 am
When it comes to slapping down, NASA calls in Mr Hill ;)
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=3297
Post by: Austin on 03/22/2007 12:55 am
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/22/2007 01:03 am
Quote
Austin - 22/3/2007 1:55 AM
Although Wayne claims not to be affected by schedule pressure, it's must be there to some extent. But the reality that the shuttle program hangs on each launch undoubtedly helps to buffer this...I hope.
I think NASA is continuing to show that schedule pressure is not as much a defining factor as it used to be. I'm sure he has pressure on his shoulders, but he's the manager of the shuttle program - a brilliant one at that - so I'm sure he eats pressure for breakfast.
He epitomizes what I grew up thinking as a kid: "Wow, working for NASA, you'd rather have to be really clever, dedicated and focused."
Post by: John44 on 03/22/2007 06:02 am
http://www.space-multimedia.nl.eu.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1689&Itemid=1
Post by: Ducati94 on 03/22/2007 11:46 am
Post by: TFGQ on 03/22/2007 02:10 pm
Post by: ETEE on 03/22/2007 02:37 pm
Quote
TFGQ - 22/3/2007 4:10 PMIt was because the CNN lady was asking exactly how many dings there were in the foam was it 7000 or 2500 and Barbee said she was an idiot because they had just said 2500. Then the moderator said "Let's keep it clean" or something similar. She was thrown by the comment though.
did barbee really call someone a idiot
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/22/2007 03:46 pm
Post by: TFGQ on 03/22/2007 04:06 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/22/2007 04:09 pm
Post by: Lee Jay on 03/22/2007 04:46 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 22/3/2007 11:09 AM
Let's keep this on Atlantis. The incident on the media call is pretty transparent.
Okay, I have a question. If the new tank arrives 4/10/07, wouldn't it be prudent to make a decision as to whether or not to swap tanks well before that date, so that if the decision is made to swap, destacking operations can begin and be completed before the tank arrives?
Lee Jay
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/22/2007 05:01 pm
Quote
Lee Jay - 22/3/2007 12:46 PMQuoteChris Bergin - 22/3/2007 11:09 AM
Let's keep this on Atlantis. The incident on the media call is pretty transparent.
Okay, I have a question. If the new tank arrives 4/10/07, wouldn't it be prudent to make a decision as to whether or not to swap tanks well before that date, so that if the decision is made to swap, destacking operations can begin and be completed before the tank arrives?
Lee Jay
Bear in mind that the tank must go through a few weeks (I believe) of final checkouts in the vertical checkout cell in the VAB before being mated to the SRBs. They'll have plenty of time to make the decision while that checkout work is completed.
Post by: DaveS on 03/22/2007 05:13 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 22/3/2007 7:01 PMCorrect. A prime example of this is the STS-114 "stack swap". Discovery had to wait in the transfer aisle on the OTS for a couple of days while technicians readied the STS-121 stack for orbiter mating in HB3.
Bear in mind that the tank must go through a few weeks (I believe) of final checkouts in the vertical checkout cell in the VAB before being mated to the SRBs. They'll have plenty of time to make the decision while that checkout work is completed.
If a tank swap is decided, I would guess that Atlantis would go back to OPF-1 and wait there as the OPF AC environment is much better than the humid environment of the VAB.
The reason is that the PLBDs and OMS pods doesn't like moisture too much. Another month on top of the already month-and-a-half wouldn't be too go for them. Better to wait in the OPF and then rollover again and perform standard ET/Orbiter mating procedures than risking the PLBDs and OMS pods not working.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/22/2007 06:31 pm
Quote
DaveS - 22/3/2007 1:13 PMQuotenathan.moeller - 22/3/2007 7:01 PMCorrect. A prime example of this is the STS-114 "stack swap". Discovery had to wait in the transfer aisle on the OTS for a couple of days while technicians readied the STS-121 stack for orbiter mating in HB3.
Bear in mind that the tank must go through a few weeks (I believe) of final checkouts in the vertical checkout cell in the VAB before being mated to the SRBs. They'll have plenty of time to make the decision while that checkout work is completed.
If a tank swap is decided, I would guess that Atlantis would go back to OPF-1 and wait there as the OPF AC environment is much better than the humid environment of the VAB.
The reason is that the PLBDs and OMS pods doesn't like moisture too much. Another month on top of the already month-and-a-half wouldn't be too go for them. Better to wait in the OPF and then rollover again and perform standard ET/Orbiter mating procedures than risking the PLBDs and OMS pods not working.
Agreed. Let's just hope they can fix ET-124.
Post by: Lee Jay on 03/22/2007 07:16 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 22/3/2007 12:01 PMQuoteLee Jay - 22/3/2007 12:46 PMQuoteChris Bergin - 22/3/2007 11:09 AM
Let's keep this on Atlantis. The incident on the media call is pretty transparent.
Okay, I have a question. If the new tank arrives 4/10/07, wouldn't it be prudent to make a decision as to whether or not to swap tanks well before that date, so that if the decision is made to swap, destacking operations can begin and be completed before the tank arrives?
Lee Jay
Bear in mind that the tank must go through a few weeks (I believe) of final checkouts in the vertical checkout cell in the VAB before being mated to the SRBs. They'll have plenty of time to make the decision while that checkout work is completed.
I did not realize that it took that long to check out the tank and prepare it for mating to the SRBs.
Lee Jay
Post by: Gekko0481 on 03/22/2007 08:23 pm
Post by: DaveS on 03/22/2007 08:31 pm
Quote
Gekko0481 - 22/3/2007 10:23 PMYou do.
PLBDs...Payload Bay Doors? Please please PLEASE tell me I've got this right! :)
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/23/2007 01:47 am
Post by: vda on 03/23/2007 07:55 am
Quote
DaveS - 21/3/2007 8:13 PM
If a tank swap is decided, I would guess that Atlantis would go back to OPF-1 and wait there as the OPF AC environment is much better than the humid environment of the VAB.
I was told on this forum that Canaveral is a good place for spaceport. However, reading the above I think climate there is definitely is not ideal - too wet.
Post by: Jim on 03/23/2007 10:05 am
Quote
vda - 23/3/2007 4:55 AMQuoteDaveS - 21/3/2007 8:13 PM
If a tank swap is decided, I would guess that Atlantis would go back to OPF-1 and wait there as the OPF AC environment is much better than the humid environment of the VAB.
I was told on this forum that Canaveral is a good place for spaceport. However, reading the above I think climate there is definitely is not ideal - too wet.
It is. Just that vehicles have to have an AC purge in their open spaces.
Post by: jacqmans on 03/23/2007 08:29 pm
S3/S4 Truss Segment Solar Arrays
Vehicle: Atlantis (OV-104)
Location: Vehicle Assembly Building
Launch Date: Targeted for April 2007
Launch Pad: 39A
Crew: Sturckow, Archambault, Reilly, Swanson, Forrester and Olivas
Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles
In high bay No. 1 of the Vehicle Assembly Building, work is under way
to repair hail damage to the STS-117 external fuel tank, ET-124.
Special scaffolding and access platforms have been erected to allow
access to the tank and orbiter for inspections and repairs. Foam
repairs on the liquid hydrogen tank, which is located on the bottom
of the ET, are complete.
Repairs to the orbiter thermal protection system tiles are complete,
and technicians completed non-destructive evaluations of the
vehicle's reinforced carbon carbon panels on the left wing leading
edge, using thermography equipment. No damage was detected.
Shuttle Program managers met on Wednesday to assess the damage and
repair status, and decided to continue work on repairing ET-124.
Managers will meet again in early April to decide whether to use
ET-124 or substitute a new tank, ET-117, which is scheduled to arrive
at KSC on April 10.
Post by: Michael22090 on 03/23/2007 11:02 pm
Quote
Jim - 23/3/2007 6:05 AMQuotevda - 23/3/2007 4:55 AMQuoteDaveS - 21/3/2007 8:13 PM
If a tank swap is decided, I would guess that Atlantis would go back to OPF-1 and wait there as the OPF AC environment is much better than the humid environment of the VAB.
I was told on this forum that Canaveral is a good place for spaceport. However, reading the above I think climate there is definitely is not ideal - too wet.
It is. Just that vehicles have to have an AC purge in their open spaces.
Hmm, interesting. My dad and I tried to ask our tour guide at KSC about how the location of KSC effects the Orbiters. Needless to say, he really didn't know all that much about it. He was busier trying to keep people from walking closer to the VAB to take pictures. It is nice to have someone that knows what they are talking about. Thanks Jim and Dave.
On topic: Is all of the scaffolding in place for the repairs or are there still some unreachable areas? Also, is the payload still at the pad, and is it safe there for the duration of the repairs?
Thanks!
Post by: punkboi on 03/23/2007 11:17 pm
Quote
Michael22090 - 23/3/2007 5:02 PM Also, is the payload still at the pad, and is it safe there for the duration of the repairs? Thanks!
The S3/S4 truss is still at the pad
Post by: on 03/24/2007 02:08 am
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/24/2007 02:11 am
Quote
Justin Wheat - 24/3/2007 3:08 AM
so are they going to do the repairs on the tank till they decide to keep the tank, or will they start the repaires when the decision is made? Hope everything works with ET-124 and Atlantis!
Yes, they are continuing to work repairs on the tank regardless.
It's all moving more towards an ET swap today, on the latest info coming in (L2), but they've got a couple of weeks before they need to make the final decision.
Post by: on 03/24/2007 02:29 am
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/24/2007 02:37 am
Quote
Justin Wheat - 24/3/2007 3:29 AM
if it is going to be an ET swap there is no way that they can make a launch until June? I hope an ET swap doesn't have to happen!
Na, the way it'll work is:
Repair ET-124 on the current estimated plan: NET May 11 ish.
Swap to ET-117: NET June 6 (this is an official date as of today on L2 documentation).
Remember, STS-117's SRB motors are out of date in July, so it really can't slip past June anyway.
Post by: paulhbell07 on 03/24/2007 11:37 am
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/24/2007 12:28 pm
Quote
paulhbell07 - 24/3/2007 7:37 AM
I didn't know that the SRB's had a 'use by date'. Let's hope that they get of the ground before July, otherwise the schedule would be up the creek for the rest of the year.
I think once the stacked SRBs have passed their ' shelf life ', they have to be destacked and sent back to Thiokol for refurbishment.
Post by: Lee Jay on 03/24/2007 12:47 pm
Post by: Thorny on 03/24/2007 01:44 pm
Quote
Lee Jay - 24/3/2007 8:47 AM
Can the tank get the MAF, get repaired and get back in time to be the LON tank if 117 launches on June 6? I'm adding up the weeks and it seems like this would have to be a fast turnaround from MAF.
Wouldn't the STS-120 Tank (previously scheduled for launch in August anyway) be the LON ET?
Post by: jacqmans on 03/24/2007 04:27 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 24/3/2007 5:37 AM
Remember, STS-117's SRB motors are out of date in July, so it really can't slip past June anyway.
How new is this...
STS-1 was rolled out to the pad in November 1980 (with stacking in September/October, I think) and launched in April 1981...So from October to April is 7+ months
STS-117 was stacked in January/February so I would say August 2007 is the 7+ month
Anyone can say more about this...
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/24/2007 05:31 pm
Post by: Lee Jay on 03/24/2007 05:53 pm
Post by: sts1canada on 03/24/2007 07:48 pm
Richard
Post by: Thorny on 03/24/2007 09:44 pm
Quote
jacqmans - 24/3/2007 12:27 PM
STS-1 was rolled out to the pad in November 1980 (with stacking in September/October, I think) and launched in April 1981...So from October to April is 7+ months
STS-1 rolled out to Pad 39A on December 29, 1980.
Post by: paulhbell07 on 03/25/2007 01:35 pm
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/25/2007 02:31 pm
Quote
paulhbell07 - 25/3/2007 8:35 AM
Have any SRB segments been returned because of the date issue.
I BELIEVE after the STS-107 disaster. The entire vehicle for the original STS-114 mission had already been stacked in the VAB at the time. Atlantis had been mated to the ET 3 days prior to the loss of Columbia. That entire vehicle was destacked.
Post by: norm103 on 03/25/2007 11:33 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/26/2007 04:02 pm
I'll write up the options, quotes from managers in a few hours.
Post by: DaveS on 03/26/2007 04:13 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 26/3/2007 6:02 PMWell, that's in line with what was decided last Wednesday. Actual decision about the fate of the May window will be taken in April 10 when ET-117 arrives at KSC.
The latest is they are still working towards the mid May launch date.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/26/2007 04:33 pm
Quote
DaveS - 26/3/2007 5:13 PMQuoteChris Bergin - 26/3/2007 6:02 PMWell, that's in line with what was decided last Wednesday. Actual decision about the fate of the May window will be taken in April 10 when ET-117 arrives at KSC.
The latest is they are still working towards the mid May launch date.
As you know, I'm refering to the Paul Hill notes, which are from Saturday.
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/27/2007 01:25 am
Post by: uko on 03/27/2007 10:29 am
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/27/2007 12:43 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 27/3/2007 2:25 AM
If they would decide NOT to swap ETs, would they possibly perform a tanking test on the repaired tank once back on the pad, to test the repairs, to see if they will stand up to the tanking cycle?
A tanking test would serve no purpose (in the way it could actually make things slightly worse).
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/27/2007 01:28 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 27/3/2007 7:43 AMQuoteshuttlefan - 27/3/2007 2:25 AM
If they would decide NOT to swap ETs, would they possibly perform a tanking test on the repaired tank once back on the pad, to test the repairs, to see if they will stand up to the tanking cycle?
A tanking test would serve no purpose (in the way it could actually make things slightly worse).
Ya because maybe an extra cycle on the tank would make the foam, especially the repaired foam, more weaker thus causing it to come off. Yikes! :cool:
Post by: DaveS on 03/27/2007 01:53 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 27/3/2007 3:28 PMNo real evidence for this. The data from ET-120 has to be taken with a grain of salt. ET-119 that flew on STS-121 had 4 cryo-cycles on it when it launched(3 standard, one press-cycle). And that one shed minimally with foam.
Ya because maybe an extra cycle on the tank would make the foam, especially the repaired foam, more weaker thus causing it to come off. Yikes! :cool:
ET-120 had 5 cryo-cycles(2 standard, 3 press-cycles).
Post by: Ducati94 on 03/27/2007 02:08 pm
Post by: Mark Nguyen on 03/27/2007 06:10 pm
Mark
Post by: DaveS on 03/27/2007 06:20 pm
Quote
Mark Nguyen - 27/3/2007 8:10 PMCycle limit is 13.
Is there a designed number of times the ET can be tanked / de-tanked? I remember waiting for the launches on 116 and wondering how many times you can load all that fuel into the thing, then expunge it, then fill it up AGAIN...
Mark
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/27/2007 06:58 pm
Quote
Mark Nguyen - 27/3/2007 1:10 PM
Is there a designed number of times the ET can be tanked / de-tanked? I remember waiting for the launches on 116 and wondering how many times you can load all that fuel into the thing, then expunge it, then fill it up AGAIN...
Mark
A tank is allowed to go through 13 cycles. A fill operation (i.e. successful launch) counts as one cycle, while a fill/empty operation (i.e. launch scrub, tanking test) counts as two cycles. I believe that is right, but feel free to correct me if it is not.
Post by: paulhbell07 on 03/27/2007 07:55 pm
Has there ever been any stats posted about how much the tank shrinks when it is filled with the fluids.
Post by: DaveS on 03/27/2007 09:27 pm
Quote
paulhbell07 - 27/3/2007 9:55 PM6 inches.
Has there ever been any stats posted about how much the tank shrinks when it is filled with the fluids.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/29/2007 12:48 pm
Orbiter and SRB powered up yesterday to support SRB Hydraulic Accumulator Retest and Hydraulic Power On testing. Power on testing complete/good; accumulator retest continues.
OEL-5135 LO2 ECO wire separation work and OEL-5140 LH2 ECO wire separation work continues this week.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/29/2007 01:01 pm
Post by: uko on 03/29/2007 01:13 pm
But still, no chance they can make the May window with ET-117, I suppose?
Post by: DaveS on 03/29/2007 01:36 pm
Quote
uko - 29/3/2007 3:13 PMNo chance. Time between ET-123(STS-116) arrival at KSC and ET/SRB mate was 24 days. Just for the sake of it, let's say ET-117 arrives on April 5.
But still, no chance they can make the May window with ET-117, I suppose?
That puts ET/SRB mate NET April 28. Add in the time of final ET/SRB close-outs prior to orbiter mate(18 days, STS-116), final SSV tests in the VAB(7 days) and time on the pad(22 days).
That puts a launch with ET-117 47 days away counting from ET/SRB mate time. Well beyond the May window.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/29/2007 02:14 pm
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/29/2007 02:19 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 29/3/2007 9:14 AM
Thanks for the good new Chris. I'm actually hoping they go ahead with the tank swap. Just for grins, what would become of ET-124 should a tank swap be ordered? Would it be moved into the vertical checkout cell in the VAB? Or would it possibly be shipped back to MAF when the barge leaves KSC after delivering ET-117?
Would ET-124 be deemed usable on a subsequent mission? :cool:
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/29/2007 02:27 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 29/3/2007 9:19 AMQuotenathan.moeller - 29/3/2007 9:14 AM
Thanks for the good new Chris. I'm actually hoping they go ahead with the tank swap. Just for grins, what would become of ET-124 should a tank swap be ordered? Would it be moved into the vertical checkout cell in the VAB? Or would it possibly be shipped back to MAF when the barge leaves KSC after delivering ET-117?
Would ET-124 be deemed usable on a subsequent mission? :cool:
I don't think there is a 'back-up' tank. If I remember correctly, they'll need every tank on the current MAF manifest (possibly one extra). But I have no doubt that if it is shipped back to MAF, we'll see it again next year. As I said earlier, this has been one headache of a tank! Don't worry though. It will be usable, especially if MAF is on the case and on their home turf!
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/29/2007 11:57 pm
Post by: TJL on 03/30/2007 12:16 am
Nathan, what else happened with ET-124?
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/30/2007 12:30 am
Quote
TJL - 29/3/2007 7:16 PM
Quote...As I said earlier, this has been one headache of a tank!
Nathan, what else happened with ET-124?
I was referring to all the wondering over whether it would be ready in time to support a December launch of Discovery for STS-116 (support being the CSCS requirements).
Post by: Do Shuttles Dream on 03/30/2007 02:47 am
What has been the longest in history?
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/30/2007 04:02 am
Quote
Do Shuttles Dream - 29/3/2007 9:47 PM
How long can an orbiter be left vertical like this? Any detrimental effects?
What has been the longest in history?
As Dave mentioned earlier, the humidity of the VAB/pad isn't good for some of the on board systems if the vehicle is exposed for a long time. I'm not sure what the effects are but I'm sure one of our experienced guys here can tell ya :) But Columbia set on pad 39A for about four and a half months or so before it flew on STS-1 in 1981.
Post by: Avron on 03/30/2007 04:10 am
Post by: Jim on 03/30/2007 11:33 am
Quote
nathan.moeller - 29/3/2007 12:02 AMQuoteDo Shuttles Dream - 29/3/2007 9:47 PM
How long can an orbiter be left vertical like this? Any detrimental effects?
What has been the longest in history?
As Dave mentioned earlier, the humidity of the VAB/pad isn't good for some of the on board systems if the vehicle is exposed for a long time. I'm not sure what the effects are but I'm sure one of our experienced guys here can tell ya :) But Columbia set on pad 39A for about four and a half months or so before it flew on STS-1 in 1981.
There is AC blowing through the Orbiter at the pad. Limited amounts in the VAB
Post by: wannamoonbase on 03/30/2007 12:21 pm
The ECS systems are designed to be fully redundant and more than capable of providing the required service.
Post by: Thorny on 03/30/2007 12:40 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 29/3/2007 11:02 PM
But Columbia set on pad 39A for about four and a half months or so before it flew on STS-1 in 1981.
3 1/2
Post by: nathan.moeller on 03/30/2007 02:11 pm
Quote
Thorny - 30/3/2007 7:40 AMQuotenathan.moeller - 29/3/2007 11:02 PM
But Columbia set on pad 39A for about four and a half months or so before it flew on STS-1 in 1981.
3 1/2
You're right. My bad.
Jim - thanks for that info on the pad AC. I didn't know that :)
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/30/2007 02:15 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 30/3/2007 12:57 AM
Decision on the tank, launch date, moved to April 16, as per L2.
The 16th is the launch date decision. They will still decide on the tank situation on the 10th.
Post by: shuttlefan on 03/30/2007 02:59 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 30/3/2007 9:11 AMQuoteThorny - 30/3/2007 7:40 AMQuotenathan.moeller - 29/3/2007 11:02 PM
But Columbia set on pad 39A for about four and a half months or so before it flew on STS-1 in 1981.
3 1/2
You're right. My bad.
Jim - thanks for that info on the pad AC. I didn't know that :)
Would Challenger/STS-6 be the longest the orbiter has ever been mated to the ET being it was gounded for so long with the SSME hydrogen leaks? I know I could research this myself but I'm just wondering if anybody on hear has an immediate answer. :cool:
Post by: jacqmans on 03/30/2007 09:00 pm
S3/S4 Truss Segment Solar Arrays
Vehicle: Atlantis (OV-104)
Location: Vehicle Assembly Building
Launch Date: Targeted for April 2007
Launch Pad: 39A
Crew: Sturckow, Archambault, Reilly, Swanson, Forrester and Olivas
Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles
In high bay No. 1 of the Vehicle Assembly Building, work is under way
to assess and repair hail damage to the STS-117 external fuel tank,
ET-124. Special scaffolding and access platforms have been erected to
allow access to the tank and orbiter for inspections and repairs.
Foam repairs on the liquid hydrogen tank, which is located on the
bottom of the external tank, are complete. The focus is currently on
repairs to the liquid oxygen tank.
Shuttle program managers will meet on or about April 10 to decide
whether to use ET-124 or substitute it with a new tank, ET-117, which
is scheduled to arrive at KSC in early April.
Post by: Thorny on 03/30/2007 11:04 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 30/3/2007 9:59 AM
Would Challenger/STS-6 be the longest the orbiter has ever been mated to the ET being it was gounded for so long with the SSME hydrogen leaks? I know I could research this myself but I'm just wondering if anybody on hear has an immediate answer. :cool:
About November 24, 1982 to April 4, 1983. 131 days. That should be the longest continuous stack.
The second longest is STS-35 Columbia. About August 3, 1990 to December 2, 1990. 121 days. Add to this the 58 days STS-35 spent stacked for the first launch attempt (this was the key ingredient in the hydrogen leak debacle of 1990), and you get a whopping 179 days (almost 6 months) the Columbia and LWT-28 spent mated. Ouch.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 03/31/2007 04:11 am
Post by: Andy USA on 03/31/2007 11:09 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 30/3/2007 11:11 PM
Another related article: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5061
Great article. If they manage to repair it, it would be an great achievement.
Post by: jacqmans on 04/03/2007 09:36 am
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 04/03/2007 10:00 am
Post by: Gekko0481 on 04/03/2007 10:55 am
Post by: DaveS on 04/03/2007 11:42 am
Quote
Gekko0481 - 3/4/2007 12:55 PMYes.
Is this the tank that would be used by Endeavour to support Atlantis on a Launch On Need mission?
Quote
Gekko0481 - 3/4/2007 12:55 PMActually, the last LWT is at Michoud it was used in the Columbia accident investigation. Endeavour would fly with the next ET, ET-120.
If this is the case, what will happen if they swap the tanks and the need arises to fly? I seem to recall reading something about the fact that a spare, slightly heavier (lightweight as opposed to Superlightweight) is kept at KSC, but the last LW tank that was used was used on STS-107.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/04/2007 12:52 am
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5064
Post by: Gekko0481 on 04/04/2007 01:07 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/04/2007 01:32 pm
Quote
Gekko0481 - 4/4/2007 3:07 PMIt's period when the solar beta angle either becomes too low or high to support a docked mission for power generation and thermal reasons.
Urm...whats the solar beta cut out?
Post by: Gekko0481 on 04/04/2007 02:07 pm
Post by: AntiKev on 04/04/2007 02:35 pm
Post by: on 04/04/2007 11:57 pm
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/05/2007 12:24 am
Quote
Justin Wheat - 4/4/2007 6:57 PM
the transport crawler is back out at the pad.
Why? :cool:
Post by: on 04/05/2007 01:12 am
Post by: on 04/05/2007 01:15 am
Post by: DaveS on 04/05/2007 01:17 am
Quote
Justin Wheat - 5/4/2007 1:57 AMThat's the not the Crawler, that is Mobile Launch Platform-1 or MLP-1 for short.
the transport crawler is back out at the pad.
The Crawler and MLPs are seperate things. Attached to this post is a photo of one the Crawlers unloded during a roadtest in late 2004.
Post by: on 04/05/2007 01:21 am
Post by: on 04/05/2007 01:22 am
Post by: DaveS on 04/05/2007 01:33 am
Quote
Justin Wheat - 5/4/2007 3:22 AMMLP-1 was rolled to LC-39B on Nov. 7 2006 with the STS-116/12A.1 Space Shuttle Vehicle. It was used for that launch and has remained at LC-39B ever since.
so why have they moved the MLP-1 back to the pad. Where has it been since
Post by: on 04/05/2007 02:15 am
Post by: DaveS on 04/05/2007 02:17 am
Quote
Justin Wheat - 5/4/2007 4:15 AMThey always arrive 3 days prior to planned launch.
When will the Atlantis crew arrive at the pad when the launch date is decided on?
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/05/2007 12:14 pm
OV-104 (STS-117)/VAB HB-1
The Orbiter was not powered up yesterday, so work could continue 1st shift on PR OEL-5135 wire separating and routing for the LO2 ECO sensor. A page 1B on another bad connector was picked up. Engineering is evaluating. PR OEL-5140, the LH2 ECO sensor wire separation mod was also worked on 2nd shift last night. The Orbiter is scheduled to be powered up today to support Orbiter systems snapshots.
New PR - MPS-1696, The boot covering the PD-5 cavity was found partially debonded from the cavity perimeter. Engineering evaluation is in work.
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/05/2007 01:31 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 5/4/2007 7:14 AM
Snippet from L2:
OV-104 (STS-117)/VAB HB-1
The Orbiter was not powered up yesterday, so work could continue 1st shift on PR OEL-5135 wire separating and routing for the LO2 ECO sensor. A page 1B on another bad connector was picked up. Engineering is evaluating. PR OEL-5140, the LH2 ECO sensor wire separation mod was also worked on 2nd shift last night. The Orbiter is scheduled to be powered up today to support Orbiter systems snapshots.
New PR - MPS-1696, The boot covering the PD-5 cavity was found partially debonded from the cavity perimeter. Engineering evaluation is in work.
Chris, by saying " the orbiter is scheduled to be powered up today to allow systems snapshots ", do you mean all the systems on the orbiter will be powered up just to see if everything is still healthy while the vehicle sits vertical in the VAB? :cool:
Post by: Rocket Guy on 04/05/2007 09:21 pm
Post by: on 04/05/2007 09:31 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/05/2007 09:36 pm
Quote
Justin Wheat - 5/4/2007 11:31 PMEhh, does this ring a bell?
What thread are you replying to because the one above you doesnt have anything you are talking about? :o
Quote
Justin Wheat - 5/4/2007 4:15 AM
When will the Atlantis crew arrive at the pad when the launch date is decided on?
Post by: marsavian on 04/06/2007 12:26 am
Given the extensive foam repairs required, many engineers believe NASA will be hard pressed to get Atlantis off the ground in May, but they are still assessing the work remaining and the results will be presented April 10.
"It looks pretty bleak," one senior engineer said today. "Having to pull the engines, the ET repair and more important, getting comfortable with the ET repair ... (a May launch is) becoming more and more unlikely."
Post by: on 04/06/2007 12:43 am
Post by: on 04/06/2007 12:46 am
Post by: Lee Jay on 04/06/2007 12:53 am
Quote
Justin Wheat - 5/4/2007 6:46 PM
Looks like a May launch window is becoming less and less. I still have hopes of a May launch window, but with the engines having to come out and the repairs still ongoing. If they launch in June it will be good because their will be no school.
Engines having to come out? I'm sorry, what did I miss?
Lee Jay
Post by: marsavian on 04/06/2007 12:53 am
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts117/070405flowliners/
Post by: on 04/06/2007 12:57 am
Post by: on 04/06/2007 01:05 am
Post by: Lee Jay on 04/06/2007 01:14 am
Post by: Ducati94 on 04/06/2007 01:16 am
Post by: on 04/06/2007 01:22 am
Post by: on 04/06/2007 01:23 am
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/06/2007 01:28 am
Quote
Justin Wheat - 5/4/2007 8:22 PM
What did challenger do to not make it to orbit, where did they land? Mission number?
STS-51L when they lost the vehicle and crew in the explosion - January 28, 1986.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/06/2007 01:34 am
Quote
Justin Wheat - 5/4/2007 8:05 PM
Has there ever been a tal abort during launch?
Justin, these questions are probably best for the Shuttle Q&A thread (under the General Discussion forum), but I'll answer. There has never been a TAL abort during launch before, nor an RTLS abort, but they did have an ATO (abort-to-orbit) situation in 1985 during Challenger's ascent for the STS-51F mission. About 5 minutes, 45 seconds into the flight, the center engine shut down prematurely. Luckily, the ATO requirements had been met and they were able to burn the engines for about another minute and a half or so to reach orbit. The mission was extended 17 orbits (about one day) because of the changed trajectory while they tried to hit their landing target.
Post by: marsavian on 04/06/2007 02:18 am
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/06/2007 03:35 am
Quote
Justin Wheat - 5/4/2007 8:23 PM
If she had to land at a tal site how long will it take for her sisters to be able to see her?
Probably 1-2 months.
Post by: Mark Dave on 04/06/2007 01:04 pm
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/06/2007 01:17 pm
Quote
MarkD - 6/4/2007 8:04 AM
Any news on when Atlantis may be set to rollback to the pad?
It will all be decided during a management meeting on Tues. April 10th. They will decide, that day, whether to use the repaired tank or replace it with the STS-118 tank, which is set to arrive at KSC today. :cool:
Post by: on 04/06/2007 01:49 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/06/2007 01:51 pm
Quote
Justin Wheat - 6/4/2007 3:49 PMYes. Read some of the stories here: www.nasaspaceflight.com.
Is the tank on schedule to arrive today?
Post by: Jim on 04/06/2007 02:54 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/06/2007 04:03 pm
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/06/2007 04:10 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 6/4/2007 11:03 AM
ET-117 has arrived in the KSC Basin.
Will it be towed into the VAB today?
Post by: jacqmans on 04/06/2007 04:20 pm
NASA HOLDS TELECONFERENCE UPDATE ON SHUTTLE REPAIR WORK
WASHINGTON - NASA will host a media teleconference Tuesday, April 10
no earlier than 6 p.m. EDT to discuss the space shuttle Atlantis'
external fuel tank, which was damaged during a Feb. 26 hail storm.
The teleconference follows a meeting to decide whether the tank will
be used for the shuttle's upcoming mission, STS-117.
The briefing participants are:
-- Bill Gerstenmaier, associate administrator, Space Operations
-- Wayne Hale, manager, Space Shuttle Program
-- John Honeycutt, deputy manager, External Tank Project
To participate, reporters must R.S.V.P. to the newsroom at NASA's
Johnson Space Center, Houston, at 281-483-5111. The deadline is 4
p.m. EDT Tuesday, April 10. NASA will stream live audio of the event
at:
http://www.nasa.gov/newsaudio
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/06/2007 04:39 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 6/4/2007 5:10 PMQuoteChris Bergin - 6/4/2007 11:03 AM
ET-117 has arrived in the KSC Basin.
Will it be towed into the VAB today?
Yes.
Post by: Felix on 04/06/2007 04:47 pm
Post by: Felix on 04/06/2007 06:57 pm
From http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/search.cfm?cat=4
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/06/2007 07:19 pm
Post by: Avron on 04/06/2007 07:37 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/06/2007 07:43 pm
Quote
Avron - 6/4/2007 9:37 PMYes. Use the Java version to be able to flip through the previous captures.
Is the tank still in the barge?
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/06/2007 07:51 pm
Post by: marsguy on 04/06/2007 08:31 pm
Post by: Radioheaded on 04/06/2007 08:45 pm
Post by: jmjawors on 04/06/2007 08:48 pm
Quote
Radioheaded - 6/4/2007 3:45 PM
It was reported locally (here in Orlando) that if STS-117 was delayed, that Suni would break US record for time in space. Now this may or may not be accurate, you know how local news can be ;)
That was acknowledged by NASA as well, so it's true.
Quote
marsguy - 6/4/2007 3:31 PM
If the launch is confirmed as being delayed until June, would Clayton Anderson be brought to the station and Suni Williams be brought back to Earth on this mission?
They are weight-restricted to 6 astronauts going uphill -- just like STS-115.
Post by: jacqmans on 04/06/2007 09:23 pm
S3/S4 Truss Segment Solar Arrays
Vehicle: Atlantis (OV-104)
Location: Vehicle Assembly Building
Launch Date: Targeted for no earlier than May 2007
Launch Pad: 39A
Crew: Sturckow, Archambault, Reilly, Swanson, Forrester and Olivas
Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles
In high bay No. 1 of the Vehicle Assembly Building, work is under way
to assess and repair hail damage to the STS-117 external fuel tank,
ET-124. Special scaffolding and access platforms have been erected to
allow access inspections and repairs. Foam repairs on the liquid
hydrogen tank, which is located on the bottom of the ET, are
complete, and the focus is currently on repairs to the liquid oxygen
tank.
Shuttle Program managers will meet on April 10 to decide whether to
use ET-124 or substitute a new tank, ET-117, which arrived at KSC
today.
Shuttle Program managers decided this week to inspect the main
propulsion systems on Atlantis and Endeavour for contamination after
a small amount of material was found during routine post-flight
inspections in one engine that flew on the STS-116 mission of
Discovery in December 2006 and one engine that flew on the STS-121
mission of Discovery in July 2006. The contaminant is a substance
called RepliSet, which is a material used to make a mold of the flow
liner surface. It is used to check for cracks and imperfections. The
inspections can be accomplished within the timeframe of the hail
damage recovery effort, with no impact to the launch schedule for
STS-117.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/06/2007 10:21 pm
Quote
Avron - 6/4/2007 2:37 PM
Is the tank still in the barge?
I'm guessing. Haven't seen anything going on but I could be mistaken.
EDIT: Images are up on http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/search.cfm?cat=4 of the tank's arrival at KSC. It appeared to be earlier this morning so it is possible that it has been offloaded and rolled to the VAB under our noses. Let's keep an eye on the barge to see if anything happens ;)
Post by: DaveS on 04/06/2007 11:39 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 7/4/2007 12:21 AMET-117 is still in the barge. Keep an eye of the opening on it. It would be uncovered and opened before offloading would start.
so it is possible that it has been offloaded and rolled to the VAB under our noses. Let's keep an eye on the barge to see if anything happens ;)
Post by: MATTBLAK on 04/07/2007 01:17 am
Post by: Andy USA on 04/07/2007 02:27 am
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/07/2007 04:00 am
Quote
MATTBLAK - 6/4/2007 8:17 PM
God, this is bad. A June launch would rule out more than 3 flights this year: You'd only need one more mishap to push the schedule even further to the right. As much as I want ISS to be finished, the fragile logistics chain, schedule and safety rules for Shuttle are really becoming a drag... :frown:
They're still optimistic about launching four flights this year, even if STS-117 goes to June. With the orbiter swaps, there is plenty of time to turn Atlantis around for an early-December launch on STS-122. Even if STS-117 launches in June, STS-118 can launch in mid-July. STS-120 (now assigned to Discovery) will fly in mid-late October. That clears the way for an early-December liftoff for Atlantis on STS-122 (December 6 I believe).
Post by: MATTBLAK on 04/07/2007 05:10 am
Quote
nathan.moeller - 7/4/2007 3:00 PMQuoteMATTBLAK - 6/4/2007 8:17 PM
God, this is bad. A June launch would rule out more than 3 flights this year: You'd only need one more mishap to push the schedule even further to the right. As much as I want ISS to be finished, the fragile logistics chain, schedule and safety rules for Shuttle are really becoming a drag... :frown:
They're still optimistic about launching four flights this year, even if STS-117 goes to June. With the orbiter swaps, there is plenty of time to turn Atlantis around for an early-December launch on STS-122. Even if STS-117 launches in June, STS-118 can launch in mid-July. STS-120 (now assigned to Discovery) will fly in mid-late October. That clears the way for an early-December liftoff for Atlantis on STS-122 (December 6 I believe).
Well... Good. Provided of course there are no more hailstorms or foreign objects found in engines, etc.
Post by: John44 on 04/07/2007 01:39 pm
http://www.space-multimedia.nl.eu.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1747&Itemid=1
Post by: on 04/07/2007 06:01 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/07/2007 08:11 pm
Quote
Justin Wheat - 7/4/2007 7:01 PM
when is the tank going to come out of the barge? In a couple of days?
Surprised it wasn't the same day, might be something to do with Easter. We'll keep an eye out on when it leaves the Barge (it might of already).
Post by: DaveS on 04/07/2007 09:04 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 7/4/2007 10:11 PMNope. One tell-tale sign of that is that the barge-opening has been uncovered, which it isn't.
We'll keep an eye out on when it leaves the Barge (it might of already).
Post by: Michael22090 on 04/07/2007 10:09 pm
Post by: on 04/07/2007 10:19 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/07/2007 10:26 pm
Quote
Justin Wheat - 8/4/2007 12:19 AMAre you talking about the bright area in the lower right corner? If so, then no. That's part of a protective covering.
have they repaired this area of the tank? It looks like the spots for the hail damage are gone?
The tank surface is the dark areas. Take a look this capture from earlier today. You can clearly make out the circular dings to the left of the covering.
Post by: on 04/07/2007 10:29 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/07/2007 10:36 pm
Quote
Justin Wheat - 8/4/2007 12:29 AMThey are repairing the ET, but it's slow work. Also, the repaired areas are going to be brighter than the rest of the surface as newer foam is whiter in color. The ET darkens during it's stay on the pad, so you can see that the ET has been spent some time outdoors.
Are they still working on how to fix the tank? Are they going to do any repaires before the conference next week?
Post by: on 04/08/2007 01:38 am
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/08/2007 01:48 am
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/08/2007 01:59 pm
Post by: ET_Mech on 04/08/2007 02:11 pm
Quote
DaveS - 7/4/2007 5:26 PMQuoteJustin Wheat - 8/4/2007 12:19 AMAre you talking about the bright area in the lower right corner? If so, then no. That's part of a protective covering.
have they repaired this area of the tank? It looks like the spots for the hail damage are gone?
The tank surface is the dark areas. Take a look this capture from earlier today. You can clearly make out the circular dings to the left of the covering.
It isn't a protective coating at all, actually its kind of the polar opposite. This area had such a high concentration of damage that we cut away a roughly 6' by 3' area of foam for a BX-265 spray repair when the major work of pouring a few thousand small holes is done. (This is the zone E spray the L2 charts refer to) It's bright white because thats the natural color of the foam before it starts to "stain" to that orange rust color.
In regard to ET-117, We were instructed that ET-124 is the highest priority and ET-117 should be left on the barge until the swap it/keep it decision is made. ET Offload is right now NET April 16.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/08/2007 03:02 pm
Post by: Jackson on 04/08/2007 03:47 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 8/4/2007 10:02 AM
Welcome to the site Paul :) Thanks for that info! It helps a lot. You guys are doing an awesome job out there with ET-124. Good luck!
Ditto. Scary amount of work and I don't think anyone will see it as a failure to swap tanks if that happens. Good effort to give ET-124 a chance.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/08/2007 07:06 pm
Quote
ET_Mech - 8/4/2007 3:11 PM
In regard to ET-117, We were instructed that ET-124 is the highest priority and ET-117 should be left on the barge until the swap it/keep it decision is made. ET Offload is right now NET April 16.
Thanks, that's interesting, as I thought they'd at least get the tank into the checkout cell for the interim.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/08/2007 07:48 pm
Post by: gordo on 04/08/2007 08:02 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/08/2007 09:12 pm
Quote
gordo - 8/4/2007 9:02 PM
Bet you the people at Mishoud are frakked after working their backsides off to get the thing ready and shipped to KSC.....for it to be kept on the barge for 2 weeks.
Michoud have to beat their shipping targets, that is what they want. What happenes with KSC (which is NASA and USA) is down to those other companies.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/08/2007 09:12 pm
Orbiter is powered down
Next power up scheduled for Tuesday.
Preps for engine removal begin Monday
ET damage inspections remain in work
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/09/2007 01:14 pm
Post by: jmjawors on 04/09/2007 01:25 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 9/4/2007 8:14 AM
Will they offload the ET from the barge today. If they do, there will probably be some great photos on the KSC multimedia site. :cool:
Undoubtedly would be great photos. But here's the answer from earlier in the thread:
Quote
ET_Mech - 8/4/2007 9:11 AM
In regard to ET-117, We were instructed that ET-124 is the highest priority and ET-117 should be left on the barge until the swap it/keep it decision is made. ET Offload is right now NET April 16.
Post by: DaveS on 04/09/2007 01:26 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 9/4/2007 3:14 PMNo. Go back to the previous page and read ET Mech's reply. ET-117 offload is NET April 16 due to ET-124 repair having priority over ET-117.
Will they offload the ET from the barge today. If they do, there will probably be some great photos on the KSC multimedia site. :cool:
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/09/2007 02:56 pm
Post by: C5C6 on 04/09/2007 08:23 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 8/4/2007 7:12 PM
Preps for engine removal begin Monday
engine removal? SSME? why???
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/09/2007 08:38 pm
Quote
C5C6 - 9/4/2007 3:23 PMQuoteChris Bergin - 8/4/2007 7:12 PM
Preps for engine removal begin Monday
engine removal? SSME? why???
Earlier story from last week. They found a bit of contamination in an engine on one of the other birds so they decided to pull out Atlantis' engines to make sure all is well.
Post by: mkirk on 04/09/2007 08:39 pm
Quote
C5C6 - 9/4/2007 3:23 PMQuoteChris Bergin - 8/4/2007 7:12 PM
Preps for engine removal begin Monday
engine removal? SSME? why???
Contamination was found from an RTV like material called Repliset was found in a feedline on Discovery and also on two engines that flew on Discovery, the plan is to check Atlantis' engines to ensure no contamination. Also there is the possibility they may replace a LPOTP (low pressure oxidizer turbo pump) because of an issue found at Stennis last week.
Mark Kirkman
P.S.
Sorry I did not see the previous reply until now.
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/09/2007 08:41 pm
Quote
mkirk - 9/4/2007 3:39 PMQuoteC5C6 - 9/4/2007 3:23 PMQuoteChris Bergin - 8/4/2007 7:12 PM
Preps for engine removal begin Monday
engine removal? SSME? why???
Contamination was from an RTV like material called Repliset was found in a feedline on Discovery and also on two engines that flew on Discovery, the plan is to check Atlantis' engines to ensure no contamination. Also there is the possibility they may replace a LPOTP (low pressure oxidizer turbo pump) because of an issue found at Stennis last week.
Mark Kirkman
Anyone know when actual engine removal begins?
Post by: mkirk on 04/09/2007 08:47 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 9/4/2007 3:41 PM
Anyone know when actual engine removal begins?
Originally they were originally aiming for Thursday-Friday, but it looks like physical removal of the engines will be next week now. One of the big objectives is to ensure the engine work has minimal impact on tank repair effort.
Mark Kirkman
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/09/2007 10:07 pm
Quote
mkirk - 9/4/2007 3:47 PMQuoteshuttlefan - 9/4/2007 3:41 PM
Anyone know when actual engine removal begins?
Originally they were originally aiming for Thursday-Friday, but it looks like physical removal of the engines will be next week now. One of the big objectives is to ensure the engine work has minimal impact on tank repair effort.
Mark Kirkman
Thanks Mark!! They're probably removing the heatshields surrounding the engines.
Post by: gordo on 04/09/2007 11:21 pm
Post by: Jim on 04/09/2007 11:33 pm
Quote
gordo - 9/4/2007 7:21 PM
must be easier and less risk to remove the engined horizontally
Not really
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/10/2007 02:11 am
ET engineering dispositions assessments complete
ET LO2 tank PDL repairs in work
Orbiter ECO sensor wire separation in work Continuity checks
SSME removal preps in work
ET sep camera removal complete
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/10/2007 12:50 pm
Quote
gordo - 9/4/2007 6:21 PM
wonder if they want to wait till swap/no swap call on tank is made. must be easier and less risk to remove the engined horizontally
They can do it both horizontally and vertically. They've performed engine removal operations in the OPF, VAB and at the pad many times before. I believe Columbia had an engine R&R'd in the VAB before rolling out for STS-107. As Jim mentioned, I don't think there is much difference in the levels of difficulty and risk.
Post by: on 04/10/2007 01:24 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/10/2007 01:27 pm
Quote
Justin Wheat - 10/4/2007 3:24 PMYes. SSME R&R can be done at any time in a flow.
Could they roll her out to the pad and then remove the engines?
Quote
nathan.moeller - 10/4/2007 2:50 PMNo SSME R&R was done during the STS-107 VAB flow.
I believe Columbia had an engine R&R'd in the VAB before rolling out for STS-107.
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/10/2007 01:33 pm
Quote
Justin Wheat - 10/4/2007 8:24 AM
Could they roll her out to the pad and then remove the engines?
Yes. They've R&R'd engines on the pad before. Here's a brief (hopefully brief!!) chronology:
STS-6Challenger-Launched April 1983:Engines replaced due to LH2 leaks.
41-DDiscovery-Launched Aug.1984:1 engine replaced on pad after FRF.
STS-49Endeavour-Launched May 1992:All three engines replaced after FRF
STS-55Columbia-Pad Abort on March22nd1993:All three engines replaced
STS-51Discovery-Pad Abort on Aug12th1993:All three engines replaced
STS-52Columbia-LaunchedOct.1992:One engine replaced(weld concerns)
If I missed any, someone please correct me. I had missed STS-52 earlier. :cool:
Post by: on 04/10/2007 01:48 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/10/2007 02:03 pm
Quote
Justin Wheat - 10/4/2007 3:48 PMNot yet. The review isn't scheduled to begin until 3 pm EDT.
Any updates with the decision to proceed with the flow or wait till June?
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/10/2007 07:06 pm
Quote
DaveS - 10/4/2007 8:27 AMQuotenathan.moeller - 10/4/2007 2:50 PMNo SSME R&R was done during the STS-107 VAB flow.
I believe Columbia had an engine R&R'd in the VAB before rolling out for STS-107.
Yeah I didn't remember for sure. I looked it up and read that Engine 2 on Columbia was removed for inspection while she was in the OPF. However, I do remember seeing images of an orbiter undergoing main engine R&R while in the VAB. For some reason my brain tied the two together. If anyone knows which orbiter and mission that might have been I'd like to know (use PM).
EDIT: It was Atlantis as she prepared for STS-101. Found the images just now on the KSC website.
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 04/10/2007 07:06 pm
Post by: astrobrian on 04/10/2007 07:27 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/10/2007 08:40 pm
Quote
astrobrian - 10/4/2007 2:27 PM
Ok, I like that, but it is not a replacement to the mission patch right? So what would that be for?
Not a replacement patch. Just something symbolizing the mission itself.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/10/2007 09:27 pm
We're following on L2, and the current thinking is KEEPING with ET-124, with repairs. As previously reported, June will be the launch window regardless, although no tank swap would allow for a NET June 8/9 target.
Could still have some twists and turns yet. Launch schedule won't be decided until the 16th. Repairs could hit a problem, leading to ET swap after all, etc.etc.
However, right now, we 'believe' (no documentation at this time) that it'll be ET-124 for STS-117, and that they'll drop the May talk officially today.
I'd be putting my arse on the line if I wrote a news article on this, as we prefer to work from actual black and white documentation, so we'll see via the presser that is due later tonight.
I'll update if documentation with the decision arrives.
Post by: astrobrian on 04/10/2007 09:39 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/10/2007 09:40 pm
Quote
astrobrian - 10/4/2007 10:39 PM
Any clue yet as to when the press conf will be or if it will be on NTV?
None. Last time I asked, the meeting was still ongoing.
Post by: rdale on 04/10/2007 09:52 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/10/2007 10:22 pm
Quote
Justin Wheat - 11/4/2007 12:21 AMMeeting is running long. Now NET 6:30 pm EDT.
are they getting set up?
Post by: rdale on 04/10/2007 10:54 pm
Post by: Jamie Young on 04/10/2007 10:54 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 10/4/2007 4:27 PM
Awaiting ET-124/ET-117 decision for STS-117.
We're following on L2, and the current thinking is KEEPING with ET-124, with repairs. As previously reported, June will be the launch window regardless, although no tank swap would allow for a NET June 8/9 target.
Could still have some twists and turns yet. Launch schedule won't be decided until the 16th. Repairs could hit a problem, leading to ET swap after all, etc.etc.
However, right now, we 'believe' (no documentation at this time) that it'll be ET-124 for STS-117, and that they'll drop the May talk officially today.
Exactly right :)
Post by: on 04/10/2007 11:37 pm
Post by: psloss on 04/10/2007 11:55 pm
http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/search.cfm?cat=71
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/10/2007 11:56 pm
Quote
Justin Wheat - 11/4/2007 12:37 AM
If they proceed for a few weeks and couldn't make the window and possibly had to swap the et, then what would happen next?
They could do that and simply aim for a launch about a week or so later in the June window.
Post by: on 04/11/2007 12:14 am
Post by: rdale on 04/11/2007 12:16 am
Post by: TNCMAXQ on 04/11/2007 12:27 am
Post by: Rocket Guy on 04/11/2007 12:34 am
Post by: Lee Jay on 04/11/2007 12:35 am
Quote
rdale - 10/4/2007 6:16 PM
The need for daylight launches was eliminated already...
You don't think there's a chance they'll put it back just for this specific tank? I know they will claim that repairs make it as good as a new tank, but there's really nothing like a flight test to demonstrate whether or not that's true. And the best flight test data on foam loss is photography.
Lee Jay
Post by: rdale on 04/11/2007 12:36 am
Post by: Lee Jay on 04/11/2007 12:57 am
Post by: James Lowe1 on 04/11/2007 02:06 am
Post by: Rocket Guy on 04/11/2007 02:49 am
http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/currentglance.html#WINDOWS
Post by: John44 on 04/11/2007 06:26 am
http://www.space-multimedia.nl.eu.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1765&Itemid=1
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/11/2007 04:01 pm
OV-104 (STS-117)/VAB HB-1
The Orbiter will be powered up today and Thursday to support snapshots.
SSME removal preps continue. Engine removals scheduled to start on Saturday.
SRB Solid State Video Recorder settings to be changed today with a retest on Thursday.
FRCS trickle purge was completed yesterday.
PR OEL-5135, LO2 continuity checks and connector mates were completed yesterday.
PR SB-BI-129R-0017, the right hand SRB RTD R&R is scheduled for tomorrow.
TPSB SB-BI-129-0010, SSVR (video recorder) R&R and camera functional retest is now scheduled for Thursday.
Post by: bsegal on 04/11/2007 05:50 pm
If they had made the decision a couple weeks ago to swap out the tanks, the de-mating could have been done before the new tank arrived last Friday. They could have in-processed the new tank, and spent this past week assembling the new stack such that a roll out could have been accomplished sometime late next week possibly. With some orbiter pad processing already having taken place, there could have been a reasonable shot at launching before the solar beta cut-out dates.
I understand, however, that these guys have forgotten more about the program than I'll ever remember, so I assume there are some flaws in my timeline. Regardless, even if they're now targeting a May 4 roll-out following completion of repairs, wouldn't it have made more sense to swap out the tanks and roll-out on that date with a new and uncompromised tank, than have to worry (even a little bit) about flying with the current one? That way, they could have taken a lot more time to either complete repairs at KSC or even send it back to The Shoe for processing there - the barge is there anyway waiting to go back.
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/11/2007 06:34 pm
Quote
bsegal - 11/4/2007 12:50 PM
Don't know if they addressed this in the teleconference, but this decision really has me scratching my head. I thought it would have been a no-brainer to swap out the tanks once it was decided that some of the more critical repairs had to be performed sequentially rather than concurrently. This was going to push the repair completion date back far enough that it wouldn't get finished before a new tank was ready and available, anyway. Now, here we are with a new and pristine tank gathering dust on the barge at KSC for a week, and NASA still crossing their fingers that all the repairs will get done properly.
If they had made the decision a couple weeks ago to swap out the tanks, the de-mating could have been done before the new tank arrived last Friday. They could have in-processed the new tank, and spent this past week assembling the new stack such that a roll out could have been accomplished sometime late next week possibly. With some orbiter pad processing already having taken place, there could have been a reasonable shot at launching before the solar beta cut-out dates.
I understand, however, that these guys have forgotten more about the program than I'll ever remember, so I assume there are some flaws in my timeline. Regardless, even if they're now targeting a May 4 roll-out following completion of repairs, wouldn't it have made more sense to swap out the tanks and roll-out on that date with a new and uncompromised tank, than have to worry (even a little bit) about flying with the current one? That way, they could have taken a lot more time to either complete repairs at KSC or even send it back to The Shoe for processing there - the barge is there anyway waiting to go back.
Very-well said!! :) I think their decision was based more on getting STS-118 Endeavour off with only a 1.5 months delay, and keeping the downstream flights more closer to schedule.
Post by: DaveS on 04/11/2007 06:49 pm
Quote
bsegal - 11/4/2007 7:50 PM
Don't know if they addressed this in the teleconference, but this decision really has me scratching my head. I thought it would have been a no-brainer to swap out the tanks once it was decided that some of the more critical repairs had to be performed sequentially rather than concurrently. This was going to push the repair completion date back far enough that it wouldn't get finished before a new tank was ready and available, anyway. Now, here we are with a new and pristine tank gathering dust on the barge at KSC for a week, and NASA still crossing their fingers that all the repairs will get done properly.
If they had made the decision a couple weeks ago to swap out the tanks, the de-mating could have been done before the new tank arrived last Friday. They could have in-processed the new tank, and spent this past week assembling the new stack such that a roll out could have been accomplished sometime late next week possibly. With some orbiter pad processing already having taken place, there could have been a reasonable shot at launching before the solar beta cut-out dates.
I understand, however, that these guys have forgotten more about the program than I'll ever remember, so I assume there are some flaws in my timeline. Regardless, even if they're now targeting a May 4 roll-out following completion of repairs, wouldn't it have made more sense to swap out the tanks and roll-out on that date with a new and uncompromised tank, than have to worry (even a little bit) about flying with the current one? That way, they could have taken a lot more time to either complete repairs at KSC or even send it back to The Shoe for processing there - the barge is there anyway waiting to go back.
Here's my STS-117 with ET-117 schedule estimate:
ET on dock: April 6
ET lift into check-out cell: April 6
ET/SRB mate: April 29
Orbiter/ET mate: May 17
Rollout to Launch Complex 39A: May 24
Launch: June 15
All dates are best-case estimates. So you see, they're right, you're wrong. So using ET-117 doesn't buy them anything.
Rather, they loose a week of valuable time! Atlantis has to be turned around in time for STS-120/10A, yet another bottleneck mission. And a week is alot of time in turn-around speak.
Post by: Lee Jay on 04/11/2007 06:52 pm
Quote
If they had made the decision a couple weeks ago to swap out the tanks, the de-mating could have been done before the new tank arrived last Friday. They could have in-processed the new tank, and spent this past week assembling the new stack such that a roll out could have been accomplished sometime late next week possibly.
I asked about this way up-thread somewhere. Basically, they told me destacking in advance of the tank's arrival would be a waste of time because it takes around 3 weeks to ready a new tank for attachment to the SRBs. Therefore, if they did decide to use the new tank, holding that decision to when the tank arrived would not slow down the processing flow at all. As to why they didn't make the decision to swap, that's another matter.
Lee Jay
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/11/2007 06:57 pm
Quote
bsegal - 11/4/2007 12:50 PM
Don't know if they addressed this in the teleconference, but this decision really has me scratching my head. I thought it would have been a no-brainer to swap out the tanks once it was decided that some of the more critical repairs had to be performed sequentially rather than concurrently. This was going to push the repair completion date back far enough that it wouldn't get finished before a new tank was ready and available, anyway. Now, here we are with a new and pristine tank gathering dust on the barge at KSC for a week, and NASA still crossing their fingers that all the repairs will get done properly.
If they had made the decision a couple weeks ago to swap out the tanks, the de-mating could have been done before the new tank arrived last Friday. They could have in-processed the new tank, and spent this past week assembling the new stack such that a roll out could have been accomplished sometime late next week possibly. With some orbiter pad processing already having taken place, there could have been a reasonable shot at launching before the solar beta cut-out dates.
I understand, however, that these guys have forgotten more about the program than I'll ever remember, so I assume there are some flaws in my timeline. Regardless, even if they're now targeting a May 4 roll-out following completion of repairs, wouldn't it have made more sense to swap out the tanks and roll-out on that date with a new and uncompromised tank, than have to worry (even a little bit) about flying with the current one? That way, they could have taken a lot more time to either complete repairs at KSC or even send it back to The Shoe for processing there - the barge is there anyway waiting to go back.
There was never a shot at launching before the solar beta cut-out with ET-124, much less ET-117. You didn't factor in the amount of processing time ET-117 still needs to go through in its checkout cell in the VAB. That takes about 6-8 weeks as it is. They don't offload the tank and immediately mate it to the SRBs. Sticking with ET-124 allows them to launch sooner then with ET-117, unless the repairs are pushed back substantially, which I don't see happening. The decision is well thought-out and they know what they're doing. They wouldn't stick with this tank if they didn't think they could finish the repairs in time for an early June liftoff.
Post by: psloss on 04/11/2007 07:05 pm
Quote
DaveS - 11/4/2007 2:49 PMWell, ISS-10A/STS-120 may end up on Discovery, but your point is still taken.
Rather, they loose a week of valuable time! Atlantis has to be turned around in time for STS-120/10A, yet another bottleneck mission. And a week is alot of time in turn-around speak.
If they had destacked, wouldn't they also have to do other "back-outs" like cycling the landing gear (irrespective of the recently added engine work)?
Post by: DaveS on 04/11/2007 07:10 pm
Quote
psloss - 11/4/2007 9:05 PMI don't think so. I think that they would simply mate Atlantis to the OTS, like they did with Discovery for her "stack-swap" for STS-114/LF1.
If they had destacked, wouldn't they also have to do other "back-outs" like cycling the landing gear
Post by: collectSPACE on 04/11/2007 07:32 pm
Quote
A preliminary look at a late swap decision puts it at May 4th. A decision made to swap to ET-117 on that date would permit 4 launch attempts over 5 days at the end of the June-July window which currently closes 7/18.and...
Quote
ET-124 (STS-117) repair schedule shows a supportable launch date of 5/31 (recall beta cut-out is 5/21-6/7).
Post by: Thorny on 04/11/2007 08:39 pm
Quote
DaveS - 11/4/2007 2:10 PMQuotepsloss - 11/4/2007 9:05 PMI don't think so. I think that they would simply mate Atlantis to the OTS, like they did with Discovery for her "stack-swap" for STS-114/LF1.
If they had destacked, wouldn't they also have to do other "back-outs" like cycling the landing gear
Isn't there a time limit before they have to top off the tires? Its been, what, two months since Atlantis' gear was retracted and nearly two more before launch?
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/11/2007 08:41 pm
Quote
psloss - 11/4/2007 2:05 PMQuoteDaveS - 11/4/2007 2:49 PMWell, ISS-10A/STS-120 may end up on Discovery, but your point is still taken.
Rather, they loose a week of valuable time! Atlantis has to be turned around in time for STS-120/10A, yet another bottleneck mission. And a week is alot of time in turn-around speak.
If they had destacked, wouldn't they also have to do other "back-outs" like cycling the landing gear (irrespective of the recently added engine work)?
I must have missed something so forgive me for asking. I was under the impression that they had officially swapped orbiters for STS-120, 122 and 124. Will that be decided on April 16?
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/11/2007 10:32 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 11/4/2007 3:41 PMI believe so.Quotepsloss - 11/4/2007 2:05 PMQuoteDaveS - 11/4/2007 2:49 PMWell, ISS-10A/STS-120 may end up on Discovery, but your point is still taken.
Rather, they loose a week of valuable time! Atlantis has to be turned around in time for STS-120/10A, yet another bottleneck mission. And a week is alot of time in turn-around speak.
If they had destacked, wouldn't they also have to do other "back-outs" like cycling the landing gear (irrespective of the recently added engine work)?
I must have missed something so forgive me for asking. I was under the impression that they had officially swapped orbiters for STS-120, 122 and 124. Will that be decided on April 16?
Post by: NASA_Twix_JSC on 04/11/2007 10:51 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 11/4/2007 3:41 PMQuotepsloss - 11/4/2007 2:05 PMQuoteDaveS - 11/4/2007 2:49 PMWell, ISS-10A/STS-120 may end up on Discovery, but your point is still taken.
Rather, they loose a week of valuable time! Atlantis has to be turned around in time for STS-120/10A, yet another bottleneck mission. And a week is alot of time in turn-around speak.
If they had destacked, wouldn't they also have to do other "back-outs" like cycling the landing gear (irrespective of the recently added engine work)?
I must have missed something so forgive me for asking. I was under the impression that they had officially swapped orbiters for STS-120, 122 and 124. Will that be decided on April 16?
As it's been made clear for a long time. FAWGs are planning schedules. It is highly likely that this will happen, but where you got 'officially' from is your assumption.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/11/2007 11:02 pm
Quote
NASA_Twix_JSC - 11/4/2007 5:51 PM
As it's been made clear for a long time. FAWGs are planning schedules. It is highly likely that this will happen, but where you got 'officially' from is your assumption.
I made no assumption, hence "under the impression." I misunderstood what was going on because I didn't know that the FAWGs were not "set in stone" so to speak. I suppose I'm still confused as to when the decision conerning orbiter assignments will be made. Is April 16 that day or is that simply to decide a new launch date for Atlantis on STS-117? Yes I'm sure I'm asking something that has been answered but I can't find the answer.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/12/2007 12:11 am
NASA sets the NET dates, per mission, as the mission gets closer to launch.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/12/2007 01:26 am
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/13/2007 08:48 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/13/2007 11:43 pm
Post by: jacqmans on 04/14/2007 09:33 am
S3/S4 Truss Segment Solar Arrays
Vehicle: Atlantis (OV-104)
Location: Vehicle Assembly Building
Launch Date: Targeted for June 8, 2007
Launch Pad: 39A
Crew: Sturckow, Archambault, Reilly, Swanson, Forrester and Olivas
Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles
In high bay No. 1 of the Vehicle Assembly Building, technicians and
engineers continue the repair work on the hail-damaged STS-117
external fuel tank, ET-124, following a decision this week by Space
Shuttle Program managers to target a launch date of June 8 using the
repaired tank.
Preparations are under way for the removal of Atlantis' three main
engines to inspect for flow liner contamination. This work can be
accomplished within the time frame of the hail damage recovery
effort, with no impact to the launch schedule for STS-117.
Post by: Mark Dave on 04/15/2007 07:06 pm
when will the new rollout happen given that target date?
Post by: rdale on 04/15/2007 07:15 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/15/2007 07:15 pm
Quote
MarkD - 15/4/2007 9:06 PMPlease visit the news site. You do now there's a news section right? Here's a link to the story: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5071
when will the new rollout happen given that target date?
Post by: eeergo on 04/15/2007 09:11 pm
New images of the repairs on the ET: http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/search.cfm?cat=71
Post by: TJL on 04/15/2007 10:56 pm
Post by: psloss on 04/16/2007 12:08 am
Quote
TJL - 15/4/2007 6:56 PMThis tank pretty much has to be used, whether it's this launch or another one; there's also a couple of weeks of margin (at least at this point) to use it for this launch instead of the just-arrived tank.
When I look at that photo of ET-124, it's hard to believe that the decision is leaning towards using that tank over ET-117.
Post by: Austin on 04/16/2007 12:16 am
Quote
psloss - 15/4/2007 5:08 PM
This tank pretty much has to be used, whether it's this launch or another one; there's also a couple of weeks of margin (at least at this point) to use it for this launch instead of the just-arrived tank.
This tank does not have to be used. It is being used because engineers have declared it flight worthy. If, following assessment, it was determined that it was unsafe to fly, it would not be flown.
The dings or pockmarks that you see in the picture, TJL, are extreme close-ups, and are actually quite small.
Post by: psloss on 04/16/2007 12:24 am
Quote
Austin - 15/4/2007 8:16 PMI missed that -- is there a reference that says that the damage could possibly have been unrepairable?
If, following assessment, it was determined that it was unsafe to fly, it would not be flown.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/16/2007 01:41 am
Quote
Austin - 15/4/2007 7:16 PMQuotepsloss - 15/4/2007 5:08 PM
This tank pretty much has to be used, whether it's this launch or another one; there's also a couple of weeks of margin (at least at this point) to use it for this launch instead of the just-arrived tank.
This tank does not have to be used. It is being used because engineers have declared it flight worthy. If, following assessment, it was determined that it was unsafe to fly, it would not be flown.
The dings or pockmarks that you see in the picture, TJL, are extreme close-ups, and are actually quite small.
Austin, I believe there are only enough tanks left to finish the shuttle program. If that is true, this tank MUST be used. It doesn't have to fly on STS-117, but it must fly. But it has been deemed flight worthy for STS-117 so it is most likely that it will be used on this flight.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/16/2007 01:50 am
Writing an article to preview this.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/16/2007 04:17 am
Post by: Austin on 04/16/2007 05:44 am
Quote
psloss - 15/4/2007 5:24 PMQuoteAustin - 15/4/2007 8:16 PMI missed that -- is there a reference that says that the damage could possibly have been unrepairable?
If, following assessment, it was determined that it was unsafe to fly, it would not be flown.
Hey Pete. Not really. Yet I hope that NASA has learned by now not to allow schedule pressure and/or deadlines (ie 2010) to dictate critical decision- making in lieu of safety. I suppose that is the point I was trying to make. If It really came down to it and the tank was not flight worthy, I want to believe that NASA would make the decision not to fly it.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/16/2007 12:44 pm
Quote
Austin - 16/4/2007 12:44 AMQuotepsloss - 15/4/2007 5:24 PMQuoteAustin - 15/4/2007 8:16 PMI missed that -- is there a reference that says that the damage could possibly have been unrepairable?
If, following assessment, it was determined that it was unsafe to fly, it would not be flown.
Hey Pete. Not really. Yet I hope that NASA has learned by now not to allow schedule pressure and/or deadlines (ie 2010) to dictate critical decision- making in lieu of safety. I suppose that is the point I was trying to make. If It really came down to it and the tank was not flight worthy, I want to believe that NASA would make the decision not to fly it.
Well, if it wasn't deemed flight worthy, they wouldn't use it for STS-117. They would either A. Place it in a vertical checkout cell in the VAB for more work or B. Send it back to MAF where they can fix it even more and get it ready to fly on a later mission. It would push the schedule back, but if it came down to that, they would do it. Looking forward to the decisions today :)
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/16/2007 01:32 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 16/4/2007 7:44 AMQuoteAustin - 16/4/2007 12:44 AMQuotepsloss - 15/4/2007 5:24 PMQuoteAustin - 15/4/2007 8:16 PMI missed that -- is there a reference that says that the damage could possibly have been unrepairable?
If, following assessment, it was determined that it was unsafe to fly, it would not be flown.
Hey Pete. Not really. Yet I hope that NASA has learned by now not to allow schedule pressure and/or deadlines (ie 2010) to dictate critical decision- making in lieu of safety. I suppose that is the point I was trying to make. If It really came down to it and the tank was not flight worthy, I want to believe that NASA would make the decision not to fly it.
Well, if it wasn't deemed flight worthy, they wouldn't use it for STS-117. They would either A. Place it in a vertical checkout cell in the VAB for more work or B. Send it back to MAF where they can fix it even more and get it ready to fly on a later mission. It would push the schedule back, but if it came down to that, they would do it. Looking forward to the decisions today :)
Absolutely, Nathan. We have to realize that NASA spent countless hours evaluating the flight-worthiness of the repaired tank vs. replacing it. I think NASA 's decision-making process is right on the money right now. ;)
BTW, are they starting to remove the main engines today?
Post by: psloss on 04/16/2007 01:55 pm
Quote
Austin - 16/4/2007 1:44 AMThat's not the point I was trying to make, which Nathan has already emphasized -- they have a sufficient number of tanks to fly out the manifest, but not much (or any) overstock.
Hey Pete. Not really. Yet I hope that NASA has learned by now not to allow schedule pressure and/or deadlines (ie 2010) to dictate critical decision- making in lieu of safety. I suppose that is the point I was trying to make. If It really came down to it and the tank was not flight worthy, I want to believe that NASA would make the decision not to fly it.
The hail damage was bad, but I haven't seen anything that says that taking this tank out of the sequence means it can never be flown. It's more a matter of how long it takes to repair the insulation. Look at what happened to ET-120 and what the plans are for it now.
(By the way, my name's not Pete. It's Philip.)
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/16/2007 02:22 pm
Post by: Austin on 04/16/2007 02:35 pm
Quote
psloss - 16/4/2007 6:55 AMQuoteAustin - 16/4/2007 1:44 AMThat's not the point I was trying to make, which Nathan has already emphasized -- they have a sufficient number of tanks to fly out the manifest, but not much (or any) overstock.
Hey Pete. Not really. Yet I hope that NASA has learned by now not to allow schedule pressure and/or deadlines (ie 2010) to dictate critical decision- making in lieu of safety. I suppose that is the point I was trying to make. If It really came down to it and the tank was not flight worthy, I want to believe that NASA would make the decision not to fly it.
The hail damage was bad, but I haven't seen anything that says that taking this tank out of the sequence means it can never be flown. It's more a matter of how long it takes to repair the insulation. Look at what happened to ET-120 and what the plans are for it now.
(By the way, my name's not Pete. It's Philip.)
Point taken. And sorry about that...not sure where I got Pete from.
Post by: Austin on 04/16/2007 02:38 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 16/4/2007 7:22 AM
They thought ET-120 would never fly, but it's now set to fly with STS-120. They know what they're doing ;)
No doubt, Nathan. I have a great deal more confidence in the management team now than before. And with the remainder of the program riding on each mission at this point, I do think that has also has a positive influence on decision-making.
Post by: rdale on 04/16/2007 04:50 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 16/4/2007 9:32 AM
BTW, are they starting to remove the main engines today?
No, per L2 that was pushed back for tank repair issues, no impact on rollout.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/17/2007 12:39 pm
OV-104 (STS-117)/VAB HB-1
The Orbiter was powered up on Friday and snapshots were completed; next power up scheduled for tomorrow.
Hydraulic operations to preposition all aerosurfaces in support of engine removals were completed on Friday.
During a walkdown in preparation for engine removal, several scaffolding issues were noted. To ensure ET-124 repair efforts were not impacted, engine removal will be rescheduled to begin on April 24. This change in the schedule is not expected to impact the rollout date of May 6 nor the NET launch date of June 8.
SRB Solid State Video Recorder retest was completed on Friday.
SSME #2 will be swapped with OV-105.
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/17/2007 01:31 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 17/4/2007 7:39 AM
From L2, which will be written up as part of another 117 related story today:
OV-104 (STS-117)/VAB HB-1
The Orbiter was powered up on Friday and snapshots were completed; next power up scheduled for tomorrow.
Hydraulic operations to preposition all aerosurfaces in support of engine removals were completed on Friday.
During a walkdown in preparation for engine removal, several scaffolding issues were noted. To ensure ET-124 repair efforts were not impacted, engine removal will be rescheduled to begin on April 24. This change in the schedule is not expected to impact the rollout date of May 6 nor the NET launch date of June 8.
SRB Solid State Video Recorder retest was completed on Friday.
SSME #2 will be swapped with OV-105.
Any word on why they are replacing SSME#2? ;)
Post by: mkirk on 04/17/2007 02:43 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 17/4/2007 8:31 AMQuoteChris Bergin - 17/4/2007 7:39 AM
From L2, which will be written up as part of another 117 related story today:
OV-104 (STS-117)/VAB HB-1
The Orbiter was powered up on Friday and snapshots were completed; next power up scheduled for tomorrow.
Hydraulic operations to preposition all aerosurfaces in support of engine removals were completed on Friday.
During a walkdown in preparation for engine removal, several scaffolding issues were noted. To ensure ET-124 repair efforts were not impacted, engine removal will be rescheduled to begin on April 24. This change in the schedule is not expected to impact the rollout date of May 6 nor the NET launch date of June 8.
SRB Solid State Video Recorder retest was completed on Friday.
SSME #2 will be swapped with OV-105.
Any word on why they are replacing SSME#2? ;)
Engine 2 on Atlantis needs to have its LPOTP (low pressure oxidizer turbo pump) replaced when they remove it for the Repliset contamination inspection. It is just logistically easier to swap the engine (when it comes out of Atlantis next week) for the engine on Endeavour. Before that engine is installed on Endeavour it will have a replacement LPOTP installed.
The LPOTP needs to be replaced because there is a potential corosion issue that is being investigated.
Mark Kirkman
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/19/2007 02:04 am
Post by: anik on 04/20/2007 01:29 pm
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson/news/flightdatafiles/index.html
Post by: dsmillman on 04/20/2007 02:16 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/20/2007 07:15 pm
Post by: mkirk on 04/20/2007 08:11 pm
Mission: STS-117 - 21st International Space Station Flight (13A) -
S3/S4 Truss Segment Solar Arrays
Vehicle: Atlantis (OV-104)
Location: Vehicle Assembly Building
Launch Date: Targeted for June 8, 2007
Launch Pad: 39A
Crew: Sturckow, Archambault, Reilly, Swanson, Forrester and Olivas
Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles
In high bay No. 1 of the Vehicle Assembly Building, technicians and
engineers continue repairing foam on the hail-damaged STS-117
external fuel tank, ET-124. The poured foam repairs are nearly
complete, and technicians are trimming and sanding repair sites.
Spray foam repairs are scheduled to begin next week. Due to the
amount of tank repair work remaining, the rollout of Atlantis to the
launch pad is now scheduled for May 12. This six-day change should
not affect the June 8 target launch date.
Preparations are complete for the removal of Atlantis' three main
engines to inspect for flow liner contamination. Engine removal is
scheduled to begin next week. This work can be accomplished within
the time frame of the tank repair.
Mark Kirkman
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/22/2007 04:32 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/22/2007 04:35 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 22/4/2007 6:32 PMNo new schedule yet. It's weekend. No new updates until tommorow.
What's the latest schedule with engine removal?
Post by: mkirk on 04/23/2007 01:09 pm
Quote
DaveS - 22/4/2007 11:35 AMQuoteshuttlefan - 22/4/2007 6:32 PMNo new schedule yet. It's weekend. No new updates until tommorow.
What's the latest schedule with engine removal?
Actual removal is currently planned for Thursday-ish.
Mark Kirkman
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/23/2007 01:34 pm
Post by: norm103 on 04/23/2007 06:03 pm
Post by: MKremer on 04/23/2007 06:35 pm
That said, I don't know what they're doing (or are actually able to do) for that while sitting parked in the VAB.
Post by: mr.columbus on 04/25/2007 12:26 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/25/2007 12:51 pm
Quote
mr.columbus - 25/4/2007 2:26 PMNot yet.
Is there any status update on engine removal and the status of the repair work done?
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/25/2007 01:30 pm
Quote
DaveS - 25/4/2007 7:51 AMQuotemr.columbus - 25/4/2007 2:26 PMNot yet.
Is there any status update on engine removal and the status of the repair work done?
The last I heard, engine removal is set to begin tomorrow.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/25/2007 05:24 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 25/4/2007 2:30 PMQuoteDaveS - 25/4/2007 7:51 AMQuotemr.columbus - 25/4/2007 2:26 PMNot yet.
Is there any status update on engine removal and the status of the repair work done?
The last I heard, engine removal is set to begin tomorrow.
That is correct.
Post by: Mark Dave on 04/25/2007 08:27 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/25/2007 08:40 pm
Quote
MarkD - 25/4/2007 10:27 PMThis isn't an remove and replace job. It's simply a remove and re-install job.
When will the new SMEs be installed?
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 04/25/2007 08:43 pm
Quote
DaveS - 25/4/2007 9:40 PMQuoteMarkD - 25/4/2007 10:27 PMThis isn't an remove and replace job. It's simply a remove and re-install job.
When will the new SMEs be installed?
Oh thanks Dave. I too was getting a bit confused about the engine removal! :)
Post by: psloss on 04/25/2007 10:54 pm
http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/search.cfm?cat=4
Post by: Lee Jay on 04/25/2007 11:46 pm
Quote
DaveS - 25/4/2007 2:40 PMQuoteMarkD - 25/4/2007 10:27 PMThis isn't an remove and replace job. It's simply a remove and re-install job.
When will the new SMEs be installed?
I thought one of the three (number 2?) was being R&R'd.
Lee Jay
Post by: mkirk on 04/25/2007 11:52 pm
Quote
Lee Jay - 25/4/2007 6:46 PM
I thought one of the three (number 2?) was being R&R'd.
Lee Jay
No the change in the SSME inspection timeline caused them to opt for replacing the LPOTP on SSME 2 and then reinstalling it on Atlantis.
Engine 2 comes out first and heads to the engine shop then by the time the complete the SSME/MPS inspections on 1 and 3 they will have engine 2 ready to go back in.
Mark Kirkman
Post by: George CA on 04/26/2007 12:18 am
Quote
mkirk - 25/4/2007 6:52 PMQuoteLee Jay - 25/4/2007 6:46 PM
I thought one of the three (number 2?) was being R&R'd.
Lee Jay
No the change in the SSME inspection timeline caused them to opt for replacing the LPOTP on SSME 2 and then reinstalling it on Atlantis.
Engine 2 comes out first and heads to the engine shop then by the time the complete the SSME/MPS inspections on 1 and 3 they will have engine 2 ready to go back in.
Mark Kirkman
You said:
Quote
mkirk - 17/4/2007 9:43 AM
Engine 2 on Atlantis needs to have its LPOTP (low pressure oxidizer turbo pump) replaced when they remove it for the Repliset contamination inspection. It is just logistically easier to swap the engine (when it comes out of Atlantis next week) for the engine on Endeavour. Before that engine is installed on Endeavour it will have a replacement LPOTP installed.
The LPOTP needs to be replaced because there is a potential corosion issue that is being investigated.
Mark Kirkman
What changed?
Post by: psloss on 04/26/2007 12:36 am
Quote
George CA - 25/4/2007 8:18 PMThe engine removals were deferred until after the "low-clearance" scaffolding around the tank can be removed. In the meantime, Endeavour's engines are either all reinstalled or will be soon. Before, both sets of the engines were going to be out in the approximately the same timeframe; with the engine removals from Atlantis deferred, that may have eliminated whatever potential schedule "gain" there was to be had from grabbing Endeavour's #2 engine for Atlantis.
What changed?
Post by: Endeavour118 on 04/26/2007 02:51 am
Post by: nathan.moeller on 04/26/2007 05:14 am
Quote
Endeavour118 - 25/4/2007 9:51 PM
can anybody confirm that the expedition 15 crew chage will occur on sts-117 instead of 118
They've considered it. No decision as of yet.
Post by: MATTBLAK on 04/26/2007 07:10 am
>>...we're tossing all kinds of stuff off that flight to make room for Clay Anderson, who looks like he's advancing one flight to get back in synch with the rest of his expedition. Quite a scramble!<<
;)
Post by: Mark Dave on 04/26/2007 12:50 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/26/2007 01:10 pm
Quote
Endeavour118 - 26/4/2007 3:51 AM
can anybody confirm that the expedition 15 crew chage will occur on sts-117 instead of 118
NASA have approved, but it's pending Russian approval.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/26/2007 01:11 pm
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/26/2007 01:41 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 26/4/2007 8:11 AM
SSME removal delayed to Sunday.
If engine removal gets delayed too much longer, to the point of affecting the overall schedule, they could decide to do it on the pad in parallel with other pad processing. ;)
Post by: Mark Dave on 04/26/2007 08:44 pm
Post by: Lee Jay on 04/26/2007 08:51 pm
Post by: Jim on 04/26/2007 10:58 pm
Quote
MarkD - 26/4/2007 4:44 PM
Can they do that while at the pad? I mean I've never heard of it being done before.
Many times , tens of times
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/27/2007 01:37 am
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/27/2007 01:16 pm
Post by: uko on 04/27/2007 01:34 pm
Post by: DaveS on 04/27/2007 01:36 pm
Quote
uko - 27/4/2007 3:34 PMYes. Currently looking at scaffolding tear-down on Sunday, starting with SSME#2 removal on Monday.
So these delays are probably because the ET repairs are taking longer and they can't move the scaffolding?
Post by: jacqmans on 04/27/2007 08:04 pm
S3/S4 Truss Segment Solar Arrays
Vehicle: Atlantis (OV-104)
Location: Vehicle Assembly Building
Launch Date: Targeted for June 8, 2007
Launch Pad: 39A
Crew: Sturckow, Archambault, Reilly, Swanson, Forrester, Olivas and
Anderson
Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles
In high bay No. 1 of the Vehicle Assembly Building, technicians and
engineers continue repairing foam on the hail-damaged STS-117
external fuel tank, ET-124. Spray foam repairs are scheduled to begin
Monday. Workers have begun disassembling the special scaffolding
built for the foam repair work, to allow for the removal next week of
Atlantis' three main engines to inspect for flow liner contamination.
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 04/27/2007 08:44 pm
Quote
DaveS - 27/4/2007 2:36 PMQuoteuko - 27/4/2007 3:34 PMYes. Currently looking at scaffolding tear-down on Sunday, starting with SSME#2 removal on Monday.
So these delays are probably because the ET repairs are taking longer and they can't move the scaffolding?
About time too... ;)
Post by: Felix on 04/28/2007 12:43 am
Post by: Flightstar on 04/28/2007 12:47 am
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/28/2007 01:36 am
Post by: uko on 04/28/2007 11:17 am
Post by: DaveS on 04/28/2007 11:45 am
Quote
uko - 28/4/2007 1:17 PM3 days of contigency time in the schedule.
Maybe someone can comment on how tight the June 8. option is if rollout occurs on May 15th?
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/28/2007 08:13 pm
Quote
DaveS - 28/4/2007 6:45 AMQuoteuko - 28/4/2007 1:17 PM3 days of contigency time in the schedule.
Maybe someone can comment on how tight the June 8. option is if rollout occurs on May 15th?
Whoo-that's tight! :o
Post by: DaveS on 04/28/2007 08:42 pm
Atlantis has been in HB1 for 58 days. With rollout planned for May 15, that will lead to a total VAB stay-time of 75 days. And for a June 8 launch, the pad time will be 24 days.
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/29/2007 01:37 am
Post by: Jim on 04/29/2007 01:51 am
Post by: Lee Jay on 04/29/2007 02:03 am
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/29/2007 01:51 pm
Quote
Lee Jay - 28/4/2007 9:03 PM
What do they do about tire pressure? Can they check and adjust it with it stacked?
They can't adjust it when stacked because the landing gear can't be lowered when the orbiter is mated to the tank. I'm not sure about how they moniter it though. ;)
Post by: eeergo on 04/29/2007 02:28 pm
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/29/2007 04:04 pm
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 04/29/2007 04:18 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 29/4/2007 5:04 PM
To the best of everyone's knowledge, is SSME removal still set to start Monday? :cool:
Yep, I think so (at last! ;) )
Post by: DaveS on 04/30/2007 01:11 am
Post by: Lee Jay on 04/30/2007 01:36 am
Post by: Radioheaded on 04/30/2007 02:13 am
Post by: ADC9 on 04/30/2007 04:59 am
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/30/2007 03:27 pm
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/30/2007 03:35 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/30/2007 03:41 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 30/4/2007 4:35 PM
Any word yet on engine removal today?
SSME 2 is out right now, as we speak. SSME 3 is next (tomorrow).
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/30/2007 04:20 pm
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 04/30/2007 05:56 pm
Post by: STS-500Cmdr on 04/30/2007 06:28 pm
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 04/30/2007 06:39 pm
Quote
STS-500Cmdr - 30/4/2007 7:28 PM
LMAO!!! orange Dalmation what an awesome description. That or the tank has the measels. Anybody wanna play connect the dots? :laugh: :laugh: ;)
I can remember several weeks ago we were joking that the tank would be bright red because of the dye!
When is the foam getting applied to the tank anyway? :)
Post by: DaveS on 04/30/2007 06:45 pm
Quote
ShuttleDiscovery - 30/4/2007 8:39 PMTommorow.
When is the foam getting applied to the tank anyway? :)
Post by: Mark Dave on 04/30/2007 06:45 pm
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 04/30/2007 06:52 pm
Quote
MarkD - 30/4/2007 7:45 PM
I wonder how it will look on rollout in a couple weeks? Will the new foam patches be easily visible?
That's what I was thinking, but I didn't want to ask in case the reply made me feel stupid! :laugh:
Post by: DaveS on 04/30/2007 07:43 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 04/30/2007 08:07 pm
Post by: psloss on 04/30/2007 08:15 pm
Post by: shuttlefan on 04/30/2007 08:23 pm
Quote
ShuttleDiscovery - 30/4/2007 1:52 PM-No such thing as a stupid question, don't let any replies intimidate you! I've learned not to. ;)QuoteMarkD - 30/4/2007 7:45 PM
I wonder how it will look on rollout in a couple weeks? Will the new foam patches be easily visible?
That's what I was thinking, but I didn't want to ask in case the reply made me feel stupid! :laugh:
Post by: psloss on 04/30/2007 08:54 pm
Post by: psloss on 04/30/2007 10:19 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/01/2007 12:07 pm
Post by: Avron on 05/01/2007 12:55 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 05/01/2007 01:14 pm
Post by: shuttlefan on 05/01/2007 01:40 pm
Post by: DaveS on 05/01/2007 01:42 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 1/5/2007 3:40 PMYes.
Are they still planning to replace the Low Pressure Oxidizer Turbopump on SSME#2?
Post by: shuttlefan on 05/01/2007 01:57 pm
Post by: Radioheaded on 05/01/2007 03:36 pm
Post by: Mark Dave on 05/01/2007 03:54 pm
Post by: DaveS on 05/01/2007 03:57 pm
Quote
MarkD - 1/5/2007 5:54 PMThe "bunny suits" are only required when near the payload bay or crew module. No need for any special suiting when working in the aft in the VAB or OPF.
Is the aft compartment open for connecting the internal pipes for the MPS all the while this is going on? I always though when entering the orbiter people need to wear speacial suits to prevent contaminating any sensative materials. For example, such as in the payload bay.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/01/2007 04:09 pm
Post by: Radioheaded on 05/01/2007 04:53 pm
edit: my questions answered on L2.... :)
Post by: mkirk on 05/01/2007 06:42 pm
Quote
Radioheaded - 1/5/2007 11:53 AM
I'll take all the non-answers as a yes :) .... Sorry, in my ignorance I assumed that this would be done elsewhere, given contamination issues, ect
edit: my questions answered on L2.... :)
Just to clarify for anyone else, a main objective is to gain access to the flow liners (i.e. the main propulsion system plumbing) Engine 2 is the only one going back to the shop since it needs the LPOTP (low pressure oxidizer turbo pump) swapped out.
Mark Kirkman
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/01/2007 09:43 pm
Post by: shuttlefan on 05/02/2007 03:02 am
Post by: astrobrian on 05/02/2007 03:14 am
Post by: Jim on 05/02/2007 10:11 am
Post by: shuttlefan on 05/02/2007 03:04 pm
Quote
Jim - 2/5/2007 5:11 AM
Was answered on another thread, no repeat TCDT. He will get individualized training. One day of TCDT isn't going to matter much wrt crew molding
Will his "individualized training" include going down to the Cape and practicing using the slidewire baskets and driving the M113 personal carrier,etc.? ;)
Also, do they plan to remove the center engine today?
Post by: Jim on 05/02/2007 03:07 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 2/5/2007 11:04 AMQuoteJim - 2/5/2007 5:11 AM
Was answered on another thread, no repeat TCDT. He will get individualized training. One day of TCDT isn't going to matter much wrt crew molding
Will his "individualized training" include going down to the Cape and practicing using the slidewire baskets and driving the M113 personal carrier,etc.? ;)
Yes
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/02/2007 07:38 pm
SSME #3 removal is complete. LPFTP borescope inspection is complete and good. MPS-1697 flowliner inspections are in work; engine #3 flowliner inspections are approximately 50% complete and are expected to be 100% later this morning.
SSME #2 has been transferred to the engine shop. Engine #2 flowliner inspections will begin this morning and will work in parallel with engine #3 inspections.
Pyro harness hi-pot is expected to begin this morning.
Post by: DaveS on 05/02/2007 10:50 pm
Post by: uko on 05/03/2007 07:49 am
Post by: DaveS on 05/03/2007 02:29 pm
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 05/03/2007 03:34 pm
Post by: DaveS on 05/03/2007 03:46 pm
Post by: DaveS on 05/03/2007 10:38 pm
Post by: uko on 05/04/2007 11:06 am
Post by: DaveS on 05/04/2007 11:27 am
Quote
uko - 4/5/2007 1:06 PMBX-265 foam application and trimmings on the ogive area were completed yesterday. BX-265 foam application for the pencil sharpner area is targeted either for Saturday or Sunday.
Any status updates on the foam repairs, especially of the BX-265 foam application?
Post by: DaveS on 05/04/2007 03:01 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 05/04/2007 04:04 pm
Post by: Skinny on 05/04/2007 06:46 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 4/5/2007 11:04 AM I hereby dub thee the 'Dalmation Tank!' :)
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 05/04/2007 07:10 pm
Post by: astrobrian on 05/04/2007 08:50 pm
Post by: jacqmans on 05/04/2007 09:16 pm
S3/S4 Truss Segment Solar Arrays
Vehicle: Atlantis (OV-104)
Location: Vehicle Assembly Building
Launch Date: Targeted for June 8, 2007
Launch Pad: 39A
Crew: Sturckow, Archambault, Reilly, Swanson, Forrester, Olivas and
Anderson
Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles
In high bay No. 1 of the Vehicle Assembly Building, technicians and
engineers continue repairing foam on the hail-damaged STS-117
external fuel tank, ET-124. Spray foam repairs began this week, and
an area on the "ogive pencil point" (at the top of the tank) is
scheduled to undergo a spray foam repair this weekend.
Atlantis' three main engines were removed this week for flow liner
contamination inspections, which are now complete. A small piece of
RepliSet found in the engine No. 2 flow liner has been removed. The
silicon rubber RepliSet is used in making 3-D impressions that help
to detect cracks in the main propulsion system fuel line flow liners.
Engine No. 3 has been reinstalled, and engineers are reinstalling
engines No. 1 and 2.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 05/04/2007 11:02 pm
Post by: Mark Dave on 05/05/2007 12:25 am
Post by: Chandonn on 05/05/2007 04:17 pm
Quote
MarkD - 4/5/2007 8:25 PM
My guess is the ET will resemble the look of the ET after ET sep, with some pock marks where foam came off.
I'm sure pock marks would hurt the aerodynamics of the tank. I fully expect the repairs on the tank to not be very noticeable.
Post by: Gekko0481 on 05/05/2007 04:56 pm
Post by: Austin on 05/05/2007 06:16 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 4/5/2007 4:02 PM
I think I like the grey tank :)
As long as we don't go back the all white tank used on the first few missions. Talk about a sight for sore eyes!
: )
Post by: shuttlefan on 05/05/2007 07:39 pm
Quote
Austin - 5/5/2007 1:16 PMQuotenathan.moeller - 4/5/2007 4:02 PM
I think I like the grey tank :)
As long as we don't go back the all white tank used on the first few missions. Talk about a sight for sore eyes!
: )
I would sort of like to see a white ET fly again. Why is it an eyesore?
Post by: MKremer on 05/05/2007 10:02 pm
Quote
Chandonn - 5/5/2007 11:17 AMNot talking about "pockmarks", but the innumerable small lighter-colored dots and larger area foam re-spray repairs which will be *quite* visible from rollout through launch.
I'm sure pock marks would hurt the aerodynamics of the tank. I fully expect the repairs on the tank to not be very noticeable.
(I prefer to think of it as the tank is going through puberty) ;) :)
Post by: Mark Dave on 05/06/2007 12:53 am
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/06/2007 01:41 am
STS 117 / OV 104 / VAB HB1
104 powered down
Next power up Monday
Engine #2 installation complete
ECP ESP swap complete
Heat shield wrap placement and milk? stool installation in progress
ET access reconfig in progress
Environmental enclosure in place
Conethane application will pick up 1st shift Sunday
Spraying will begin 2nd shift Sunday
Post by: nathan.moeller on 05/06/2007 05:12 am
Quote
shuttlefan - 5/5/2007 2:39 PMQuoteAustin - 5/5/2007 1:16 PMQuotenathan.moeller - 4/5/2007 4:02 PM
I think I like the grey tank :)
As long as we don't go back the all white tank used on the first few missions. Talk about a sight for sore eyes!
: )
I would sort of like to see a white ET fly again. Why is it an eyesore?
Just remember that it took over 600 lbs. of paint to make that sucker white :) Also, talk about a debris hazard!
Post by: shuttlefan on 05/06/2007 01:26 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 5/5/2007 12:12 AM--Yeah, I didn't have my engineering hat on when I said that. ;)Quoteshuttlefan - 5/5/2007 2:39 PMQuoteAustin - 5/5/2007 1:16 PMQuotenathan.moeller - 4/5/2007 4:02 PM
I think I like the grey tank :)
As long as we don't go back the all white tank used on the first few missions. Talk about a sight for sore eyes!
: )
I would sort of like to see a white ET fly again. Why is it an eyesore?
Just remember that it took over 600 lbs. of paint to make that sucker white :) Also, talk about a debris hazard!
Post by: DaveS on 05/06/2007 01:46 pm
Post by: spaceshuttle on 05/06/2007 03:18 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 5/5/2007 2:39 PMQuoteAustin - 5/5/2007 1:16 PMQuotenathan.moeller - 4/5/2007 4:02 PM
I think I like the grey tank :)
As long as we don't go back the all white tank used on the first few missions. Talk about a sight for sore eyes!
: )
I would sort of like to see a white ET fly again. Why is it an eyesore?
IT HURTS THE EYES...all that white! J/K, but yeah, it was fluorescent, and a bit tacky...
I'd take the usual gold...orange...caramel...rust ANY DAY over that nasty white.
Post by: Mark Dave on 05/06/2007 03:32 pm
Post by: nathan.moeller on 05/06/2007 05:50 pm
Quote
DaveS - 6/5/2007 8:46 AM
It wasn't paint. It was a Fire Retardant Latex(FRL). The FRL was to protect the ET from aerodynamic heating during ascent. After STS-2 NASA decided to stop using the FRL as the regular SOFI provided adequate protection.
My bad. But was I correct on the weight? About 600 lbs?
Post by: Austin on 05/06/2007 07:36 pm
Quote
spaceshuttle - 6/5/2007 8:18 AM
IT HURTS THE EYES...all that white! J/K, but yeah, it was fluorescent, and a bit tacky...
I'd take the usual gold...orange...caramel...rust ANY DAY over that nasty white.
I concur. It just looks very plain and...sterile, being all white. The rust color gives it some character at least. Just my humble opinion.
Maybe a red, white and blue scheme for the very last flight as a show of patriotism?
Just kidding.
:)
Post by: jmcgauley on 05/07/2007 01:57 am
Post by: Martin FL on 05/07/2007 02:21 am
Quote
jmcgauley - 6/5/2007 8:57 PM
Does anyone have a good idea as to when the Flight Readiness Review might be? I'm headed down whenever this flies and I'm trying to do a little planning. Thanks in advance!
As per L2, they are working off Delta FRR and LRRs right now, and it looks like the FRR will be about the 24th if I read it correctly.
Post by: jmcgauley on 05/07/2007 02:55 am
Post by: johng on 05/07/2007 12:57 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 6/5/2007 1:12 AM
Just remember that it took over 600 lbs. of paint to make that sucker white :) Also, talk about a debris hazard!
Do you have any info that would say the paint would be a debris hazard? My own feeling would be that it would have acted like a skin to keep pieces from flying off.
Post by: DaveS on 05/07/2007 01:32 pm
Quote
johng - 7/5/2007 2:57 PMThere's one good source: The STS-1 Technical Debriefing of Young and Crippen. In there Crippen mentions that some foam from the ET impacted the windows and actually got stuck there for the remainder of the flight!Quotenathan.moeller - 6/5/2007 1:12 AM
Just remember that it took over 600 lbs. of paint to make that sucker white :) Also, talk about a debris hazard!
Do you have any info that would say the paint would be a debris hazard? My own feeling would be that it would have acted like a skin to keep pieces from flying off.
I'll see if I can't dig up some post-sep photos of the ET.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/07/2007 02:22 pm
Post by: Jorge on 05/07/2007 02:26 pm
Quote
johng - 7/5/2007 7:57 AMQuotenathan.moeller - 6/5/2007 1:12 AM
Just remember that it took over 600 lbs. of paint to make that sucker white :) Also, talk about a debris hazard!
Do you have any info that would say the paint would be a debris hazard? My own feeling would be that it would have acted like a skin to keep pieces from flying off.
In the STS-1 Orbiter Final Mission Report (JSC-17378), p. 85, it was noted that Columbia sustained damage from debris strikes during STS-1 and that more than 300 tiles had to be replaced. This report was referenced by the CAIB report on p. 122.
There is no evidence the latex acted as a skin to keep pieces from flying off. The forces involved in "popcorning" foam are too strong for that - if anything, when popcorning occurred, the latex would have caused adjacent foam to be pulled off with the popcorning piece, increasing the size of the debris.
--
JRF
Post by: johng on 05/07/2007 03:35 pm
Wow. Good find.
Post by: Joffan on 05/07/2007 03:49 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 7/5/2007 8:22 AM... and the pencil point area is the final area for repair, isn't it, and now just needs dressing off. So rollout is looming....
All engines on Atlantis have been reinstalled.
Post by: marsguy on 05/07/2007 03:56 pm
Post by: ET_Mech on 05/07/2007 07:24 pm
Quote
johng - 7/5/2007 7:57 AMQuotenathan.moeller - 6/5/2007 1:12 AM
Just remember that it took over 600 lbs. of paint to make that sucker white :) Also, talk about a debris hazard!
Do you have any info that would say the paint would be a debris hazard? My own feeling would be that it would have acted like a skin to keep pieces from flying off.
Look at the classic photo of STS-1 waiting at the pad. You can see an area encapsulated by a debris net strapped to the tank. This is where an area of foam roughly the size of a filing cabinet came off in one integrated piece.
The current philosophy we work to in the foam world is that since we know foam shedding in flight is unavoidable, its best to make sure it comes off in small pieces that do not present a hazard to the rest of the vehicle. Having a 'skin' that has the potential to keep very large pieces of foam together while shedding could lead to a really bad day.
Edit: Sorry, I posted before I noticed you got an answer to your question. My apologies.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/07/2007 07:44 pm
Quote
marsguy - 7/5/2007 4:56 PM
Any chance rollout will occur earlier then planned?
Don't think so, although there is a review on the 11th.
Having said that, the tank is almost finished with, so there might be an opportunity.
Post by: STS-500Cmdr on 05/07/2007 08:04 pm
Post by: Michael22090 on 05/08/2007 12:40 am
Quote
Chris Bergin - 7/5/2007 2:44 PMQuotemarsguy - 7/5/2007 4:56 PM
Any chance rollout will occur earlier then planned?
Don't think so, although there is a review on the 11th.
Having said that, the tank is almost finished with, so there might be an opportunity.
An early rollout would be cool, plus it would give a few more contingency days. I am just glad that all the repairs were successful and if they need a few extra days to finish them, fine by me. Just looking forward to Atlanits being back at the pad.
Post by: Endeavour118 on 05/08/2007 02:00 am
Post by: Jim on 05/08/2007 02:01 am
Quote
Endeavour118 - 7/5/2007 10:00 PM
Can Anyone Confirm The Launch Time Of 7:34 PM?
too early to confirm the exact minute.
Post by: nathan.moeller on 05/08/2007 02:07 am
Quote
Endeavour118 - 7/5/2007 9:00 PM
Can Anyone Confirm The Launch Time Of 7:34 PM?
The exact launch time really isn't known until they're in the last parts countdown. The ISS orbit changes with reboosts and such and changes the times up a bit.
Post by: MKremer on 05/08/2007 02:35 am
Post by: nathan.moeller on 05/08/2007 07:10 am
Quote
MKremer - 7/5/2007 9:35 PM
Well, not only that, but things like upper atmospheric changes (along with solar wind/energy variances) that affect drag, and even miniscule transient gravitational irregularities, will affect the ISS orbit and times all the way up until the terminal launch countdown (and after that they calculate that into their orbital change/approach vectors).
It's details like these that keep me in awe of the entire system and the fact that it's ever worked. It reminds me of how endlessly complicated spaceflight is. Thanks for the info Mike!
Post by: shuttlefan on 05/08/2007 01:32 pm
Quote
nathan.moeller - 8/5/2007 2:10 AM--Totally agree with you, Nathan. There are some smart people on this planet! :laugh:QuoteMKremer - 7/5/2007 9:35 PM
Well, not only that, but things like upper atmospheric changes (along with solar wind/energy variances) that affect drag, and even miniscule transient gravitational irregularities, will affect the ISS orbit and times all the way up until the terminal launch countdown (and after that they calculate that into their orbital change/approach vectors).
It's details like these that keep me in awe of the entire system and the fact that it's ever worked. It reminds me of how endlessly complicated spaceflight is. Thanks for the info Mike!
Post by: Mark Dave on 05/08/2007 03:29 pm
Post by: DaveS on 05/08/2007 03:37 pm
Quote
MarkD - 8/5/2007 5:29 PMCurrently not listed. And I'm not even sure if NASA TV plans to cover it. It all depends on when exactly rollout starts on the 16th. And remember, the 16th is just an NET date. It could slip.
When is rollout scheduled to be seen on NASA TV for the 16th?
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/08/2007 03:50 pm
NASA will hold a media teleconference Friday, May 11, no earlier than 3 p.m. EDT to discuss the space shuttle Atlantis' external fuel tank. The tank has been repaired after a hail storm struck Kennedy Space Center, Fla. The teleconference follows a meeting to schedule the shuttle's return to the launch pad for the upcoming mission, STS-117.
The briefing participants are:
-- Bill Gerstenmaier, associate administrator, Space Operations Mission
Directorate
-- Wayne Hale, manager, Space Shuttle Program
-- John Chapman, manager, External Tank Project
-- Mike Leinbach, NASA launch director
So that's after the rollout review of the same day.
Post by: STS-500Cmdr on 05/08/2007 09:53 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/09/2007 02:45 am
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5095
The likihood this will be a new looking ET-124 comes from MAF sources who claim it won't rollout with the repaired areas showing. We'll see, but the final sprays certainly suggest this is possible too.
Post by: Lee Jay on 05/09/2007 02:59 am
Good article. So the Dalmatian loses it's spots!
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/09/2007 03:13 am
We'll probably have to wait and see the webcam images over the coming days, but I do get the impression you'll not see patches and spots all over the tank when she's at the pad.
Post by: shuttlefan on 05/09/2007 01:28 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/09/2007 01:29 pm
And NET for launch is still June 8. :)
Post by: astrobrian on 05/09/2007 01:42 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 9/5/2007 8:28 AM Will Clayton Anderson have the chance to board Atlantis on the pad for a dress rehearsal like his fellow crewmates did before the hailstorm?
He will get catch up training, but nothing like a full on TCDT.
Post by: rosbif73 on 05/09/2007 05:56 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 9/5/2007 3:29 PM
May 16 now documented as rollout date. The 11th review could change this, but the current state of play is the 16th.
And NET for launch is still June 8. :)
I see that subtropical storm Andrea (http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at1+shtml/145632.shtml?5day) is brewing. It doesn't sound like it will be a problem for rollout ("THE OFFICIAL FORECAST SHOWS DISSIPATION NEAR THE COAST IN LESS THAN FIVE DAYS. HOWEVER...SINCE ANDREA MIGHT BRING WINDS OF TROPICAL STORM FORCE TO THE COAST...A TROPICAL STORM WATCH HAS BEEN ISSUED.")
Any of the resident weather experts (Rob?) have anything to add to that?
Post by: psloss on 05/09/2007 08:12 pm
http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/search.cfm?cat=4
Post by: nathan.moeller on 05/10/2007 03:57 am
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/10/2007 01:29 pm
"Lockheed Martin is currently evaluating some areas of lowfoam in the closeout." :(
Post by: shuttlefan on 05/10/2007 01:31 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 10/5/2007 8:29 AM
There's an ongoing evaluation today on news late last night that the repairs have hit a problem.
"Lockheed Martin is currently evaluating some areas of lowfoam in the closeout." :(
Chris, do you know,offhand, what "lowfoam" is?
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/10/2007 01:34 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 10/5/2007 2:31 PMQuoteChris Bergin - 10/5/2007 8:29 AM
There's an ongoing evaluation today on news late last night that the repairs have hit a problem.
"Lockheed Martin is currently evaluating some areas of lowfoam in the closeout." :(
Chris, do you know,offhand, what "lowfoam" is?
I'm no cook, but: Imagine you're icing a cake. You smooth over the icing, but find it's not level and there's dips. The dips are low foam.
Post by: shuttlefan on 05/10/2007 01:37 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 10/5/2007 8:34 AMQuoteshuttlefan - 10/5/2007 2:31 PMQuoteChris Bergin - 10/5/2007 8:29 AM
There's an ongoing evaluation today on news late last night that the repairs have hit a problem.
"Lockheed Martin is currently evaluating some areas of lowfoam in the closeout." :(
Chris, do you know,offhand, what "lowfoam" is?
I'm no cook, but: Imagine you're icing a cake. You smooth over the icing, but find it's not level and there's dips. The dips are low foam.
Thanks Chris!! You could also compare it to a city crew fixing a pothole in the street with pavement. After it's been driven over a couple times it is not level with the rest of the street anymore. The pothole is back and they might as well not even filled it in. ;)
Post by: uko on 05/10/2007 02:08 pm
Post by: rdale on 05/10/2007 03:37 pm
Post by: Radioheaded on 05/10/2007 04:37 pm
Quote
rdale - 10/5/2007 11:37 AM
Andrea will have no impact on KSC operations. There's a pretty big debate in the weather community about why she even was named in the first place, it's more of a CYA response "just in case" she would magically turn into a tropical system. But most 'noreasters are stronger than this system...
In fact it looks as though now it won't even bring us the rain we so desperately need to help with the 200+wildfires burning around the state :(
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/10/2007 07:31 pm
Post by: dsmillman on 05/11/2007 12:46 pm
Post by: DaveS on 05/11/2007 12:55 pm
Quote
dsmillman - 11/5/2007 2:46 PMThe media teleconference is set to start NET 3 pm EDT.
What time does today's meeting start and how long is it expected to last?
Post by: dsmillman on 05/11/2007 01:17 pm
Post by: DaveS on 05/11/2007 01:31 pm
Quote
dsmillman - 11/5/2007 3:17 PMNo idea. Just out of curiosity: why do you want to know? Chris will keep us up to date on it if there's any major news coming out of it.
But when does the meeting(The Rollout Review) itself start?
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/11/2007 03:57 pm
Quote
dsmillman - 11/5/2007 2:17 PM
But when does the meeting(The Rollout Review) itself start?
Started. The issue with the low foam doesn't seem to be getting a large amount of notes on the documentation we've put on L2 today, so hopefully that's a good sign.
Post by: Andy USA on 05/11/2007 05:31 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/11/2007 06:51 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/11/2007 06:55 pm
Someone called Mark Kirkman's joined ;)
Post by: DaveS on 05/11/2007 07:12 pm
Post by: Fido on 05/11/2007 07:27 pm
Thanks.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/11/2007 07:28 pm
FRR on the 30-31st of May.
STS-125 manifest re-align to be released with two options. One Sept, 2008 (current) and one potentially Jan 2009. Decision early June.
Wayne: Rollout remains the 16th.
Post by: DaveS on 05/11/2007 07:28 pm
Quote
Fido - 11/5/2007 9:27 PMHere: http://www.nasa.gov/audience/formedia/features/news_audio.html
Silly question, but is the teleconference being broadcast anywhere, because there's nothing on NTV media ch.
Thanks.
Post by: Fido on 05/11/2007 07:32 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/11/2007 07:32 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/11/2007 07:36 pm
Post by: shuttlepilot on 05/11/2007 07:39 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/11/2007 07:42 pm
Post by: Mark Max Q on 05/11/2007 07:55 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/11/2007 07:56 pm
Quote
Mark Max Q - 11/5/2007 8:55 PM
Wow, Todd comes across really loud on the teleconference. A decent question about COPV at last.
He must have an excellent phone! :)
Yeah, that's a useful question. Some of the others have been utter drivel (especially AP - but Wayne dispatched it nicely).
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/11/2007 07:59 pm
Post by: stockman on 05/11/2007 08:04 pm
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/11/2007 08:08 pm
Quote
stockman - 11/5/2007 9:04 PM
I could not get on in time to listen. Was there any discussion on the seriousness of the Foam issue not being even/level, whatever? It appears by the discussion so far that it may not be a major concern??
Absolutely no mention (bar the documentation we have). No one asked though!
Fascinating stuff on the aerodynamic envioment the tank goes through on ascent just now though.
Also, John44 will be recording this and will have it for playback soon.
Post by: spaceshuttle on 05/11/2007 08:27 pm
Quote
shuttlepilot - 11/5/2007 2:39 PM
But as the guy said - dalmation is not problem ;) And it looks funny.
I thought they were sanding down the entire ogive on the tank?
Post by: DaveS on 05/11/2007 09:04 pm
Quote
spaceshuttle - 11/5/2007 10:27 PMNo. Only a few select areas got the "sand&blend" repair method.Quoteshuttlepilot - 11/5/2007 2:39 PM
But as the guy said - dalmation is not problem ;) And it looks funny.
I thought they were sanding down the entire ogive on the tank?
Post by: John44 on 05/11/2007 09:09 pm
The briefing participants are:
-- Bill Gerstenmaier, associate administrator, Space Operations Mission Directorate
-- Wayne Hale, manager, Space Shuttle Program
-- John Chapman, manager, External Tank Project
-- Mike Leinbach, NASA launch director
http://www.space-multimedia.nl.eu.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2061&Itemid=1
Post by: jacqmans on 05/11/2007 09:19 pm
S3/S4 Truss Segment Solar Arrays
Vehicle: Atlantis (OV-104)
Location: Vehicle Assembly Building
Launch Date: Targeted for June 8, 2007
Launch Pad: 39A
Crew: Sturckow, Archambault, Reilly, Swanson, Forrester, Olivas and
Anderson
Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles
In high bay No. 1 of the Vehicle Assembly Building, repairs to the
foam on the hail-damaged external fuel tank ET-124 are nearly
complete, and technicians and engineers are preparing Atlantis for
its rollout to Launch Pad 39A, currently scheduled for May 16.
Atlantis' three main engines, which were removed last week to allow
for inspection of the flow liners, have all been reinstalled, and
final checkout and testing are under way.
Post by: Mark Dave on 05/11/2007 09:30 pm
Post by: DaveS on 05/11/2007 09:41 pm
Quote
MarkD - 11/5/2007 11:30 PMYes. There's a final pre-rollout meeting on Monday but first motion is planned for 4 am EDT on Wednesday.
So what's the news? Is everything given a Go? Also for rollout what time is it scheduled for? I heard on NASA TV it's very early in the morning.
Post by: STS-500Cmdr on 05/11/2007 10:04 pm
Post by: psloss on 05/11/2007 10:07 pm
Post by: DaveS on 05/11/2007 10:16 pm
Quote
psloss - 11/5/2007 12:07 AMIt will. The videofile clips are carefully edited so that all clips fills exactly 30 minutes. And with the loop, it will be 60 minutes.
They just ran b-roll of recent repair work in the public channel Video File...FWIW. (The items run in a loop, so maybe it will run again during this hour.)
Post by: DaveS on 05/11/2007 11:13 pm
Atlantis has been in HB1 for 72 days. With rollout planned for May 16, that will lead to a total VAB stay-time of 76 days. And for a June 8 launch, the pad time will be 24 days.
Post by: Mark Dave on 05/12/2007 03:26 am
Post by: John44 on 05/12/2007 06:15 am
http://www.space-multimedia.nl.eu.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2064&Itemid=2
Post by: DaveS on 05/12/2007 08:28 am
Quote
MarkD - 12/5/2007 5:26 AMJust wait and check the NASA TV Live Events schedule: http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/MM_NTV_Breaking.html
Given the time, will it be shown LIVE on the public channel? I ask as I wish to record it, being a shuttle buff. :)
Post by: MKremer on 05/12/2007 09:38 am
Quote
Chris Bergin - 8/5/2007 9:45 PM
Rounded up the info on L2 today:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5095
The likihood this will be a new looking ET-124 comes from MAF sources who claim it won't rollout with the repaired areas showing. We'll see, but the final sprays certainly suggest this is possible too.
Just wondering why your sources would suggest this when everything we know about the foam and the reason for the changing color prove otherwise (not to mention yesterday's conference took pains to state that this tank would look quite different and the repairs would definitely be noticeable.)
Post by: ShuttleDiscovery on 05/12/2007 11:44 am
Post by: mkirk on 05/12/2007 03:24 pm
As most of you heard yesterday, the current plan is to rollout to the pad on Tuesday morning.
Call to Stations for Rollout has been scheduled for 12:01 am eastern time, with first motion targeted for 4:00 am.
Mark Kirkman
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/12/2007 03:27 pm
Post by: mkirk on 05/12/2007 03:29 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 12/5/2007 10:27 AM
No, they said the 16th yesterday. We've been trying to confirm Tuesday as the new date.
Actually Mike Lienbach said they wanted to Roll early (i.e. Tuesday) but it would only occur if the platform retracts occured over the weakend. They will know for sure if Tuesday can be done sometime late tomorrow. Current processing schedule shows Tuesday at this time.
Mark Kirkman
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/12/2007 03:40 pm
"Call to stations brief 850214 STS117 rollout planned for 0001 Tuesday, May 14th with first motion 04:00 Tuesday. "
Tuesday's the 15th (which is what confused me as it looked like a two day jump at first look) ;)
Post by: mkirk on 05/12/2007 03:48 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 12/5/2007 10:40 AM
"Call to stations brief 850214 STS117 rollout planned for 0001 Tuesday, May 14th with first motion 04:00 Tuesday. "
I'm not sure what he said, but it should read "A5214" which is the OMI document for Rollout.
Mark Kirkman
Post by: shuttlefan on 05/13/2007 12:31 am
Quote
Chris Bergin - 12/5/2007 10:40 AM
I've been thrown by the guy who's reading this out over the phone:
"Call to stations brief 850214 STS117 rollout planned for 0001 Tuesday, May 14th with first motion 04:00 Tuesday. "
Tuesday's the 15th (which is what confused me as it looked like a two day jump at first look) ;)
So they are now targetting 4:00am Tuesday?
Post by: Jackson on 05/13/2007 02:14 am
Post by: shuttlefan on 05/13/2007 02:35 pm
Post by: DaveS on 05/13/2007 02:37 pm
Quote
shuttlefan - 13/5/2007 4:35 PMNo. That is done on the day of the rollout.
Have they moved the crawler under the launch platform yet?
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/13/2007 03:02 pm
Platform retracts started this morning in preparation for call to stations 850214 (As Mark states, this should actually be A5214) Which is the shuttle vehicle transfer to the pad. This will occur Tuesday morning."
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/13/2007 03:10 pm
At some point during the pad latest thread, we'll have a seperate thread for launch weather - likely about two weeks prior to the NET June 8 launch target - which will be RDale's (Rob) charge, who is our resident expert meteorologist.
Post by: Mark Dave on 05/13/2007 05:58 pm
Post by: DaveS on 05/13/2007 06:12 pm
Quote
MarkD - 13/5/2007 7:58 PMIt's still weekend you know! We'll know for sure by this time tommorow.
I don't think the rollout will be seen on the public tv channel as I can't see anything about it on the BreakingNews page for NASA TV.
Post by: rdale on 05/13/2007 10:22 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 13/5/2007 11:10 AM
we'll have a seperate thread for launch weather - likely about two weeks prior to the NET June 8 launch target - which will be RDale's (Rob) charge
Early outlook - partly fair with a chance of not fair...
Post by: astrobrian on 05/14/2007 04:28 am
Post by: DaveS on 05/14/2007 12:00 pm
Quote
astrobrian - 14/5/2007 6:28 AMThey won't. They have rolloed out in very thick fog before with the most notable one being the STS-6 rollout of Challenger.
And a slight hint of fire smoke for texture too. Hopefully those don't wreak havoc with Rollout
Latest exposure forecast for the rollout. Doesn't look too good with the chances of thunderstorms as the rules state that the Crawler must be stopped if lightning is detected within 20 miles of it no matter where the Crawler is on the crawlerway.
The second one shows the exposure forecast for Monday.
Post by: DaveS on 05/14/2007 01:16 pm
Post by: Mark Nguyen on 05/14/2007 03:09 pm
Mark
Post by: DaveS on 05/14/2007 03:14 pm
Quote
Mark Nguyen - 14/5/2007 5:09 PMBeats me. No news on this yet.
Awesome! Will NASA TV Have a schedule release today?
Mark
Post by: rdale on 05/14/2007 03:44 pm
Quote
Mark Nguyen - 14/5/2007 11:09 AM
Will NASA TV Have a schedule release today?
NASA TV releases a schedule every weekday around noon ET. Watch the website for more, or just set your alarm to wake you up and watch on the webcams. I don't think you'll notice much speed difference ;>
Regarding weather - are you saying they won't roll out if there's a chance of storms, or just that they have to stop if lightning gets close? Is the system protected from strikes when it's mobile?
Post by: DaveS on 05/14/2007 03:55 pm
Quote
rdale - 14/5/2007 5:44 PMNo protection whatsoever against lightning strikes during rollouts/rollbacks. And yes, they won't roll if there's a chance of lightning during the roll.
Regarding weather - are you saying they won't roll out if there's a chance of storms, or just that they have to stop if lightning gets close? Is the system protected from strikes when it's mobile?
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/14/2007 03:57 pm
Post by: collectSPACE on 05/14/2007 04:16 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 14/5/2007 10:57 AMKSC PAO and NASA.gov (as of 11:00 am EDT) now say first motion is at 4:00 am.
Rollout on track for 00:01 Tuesday, that's 5:01am UK time.
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/14/2007 04:32 pm
Post by: DaveS on 05/14/2007 04:43 pm
Quote
collectSPACE - 14/5/2007 6:16 PMHey Rob, couldn't ask KSC PAO if they plan to have NASA TV coverage of the roll assuming a 1st motion of 4 am EDT?QuoteChris Bergin - 14/5/2007 10:57 AMKSC PAO and NASA.gov (as of 11:00 am EDT) now say first motion is at 4:00 am.
Rollout on track for 00:01 Tuesday, that's 5:01am UK time.
Thanks!
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/14/2007 05:38 pm
Post by: Mark Nguyen on 05/14/2007 05:41 pm
I wonder if that means the crew who'll be supervising the rollout get to go home early tonight...
Mark
Post by: DaveS on 05/14/2007 05:48 pm
Quote
Mark Nguyen - 14/5/2007 7:41 PMYes, thanks for the answer Chris! If my rollout simulations are correct, Atlantis should be about halfway to the crawlerway junction where it splits to both 39A and B when the live coverage starts.
Great, thanks!
This is assuming a 4 am start.
Post by: rdale on 05/14/2007 06:24 pm
Quote
Chris Bergin - 14/5/2007 1:38 PM
NASA TV will have live coverage from 6:30am EST.
More likely 6:30am EDT ;>
Post by: DaveS on 05/14/2007 06:30 pm
Quote
rdale - 14/5/2007 8:24 PMRob, what kind of weather do you see for tommorow? Any hope of the rain letting up?QuoteChris Bergin - 14/5/2007 1:38 PM
NASA TV will have live coverage from 6:30am EST.
More likely 6:30am EDT ;>
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/14/2007 06:42 pm
Post by: Mark Dave on 05/14/2007 08:06 pm
Post by: DaveS on 05/14/2007 08:14 pm
Quote
MarkD - 14/5/2007 10:06 PMThat was only because the roll happened on the same day as the STS-117/13A and THEMIS preflight briefings.
I just hope they show the whole thing, instead of it cut up into bits like it was last time.
As the only event scheduled in for Tuesday is the Progress M-60 docking to ISS at 12:30 am EDT, it won't get cut up.
Post by: Mark Dave on 05/14/2007 08:27 pm
So early tomorrow is it huh? :)
This should be interesting given the new look the ET will have. The nose of the tank has a white band of new foam instead of the rust colored tone it used to have, and the new patchwork on the rest of the tank.
Any new photos of the ET cleaned up to go?
Post by: STS-500Cmdr on 05/14/2007 08:58 pm
Post by: johng on 05/14/2007 09:19 pm
Jeez, 3 weeks to launch, and somebody decides to roll out in the middle of the night? Why not during daylight so us KSC ham'n'eggers can see? (sorry, been here since Jan. and haven't seen a launch yet.) What drives the early morning roll? First time -117 went to the pad, start time was 7AM.
Also:
Quote
astrobrian - 14/5/2007 12:28 AM
And a slight hint of fire smoke for texture too. Hopefully those don't wreak havoc with Rollout
Last week the smoke was solid. When I drove by the VAB, they were moving an MLP back from pad B. They had all the 'running' lights on. Moving thru the blowing smoke looked like a sandcrawler scene from Star Wars. Jawas could have come out and offered me a good used droid. I should have stopped for a picture. Quite surreal.
Post by: DaveS on 05/14/2007 10:05 pm
Edit:
From a technical standpoint, does everything look good for 4 am roll to the pad?
Post by: Chris Bergin on 05/14/2007 10:34 pm
Closing the thread and moving to the rollout updates: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=7916&posts=1&start=1