Author Topic: LIVE: STS-120 Flight Day 9 - Transfers, EVA-4 Prep, Continuing Array/SARJ Evaluations (Read 61601 times)

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #140 on:** 10/31/2007 05:22 pm »

"So we have a plan in place. We need to see if we're ready to tell the crew."

Norm Hartnett · « **Reply #141 on:** 10/31/2007 05:22 pm »

Mike answered my question. Running the EVA4 on Friday reserves the possibility of running an EVA5 to complete Solar Array repairs if necessary.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #142 on:** 10/31/2007 05:24 pm »

They'll return to the SRAJ on another mission (or during an ISS stage).

joncz · « **Reply #143 on:** 10/31/2007 05:24 pm »

Quote

hutchel - 31/10/2007 2:18 PM

OK so use the ISS crew from QUEST and use the Discovery crew on Discovery - EVA 5 will be just the ISS crew anyway.... This is about thinking what can work and finding a way to make it work - not about why it won't work and then dismissing an idea.

Lee

Mike S: "This is our priority as a program. We need this array. It could gain further damage if we leave it in this configuration."

ApolloLee · « **Reply #144 on:** 10/31/2007 05:25 pm »

Quote

Chris Bergin - 31/10/2007 11:21 AM

"I just came back from Building 9. We're looking like we have a chance to use the boom without retracting the array. We look like we'll have a way to cut the snag.

"We could insert some wire into exsisting holes. Blanket restraint system for the ride to orbit. So we have a reinfornced strip we could transfer to load to, instead of the hinges."

And upon this statement, how many of us thought back to the Apollo 13 laying out of items on the table, trying to put a square filter in a round hole?

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #145 on:** 10/31/2007 05:26 pm »

SSRMS does not have the reach.

They can't retract the Array.

Plan: SSRMS+OBSS+EVA. (as you know).

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #146 on:** 10/31/2007 05:28 pm »

Mobile Transporter from site 8 to site 3. OBSS out of Discovery, back to site 8 with the boom.

hutchel · « **Reply #147 on:** 10/31/2007 05:29 pm »

Quote

ApolloLee - 31/10/2007 2:25 PM

Quote
Chris Bergin - 31/10/2007 11:21 AM

"I just came back from Building 9. We're looking like we have a chance to use the boom without retracting the array. We look like we'll have a way to cut the snag.

"We could insert some wire into exsisting holes. Blanket restraint system for the ride to orbit. So we have a reinfornced strip we could transfer to load to, instead of the hinges."

And upon this statement, how many of us thought back to the Apollo 13 laying out of items on the table, trying to put a square filter in a round hole?

That's probably what's going on right now - or at least last night - the difference is that there are more resources available with which to deal with these issues. Yes I had that same thought....

ace007 · « **Reply #148 on:** 10/31/2007 05:30 pm »

There is also the Russian airlock which could be used if the 3rd Astronaut used a Russian suit.. Always lots of options but I wonder what it would cost us to use the Russian equipment.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #149 on:** 10/31/2007 05:31 pm »

"With the teams we have involved, I have a lot of confidence we'll do this on Friday."

OBSS will survive, because of high beta.

hutchel · « **Reply #150 on:** 10/31/2007 05:31 pm »

Quote

joncz - 31/10/2007 2:24 PM

Quote
hutchel - 31/10/2007 2:18 PM

OK so use the ISS crew from QUEST and use the Discovery crew on Discovery - EVA 5 will be just the ISS crew anyway.... This is about thinking what can work and finding a way to make it work - not about why it won't work and then dismissing an idea.

Lee

Mike S: "This is our priority as a program. We need this array. It could gain further damage if we leave it in this configuration."

The other option is to put 2 into the Orlon suits - I know they are more cumbersome to work in - just depends on what you need to do..... - So there really are 3 airlocks available on orbit - heck you could put 6 outside if you wanted to - I can't imagine they would do that -but it's possible. Leave one person inside to manage each of the airlocks. That would be something to see!

Lee

Ford Mustang · « **Reply #151 on:** 10/31/2007 05:32 pm »

Just a question here, as I'm unexperienced in things like this...

I'm assuming they are using the middle OBSS grapple. Do they HAVE to use the middle grapple point on the OBSS for grapple? Or would using the main grapple not work, as not enough/too much power?

EDIT: Not assuming anymore, they actually are. Question has been answered.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #152 on:** 10/31/2007 05:32 pm »

See image on from page story http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5271 (hi res on L2) for the grapple image.

Kel · « **Reply #153 on:** 10/31/2007 05:34 pm »

Quote

Chris Bergin - 31/10/2007 1:26 PM

SSRMS does not have the reach.

They can't retract the Array.

Plan: SSRMS+OBSS+EVA. (as you know).

I'm guessing Longbo (Scott) will be the EVA on the end of the OBSS

hutchel · « **Reply #154 on:** 10/31/2007 05:34 pm »

Quote

Ford Mustang - 31/10/2007 2:32 PM

Just a question here, as I'm unexperienced in things like this...

I'm assuming they are using the middle OBSS grapple. Do they HAVE to use the middle grapple point on the OBSS for grapple? Or would using the main grapple not work, as not enough/too much power?

Apparently the SRMS has a power fixture built into it that connects to the fixture you mentioned. If the SSRMS where to grapple there, they would damage it and render it INOP.

Lee

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #155 on:** 10/31/2007 05:35 pm »

"The array is stable right now. So we have time."

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #156 on:** 10/31/2007 05:36 pm »

Dec 6 is preserved for STS-122, no problems with that.

Oberon_Command · « **Reply #157 on:** 10/31/2007 05:37 pm »

I take it that undocking Discovery temporarily and maneuvering to an attitude where the SRMS can service the solar panel is not feasible?

DaveS · « **Reply #158 on:** 10/31/2007 05:37 pm »

Quote

Oberon_Command - 31/10/2007 7:37 PM

I take it that undocking Discovery temporarily and maneuvering to an attitude where the SRMS can service the solar panel is not feasible?

No. Too unstable.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #159 on:** 10/31/2007 05:39 pm »

Fixing the SARJ was not going to happen on this flight, or for a few flights - Mike S.