STS-120 Press Kit Released

[ArielGold]

The STS-120 Press Kit was released today:

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/192719main_STS120_Shuttle_Press_Kit.pdf

[eeergo]

Thanks for the heads-up, one more to read! I still haven't finished Exp16's

[generic_handle_42]

According to page 11 (pdf page 15) the payload for this mission is the S5 truss segment.  

Sombody made a mistake!

[joh]

Thanks. But have a look on page 15:
Payloads: Integrated Truss Segment (ITS) – Starboard 5 (S5) ;-)

edit: too late

[jcm]

Here's what's in the STS-120 payload bay as far as I know right now;
those at KSC/JSC who know  better, feel free to fill in corrections. (As
usual, frustrated at the lack of detail in the press kit...)

Bay 1-2
- Orbiter Docking System
     Mass about 1800 kg empty.
     Contains two EMUs, serial numbers not yet known

Bay 3 port
- SPDU (Station Power Distribution Unit) for OBSS,
  on APC (Adaptive Payload Carrier).
  Small sidewall payload, mass around 100 kg?

Bay 4 stbd
- SASA FSE (S-band Antenna Assembly Flight Support
  Equipment), this is not the S-band Antenna, just a
  carrier to stash the old S-band Antenna in when they
  rip it off the station. It is on a GABA (GAS Beam Adapter)
  (now called an SPA, but never mind).
  Mass unknown.

Bay 5 port
 - PGDF, a power and data grapple fixture.
   This is a piece of Harmony that needs to be stuck on
   during an EVA.  Mass unknown: possibly around
   33 kg and probably on a 45 kg APC adaptive payload
   carrier.

Bay 6 starboard: MBSU, the Main Bus Switching Unit.
  This is a 238 kg piece of hardware on a 122 kg
  adapter beam.  It is for use in the truss, but will be
  stashed on one of the External Stowage Platforms (ESPs)
  until it is needed.

Bay 7 port: SPDU. Station power distribution unit
   on an adaptive payload carrier. Mass unknown.

Bay 8-12: Harmony (Node 2), a 14300 kg (approx)
  space station module.

And of course, an RMS and an OBSS on the sills. S/N 301 and 203 respectively
I believe...

How am I doing?
 - Jonathan

[generic_handle_42]

jcm - 16/10/2007  5:39 PM

How am I doing?
 - Jonathan

Better than the PAO people who put out the press kit!  

EDIT: Good job, though!

[tesheiner]

On page 54, as part of EVA-1, is described the operation to install a Payload and Data Grapple Fixture on the node. :laugh:

[outward]

On similar note.....is there some inconsistency in power output numbers for the P6 (page 36) , given as 66kw (seems high compared to other info I've read) and the (eventual) total for ISS given as 80kw on page 35?

Do the press kits tend to be sloppy?

[jcm]

outward - 17/10/2007  11:38 AM
 
Do the press kits tend to be sloppy?

If that's a serious question, you haven't looked at many of them before! Yes, the sloppiness
of these kits is a continuing embarrassment. They could really use internal review by someone with a technical background.

[jcm]

tesheiner - 17/10/2007  6:54 AM

On page 54, as part of EVA-1, is described the operation to install a Payload and Data Grapple Fixture on the node. :laugh:

Interesting. I've seen that once for another mission, but P for Power is by far the more common
interpretation of PDGF, so I'm assuming that's another press kit booboo unless I get more evidence...

[Peter NASA]

Our PAO needs a big shake up. That's all I'll say.

[Mark Nguyen]

Aren't 95% of the information in the press kit just recycled from previous editions anyway?

Mark

[MKremer]

Mark Nguyen - 18/10/2007  11:38 AM

Aren't 95% of the information in the press kit just recycled from previous editions anyway?

Mark

I'd bet they have basic boilerplate layouts, and fill-in-the-blank text for some sections, but that doesn't excuse letting a document be published without some kind of complete proofreading/fact checking beforehand.

[generic_handle_42]

Mark Nguyen - 18/10/2007  12:38 PM

Aren't 95% of the information in the press kit just recycled from previous editions anyway?

Mark

I wouldn't say it's that high, but a lot of it is the same - and that's absolutely fine.  In fact, you wouldn't expect some of it to change (take the historical abort cases, for example: not a good day if those have to be changed).  

Since much of it remains the same from mission to mission, that's just all the more reason to make sure the stuff that is new is correct.  I mean, they're not even writing an entirely new document here, only inserting mission specific information.  When you boil it down to only the new stuff, there is no reason that it can't be correct.

Plus, isn't this called a press kit because it's being used by the press?  Does NASA PAO really want the press to be reporting incorrect information?  Isn't part of the PAO's job to prevent that?  Makes no sense....

-Nick-

EDIT: Typos!

[rdale]

While it's a bit of an inconvenience, what press member is going to even mention PGDF let alone the specific definition - Joe Public doesn't care in the slightest how much P6 weighs, or whether SASA is in bay 3 or bay 4...

[Ender0319]

Check out Mission Profile page 11 (it's page 15 of the pdf file)... PAULO NESPOLI... I mean really people, is it that hard to make sure you spell his name correctly?!!  It's P A O L O... as in P.A.O. screwed it up.  "Why must I be surrounded by frickin' idiots?"

[generic_handle_42]

rdale - 18/10/2007  2:14 PM

While it's a bit of an inconvenience, what press member is going to even mention PGDF let alone the specific definition - Joe Public doesn't care in the slightest how much P6 weighs, or whether SASA is in bay 3 or bay 4...

True.  However on page 11 (pdf page 15), the payload is listed as the S5 truss.  At least they could get the major payload correct.  A few errors in masses of things, or what bay they are located in shouldn't matter, but S5 and Node 2 are two very different station components.

-Nick-

[C5C6]

How much time will pass from the undocking of Discovery until relocation of PMA-2 and Harmony? I've been trying to find this answer....

[sts1canada]

C5C6 - 18/10/2007  7:39 PM

How much time will pass from the undocking of Discovery until relocation of PMA-2 and Harmony? I've been trying to find this answer....

The expected time that will pass between these two events is about three days, here is an excerpt  from Bill Harwood's Space Place QuickLook site below for the details:

11/04/07...STS-120...Undocking
11/04/07.............DT to ST in the United States (clocks move back 1 hour at 2 a.m.)
11/06/07...ISS-16....PMA-2 moved to Harmony (Unity port; begins at 1 a.m. EST - 6:00 AM GMT)
11/06/07...STS-120...Landing
11/07/07...ISS-16....Harmony/PMA-2 moved to Destiny forward (begins at 11:55 PM EST - 4:55 AM GMT)

Here is a link to the above information:

http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/currentglance.html

Thanks.

Richard

[jcm]

rdale - 18/10/2007  2:14 PM

While it's a bit of an inconvenience, what press member is going to even mention PGDF let alone the specific definition - Joe Public doesn't care in the slightest how much P6 weighs, or whether SASA is in bay 3 or bay 4...

Perhaps not. But in order to write the story for the public, the press person needs that deeper level of knowledge.
If you're teaching a class, you need to know a lot more than you're telling the students....

[cabbage]

Judging by the launch coverage I've seen, a typical BBC online story (to take an example of the mainstream) will describe the major payload and will possibly name the crew (I'd be surprised if they didn't mention the ESA involvement and thus Paolo Nespoli). They might even summarise the main EVA activities and would expect Nasa's use of it's own abbreviations to be correct!

In general, the Nasa press kit (like press kits from other organisations doing technical things) would normally be considered an authoritative reference in the absence of controversy or a serious dissenting source. Given the cost and high profile of a shuttle flight, it ought to be possible to get it right.

Some in the media will go the extra mile to verify and expand on the kit, but most won't. A press kit full of errors just sets the media up to deliver poor reports and doesn't get you friends in the media when they ask stupid questions at your press conference on account of stupid mistakes in your press kit!

[SimonShuttle]

The BBC don't care, they are too busy saying "Nasa" when it's "NASA"! They only use the AP reports anyway.

[dsmillman]

I would like to point out that the STS-120 NASA TV schedule normally at:

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/mission_schedule.html

has not been released yet.  Does anyone know why?

[cabbage]

SimonShuttle> Without getting too offtopic about the way the BBC reports are produced - as a lot of people read these reports (whatever you think of the BBC) wouldn't you rather that the content was accurate? If NASA are issuing press kits with serious mistakes in, a large number of news outlets will repeat them, or run agency reports which repeat them.

Depending on your view of the media they are either overworked, not interested in space or just plain lazy. In the big picture, a space story may not be seen as important enough to merit spending a lot of time making sense of conflicting information - it's sad but generally if you want the media to run with a story then spoon-feeding it is the soundest policy. There are enthusiasts in the media, but it's safest not to rely on that.

As far as NASA vs Nasa, I think it's a general BBC online style choice - organisations which are usually pronounced as a word have an initial capital only (Nasa, Nato, Esa, Nacro, Umist) and all-caps is reserved for organisations whose abbreviated names are spelt out as letters(CBI, BBC, ITV, CNN, MIT).

[azreddog]

With the launch date only four days away, is the release of the Flight Plan and other Flight Data File products expected soon?

[Chandonn]

azreddog - 19/10/2007  10:41 AM

With the launch date only four days away, is the release of the Flight Plan and other Flight Data File products expected soon?

This may not be as detailed as you're asking for, but it is a pretty good day-by-day overview:

http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/120/120flightplan.html

[Martin FL]

azreddog - 19/10/2007  9:41 AM

With the launch date only four days away, is the release of the Flight Plan and other Flight Data File products expected soon?

There's about 45 of the FDF pdfs, including Flight Plan etc. for STS-120, on L2 for what it's worth. Something like 500megs worth at the last count.

[jmjawors]

tesheiner - 17/10/2007  5:54 AM  On page 54, as part of EVA-1, is described the operation to install a Payload and Data Grapple Fixture on the node. :laugh:

I'm watching the NASA interview with Scott Parazynski.  For what it's worth, he consistently refers to it as "Payload and Data Grapple Fixture."

Maybe "PDGF" is another "RPM." 

[ChrisC]

dsmillman - 19/10/2007  8:07 AM

I would like to point out that the STS-120 NASA TV schedule normally at:

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/mission_schedule.html

has not been released yet.  Does anyone know why?

It's up now.