Author Topic: LIVE: STS-120 Flight Day 8 - EVA-3 and P5/P6 Events (Read 120702 times)

psloss · « **Reply #680 on:** 10/30/2007 11:08 pm »

Quote

Shuttle Man - 30/10/2007 7:54 PM

The one thing I've taken out of today, thanks to this site, is the amount of actual interest in what's happening during a mission. That should be seen as very positive. There have been years where we didn't think anyone was watching, or anyone cared. Now we've got this site, which even gets busy for events such as an ET lift in the VAB. It's a positive shot in the arm.

Good to hear. This site provides an information outlet that didn't exist between touchdown and countdown before; for armchair fanatics like me, this is the way I wanted to follow the program for the last 25 years. (Especially for lifts in the VAB!)

chksix · « **Reply #681 on:** 10/30/2007 11:08 pm »

Has a SAFER unit been tested in space yet?

If this is shuttle Q&A I apologize.

psloss · « **Reply #682 on:** 10/30/2007 11:10 pm »

Quote

chksix - 30/10/2007 8:08 PM

Has a SAFER unit been tested in space yet?

If this is shuttle Q&A I apologize.

It is a Q&A (can this be moved? a little help?) thing -- there were at least two tests on STS-64 (1994) and STS-92 (2000), although I'm not sure the units were the same.

davcbow · « **Reply #683 on:** 10/30/2007 11:18 pm »

Can the boom extension be used with the station arm, if so can the 2 of them reach the tear in the wing?

chksix · « **Reply #684 on:** 10/30/2007 11:27 pm »

That has been discussed extensively on the last few pages of this thread

In short; No

bsegal · « **Reply #685 on:** 10/30/2007 11:36 pm »

Ok, prediction for the day. Don't bother wondering about using SRMS, SSRMS, OBSS and/or SAFER for any possible "repair" of the torn blanket. They won't even try to repair it. Instead, since array as currently deployed is generating on the order of 97% output (if Mike S. is to be believed), expect all the focus right now to be on structural loading analyses of the array as it is. If they can get comfortable with the array as currently deployed for shuttle undock, and stage EVAs to relocate PMA and Node 2, then look for next shuttle mission to include replacement array blanket box with an EVA to jettison the torn array, if there's room in the payload bay to fit one along with Columbus.

Lee Jay · « **Reply #686 on:** 10/30/2007 11:41 pm »

Someone mentioned above that they don't have a spare. I don't know if that's true or not.

TJL · « **Reply #687 on:** 10/30/2007 11:45 pm »

Will this put a higher priority on STS-119 / S6 flight?

rdale · « **Reply #688 on:** 10/30/2007 11:48 pm »

Quote

TJL - 30/10/2007 8:45 PM

Will this put a higher priority on STS-119 / S6 flight?

No.

gordo · « **Reply #689 on:** 10/30/2007 11:48 pm »

My Prediction:

Work on SARJ to see if they can ID problem, R+R maybe on STS 122. R+R on this mission with no training is too big a risk.

They will also attempt to see if they can retract the 4B array to get it to an area where they can work the hang up better. If possible they will try to free the hang - up by cutting the section of hinge that is caught...if it can't simply be release. Of course with the tension released it might just free up on its own.

Columbus can launch, juts not be made fully operational till the major array issues are overcome.

rdale · « **Reply #690 on:** 10/30/2007 11:49 pm »

Quote

gordo - 30/10/2007 8:48 PM

My Prediction:

Don't forget - there's a thread dedicated for predictions... This is more a news/discussion type thread here.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=10542&posts=33&start=1

Avron · « **Reply #691 on:** 10/30/2007 11:49 pm »

Quote

bsegal - 30/10/2007 8:36 PM

Ok, prediction for the day. Don't bother wondering about using SRMS, SSRMS, OBSS and/or SAFER for any possible "repair" of the torn blanket. They won't even try to repair it. Instead, since array as currently deployed is generating on the order of 97% output (if Mike S. is to be believed), expect all the focus right now to be on structural loading analyses of the array as it is. If they can get comfortable with the array as currently deployed for shuttle undock, and stage EVAs to relocate PMA and Node 2, then look for next shuttle mission to include replacement array blanket box with an EVA to jettison the torn array, if there's room in the payload bay to fit one along with Columbus.

Logical,if a spare exists.. and I dont see how the blanket under 70 odd ponds in tension will make this any magnitude stronger to take structural loads of rotation etc..

What I cannot work out is why deploy in such a rush, knowing that there was issues with the guide wires?

rdale · « **Reply #692 on:** 10/30/2007 11:52 pm »

Quote

Avron - 30/10/2007 8:49 PM

What I cannot work out is why deploy in such a rush, knowing that there was issues with the guide wires?

The slow (well, start & stop) deploys in the past were due to stickiness of the panels - these were up long enough that stick wasn't an issue.

There's no reason to assume that start & stop would have made a difference here.

joncz · « **Reply #693 on:** 10/30/2007 11:55 pm »

All good up to the replacement blanket box -- there isn't one. Yes, it's an ORU, but there are no staged replacements.

Edit: Pointed out by other thinking outside the [blanket] box that there are two available giving almost a year's lead time to craft a replacement.

Avron · « **Reply #694 on:** 10/30/2007 11:59 pm »

Quote

joncz - 30/10/2007 8:55 PM

All good up to the replacement blanket box -- there isn't one. Yes, it's an ORU, but there are no staged replacements.

Two on S6

bsegal · « **Reply #695 on:** 10/31/2007 12:02 am »

Quote

joncz - 30/10/2007 8:55 PM

All good up to the replacement blanket box -- there isn't one. Yes, it's an ORU, but there are no staged replacements.

They've got two blanket boxes ready to fly on the mission that will bring up the final truss segment for the port side. Take one of the blanket boxes from there and accelerate order/delivery of a replacement blanket box for the one you'll need to fly up to replace the torn one.

gordo · « **Reply #696 on:** 10/31/2007 12:03 am »

interesting quotes from a recent L2 doc

"The mast may retain only about ten percent of its strength if not fully deployed, depending on where it stops."

So does that mean that if they get the hang sorted and deployed fully, they can live with the small tear?

2.1.1.5 Replacement/Location
The SAW components are designed for on-orbit replacement as needed. Each blanket
box can be removed from the mast canister and replaced. However, the left and right
blanket boxes are not interchangeable.

I wonder if the could pull one from S6, giving enough time for a replacement to be manufactured as S6 is not due till late 2008

Jim · « **Reply #697 on:** 10/31/2007 12:03 am »

Quote

Colds7ream - 30/10/2007 6:54 PM

Quote
STS Tony - 30/10/2007 11:53 PM

Quote
Colds7ream - 30/10/2007 5:48 PM

Quote
Where's Bruce McCandless when you need him?

Now there's a good point - I understand the MMUs are still in storage somewhere?

Probably, why did they stop using them?

They were deemed unnecessary following the Challenger accident... But they'd be absolutely perfect for this!

totally useless for this

Jim · « **Reply #698 on:** 10/31/2007 12:04 am »

Quote

Marcel-Jan - 30/10/2007 7:00 PM

After Challenger, the MMU was judged too risky. Also, the MMU gas ejecta was considered too damaging. According to Wikipedia MMU flight unit #3 was transferred in 2001 to the National Air and Space Museum. "The remaining MMU are stored at NASA (location not known)."

"gas ejecta"? It was only GN2, which is not damaging

Avron · « **Reply #699 on:** 10/31/2007 12:04 am »

For the record.. this is the last image I have of a good ( I don't see any problem) array, just before they brake away