Author Topic: ISS Solar Array Tear - What Next? (Read 49434 times)

psloss · « **Reply #80 on:** 10/31/2007 07:19 pm »

Quote

Speedracer - 31/10/2007 4:15 PM

What if....

They could use the Station's Canadarm-2 to latch on to the shuttle, then maneuver it to the location via the CETA (sp?) cart, then the shuttle's arm might reach the affected area? I know there's space, room, maneuverability, etc. but still its a thought.

In addition to MKremer's answer, if you could somehow get the orbiter out there, you now have that 110+ tons way out on the end of the truss -- has it been analyzed for putting that much mass out on that kind of moment-arm (work site

? What kind of loads would that put on all those parts (SSRMS, MT, SARJ)?

Ronsmytheiii · « **Reply #81 on:** 10/31/2007 08:05 pm »

With the OBSS being used for the station repair, my thoughts are why not leave a SBSS (Station Boom Sensor system) on the last flight to the ISS? By the last flight, one of the shuttles will be retired with another as a backup besides the primary, so on of the OBSS can be rebuilt. The only problems I see are the sensors being damaged (I am sure that we could have a removable version with some modifications) and also a storage placement. however, I think that STS-120 has proved that it is a valid option to have.

Edit: Whoo hoo, number 100! Put the serious face back on...

nathan.moeller · « **Reply #82 on:** 10/31/2007 08:14 pm »

Quote

Ronsmytheiii - 31/10/2007 4:05 PM

With the OBSS being used for the station repair, my thoughts are why not leave a SBSS (Station Boom Sensor system) on the last flight to the ISS? By the last flight, one of the shuttles will be retired with another as a backup besides the primary, so on of the OBSS can be rebuilt. The only problems I see are the sensors being damaged (I am sure that we could have a removable version with some modifications) and also a storage placement. however, I think that STS-120 has proved that it is a valid option to have.

Edit: Whoo hoo, number 100! Put the serious face back on...

No need for an actual sensor system boom for the station. A boom by itself maybe. But the 'sensor system' in OBSS means just that. It's for sensing the RCC panels. Station doesn't need to 'sense' anything. It could be practical as a repair platform, though.

kevwalsh · « **Reply #83 on:** 10/31/2007 09:55 pm »

One of the fun parts of keeping something in space for long duration is coming to grips with fixing the inevitable problems in situ... viz Skylab, Salyut 7, Mir... and much better to learn how to cope with these kinds of problems in LEO than in LMO ;-)

MKremer · « **Reply #84 on:** 10/31/2007 10:11 pm »

I sure will be interested to hear or read some details about where the parts and pieces used for constructing the new load straps will be coming from.

Norm Hartnett · « **Reply #85 on:** 10/31/2007 10:30 pm »

Quote

MKremer - 31/10/2007 4:11 PM

I sure will be interested to hear or read some details about where the parts and pieces used for constructing the new load straps will be coming from.

Wait for the movie, they will show it in gory engineering detail, A'la Apollo 13.

Ronsmytheiii · « **Reply #86 on:** 10/31/2007 10:34 pm »

Quote

nathan.moeller - 31/10/2007 5:14 PM

Quote
Ronsmytheiii - 31/10/2007 4:05 PM

With the OBSS being used for the station repair, my thoughts are why not leave a SBSS (Station Boom Sensor system) on the last flight to the ISS? By the last flight, one of the shuttles will be retired with another as a backup besides the primary, so on of the OBSS can be rebuilt. The only problems I see are the sensors being damaged (I am sure that we could have a removable version with some modifications) and also a storage placement. however, I think that STS-120 has proved that it is a valid option to have.

Edit: Whoo hoo, number 100! Put the serious face back on...

No need for an actual sensor system boom for the station. A boom by itself maybe. But the 'sensor system' in OBSS means just that. It's for sensing the RCC panels. Station doesn't need to 'sense' anything. It could be practical as a repair platform, though.

The Sensor system would be fantastic for a spektyr scenario, with a hole that cannot be found. If anything happened to a module, they could just scan it to locate the hole and then plug it up. Also, having a lidar and laser camera in space is never a bad idea.

MKremer · « **Reply #87 on:** 10/31/2007 10:59 pm »

A "hole that can't be found" is rather farfetched, especially as a pressure vessel leak needs to be patched from the inside, and wouldn't necessarily correspond to an outer MMOD shield impact location (that is, once you manage to find one).

In other words, if a leak of any type occurs, you don't immediately jump on the SSRMS controls to start looking for outside holes - you find and stop the internal leak ASAP, or close off the affected module, or abandon the station as a last resort, depending on severity.

After a leak is stopped (and assuming it's due to a MMOD hit) it doesn't mean diddly about where an outer hole might be unless you're making the time and resources available to find it strictly for scientific and engineering research data purposes.

ckiki lwai · « **Reply #88 on:** 11/01/2007 10:33 am »

While talking about combining arms, could they combine the European robotic arm with the SSRMS?
It would be an extension of 10m (33 feet), and even if doesn't fit with the SSRMS, they could build a small coupling system.
It could be very useful if they need to reach some of these far spots again.

Jim · « **Reply #89 on:** 11/01/2007 10:41 am »

Quote

ckiki lwai - 1/11/2007 7:33 AM

While talking about combining arms, could they combine the European robotic arm with the SSRMS?
It would be an extension of 10m (33 feet), and even if doesn't fit with the SSRMS, they could build a small coupling system.
It could be very useful if they need to reach some of these far spots again.

The OBSS has no joints and therefore no control is needed. The ERA wouldn't work, it needs power and data

ckiki lwai · « **Reply #90 on:** 11/01/2007 10:59 am »

Quote

Jim - 1/11/2007 12:41 PM

Quote
ckiki lwai - 1/11/2007 7:33 AM

While talking about combining arms, could they combine the European robotic arm with the SSRMS?
It would be an extension of 10m (33 feet), and even if doesn't fit with the SSRMS, they could build a small coupling system.
It could be very useful if they need to reach some of these far spots again.

The OBSS has no joints and therefore no control is needed. The ERA wouldn't work, it needs power and data

And would it be possible to fix the joints of the ERA so they can't turn and then place it on the SSRMS, and free the joints when it is placed back on the Russian part?

Jim · « **Reply #91 on:** 11/01/2007 11:25 am »

just leave it. It is not viable. The ERA is only on the russian segment. How would the SSRMS grab it while it is straight and still attached at the base. They were never meant to work together.

Power is needed to couple. How would the ERA couple the "adapter"?

Ronsmytheiii · « **Reply #92 on:** 11/01/2007 01:33 pm »

Sorry to stay off topic, promise to get back after this. However, will the European arm replace or supplement the STRELA crane already on the Russian segment?

Lee Jay · « **Reply #93 on:** 11/01/2007 01:42 pm »

Would DEXTRE have alleviated this problem, or is it (he?) just too short?

Jim · « **Reply #94 on:** 11/01/2007 01:44 pm »

Quote

Lee Jay - 1/11/2007 10:42 AM

Would DEXTRE have alleviated this problem, or is it (he?) just too short?

too short

bobthemonkey · « **Reply #95 on:** 11/01/2007 01:44 pm »

Dextre would only work with compatible couplings. Think of it as a very large EVA PGT. It doesn't add much length at all to the SSRMS.

Iren · « **Reply #96 on:** 11/01/2007 08:00 pm »

Hello there, first post

I've been asking me something about the so-called power shortage for Columbus and Kibo... ISS was going to have 2 now-cancelled modules (Hab module and Centrifuge module), powering the whole station with the 4 solar array pairs, so why is there a power shortage if the ISS isnt going to have those modules?

Hope someone understands my question. Sorry for spelling, english is not my mother lang

Jim · « **Reply #97 on:** 11/01/2007 08:04 pm »

The Russian SPP was canceled so the US has to provide the Russian segment with some power. Most of the HAB systems are now distributed through out the ISS.

Iren · « **Reply #98 on:** 11/01/2007 08:08 pm »

Thanks, I though that the russian segment, in the current configuration, could get the power they needed by itself... Then why Zarya's solar panels are retracted?

swhitt · « **Reply #99 on:** 11/01/2007 08:09 pm »

Quote

Iren - 1/11/2007 2:00 PM

Hello there, first post

I've been asking me something about the so-called power shortage for Columbus and Kibo... ISS was going to have 2 now-cancelled modules (Hab module and Centrifuge module), powering the whole station with the 4 solar array pairs, so why is there a power shortage if the ISS isnt going to have those modules?

Hope someone understands my question. Sorry for spelling, english is not my mother lang

Iren, welcome to the forum.

The reason for the power shortage is that the Russian Segment was originally designed to have a large solar array as well. But due to reconfigurations, they are now going to use the main array. So the trade was to not consume electricity for the two modules you mention and allow the Russian Segment to consume more.

This equalled out. So if the main array is not a full strength, there is a shortage.