-
#1140
by
TyMoore
on 30 Jun, 2008 20:06
-
Hopefully this hasn't been asked yet, but the Shuttle Q&A is huge...(by the way, Chris, the links to the Shuttle Q&A's 1-3 are all dead...?)
The intertank structure between the liquid hydrogen tank and the liquid oxygen tank is reinforced with 'hat' type stringers, apparently riveted to the skin of the panels...Are the hat stringers on both sides (inside and outside) of the panels to form a 'corrigation' reinforcement? Or are they only on the outer surface?
-
#1141
by
DaveS
on 30 Jun, 2008 20:36
-
Hopefully this hasn't been asked yet, but the Shuttle Q&A is huge...(by the way, Chris, the links to the Shuttle Q&A's 1-3 are all dead...?)
The intertank structure between the liquid hydrogen tank and the liquid oxygen tank is reinforced with 'hat' type stringers, apparently riveted to the skin of the panels...Are the hat stringers on both sides (inside and outside) of the panels to form a 'corrigation' reinforcement? Or are they only on the outer surface?
Outer surface only. And it's spelled "corrugation". LM MAF's official "General ET" image gallery:
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ssc/michoud/MichoudImages/GeneralET.html
-
#1142
by
TyMoore
on 01 Jul, 2008 03:16
-
Thanks for the link to Lockheed-Martin DaveS and the spelling lesson!
The photos on the website were very helpful for another project I've been working. Thanks!
TyMoore
-
#1143
by
brahmanknight
on 06 Jul, 2008 15:56
-
I've read that the Quest airlock on ISS is similar to the airlock on the shuttle. How exactly was the 3 person spacewalk on STS 49 accomplished? By that I mean how did the airlock handle having 3 umbilicals before the airlock was depressed? Or does the shuttle airlock not have connections for umbilicals?
-
#1144
by
Jim
on 06 Jul, 2008 15:59
-
I've read that the Quest airlock on ISS is similar to the airlock on the shuttle. How exactly was the 3 person spacewalk on STS 49 accomplished? By that I mean how did the airlock handle having 3 umbilicals before the airlock was depressed? Or does the shuttle airlock not have connections for umbilicals?
The shuttle only has 2 umbilicals. The 3rd EV deep cooled his suit and went on O2 before the other two. The duration of the EVA was shorter
-
#1145
by
psloss
on 06 Jul, 2008 16:01
-
I've read that the Quest airlock on ISS is similar to the airlock on the shuttle. How exactly was the 3 person spacewalk on STS 49 accomplished? By that I mean how did the airlock handle having 3 umbilicals before the airlock was depressed? Or does the shuttle airlock not have connections for umbilicals?
FYI, discussed previously outside the thread:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=10553.msg205805#msg205805
-
#1146
by
overby
on 06 Jul, 2008 17:13
-
No answers, but this reminded me of what I thought Jim Oberg wrote about regarding a last-minute request to change the timing of the FGB (Zarya) launch to help avoid having to de-orbit Mir...can't remember where his
I think you're referring to the story in
Starcrossed Orbits, excerpted on Jim's web site. The excerpt is Chapter 14 -- Staking Out the ISS Orbit.
To find it I went to Jim's web site (
www.jamesoberg.com) and did a search.
Glen
-
#1147
by
psloss
on 06 Jul, 2008 17:59
-
I think you're referring to the story in Starcrossed Orbits, excerpted on Jim's web site. The excerpt is Chapter 14 -- Staking Out the ISS Orbit.
To find it I went to Jim's web site (www.jamesoberg.com) and did a search.
Thanks.
-
#1148
by
DaveS
on 06 Jul, 2008 21:31
-
Does anyone know when the original ET barge "Poseidon" was retired and the current barge "Pegasus" entered service?
Edit:
Does anyone know the dimensions of the barges?
-
#1149
by
Mike_1179
on 07 Jul, 2008 15:20
-
Only slightly off topic, is another issue I have difficulty wrapping my head around is why ISS's beta angle is a problem for the STS to dock. Without visual aides, or detailed explanations, some of us don't quite get it.
It's been covered here are few times, but the short answer is the ability to balance thermal and power requirements of the stack becomes more difficult as the orbit of the ISS is in sunlight for longer portions of its orbit (higher Beta angles).
Above a certain beta angle, you can't keep the shuttle and ISS cool enough while still providing enough power to the ISS through the solar arrays.
-
#1150
by
tmckinley
on 08 Jul, 2008 17:50
-
Alright, so I'm trying to build a link budget with a very large data rate (like 10 Gbps). When sending this data down to a large dish on the ground, I get a pretty high power consumption (like 10 to 100 kW). I realize that the shuttle uses TDRSS, so I was wondering what the power consumption of the comm system for the shuttle is approximately. I doubt the shuttle uses that high of a data rate, but architecture specifics would be great. Thanks
-
#1151
by
Jim
on 08 Jul, 2008 20:06
-
" The Ku-band system return link consists of channel 1, modes 1 and 2, plus one channel 2, modes 1 and 2, and one channel 3. Channel 1, modes 1 and 2, consists of 192 kbps of operational data (128 kbps of operational data telemetry and payload interleaver plus two air-to-ground voice links at 32 kbps each) plus one of the following selections from channel 2, modes 1 and 2: (1) payload digital data from 16 kbps to 2 Mbps, (2) payload digital data from 16 kbps to 2 Mbps, (3) operations recorder playback from 60 kbps to 1,024 kbps, or (4) payload recorder playback from 25.5 kbps to 1,024 kbps. It also includes one of the following from channel 3: mode 1 attached payload digital data (real-time or playback) from 2 Mbps to 50 Mbps, mode 2 television (color or black and white) composite video, or mode 2 real-time attached payload digital data or payload analog data."
-
#1152
by
Jim
on 08 Jul, 2008 20:12
-
-
#1153
by
shuttlefan
on 10 Jul, 2008 02:05
-
On the Jan.10'86 61-C launch attempt when it was lightning and raining in the KSC area, did they take the count all the way down to T-31 seconds or did they scrub at T-9?
-
#1154
by
psloss
on 10 Jul, 2008 11:04
-
On the Jan.10'86 61-C launch attempt when it was lightning and raining in the KSC area, did they take the count all the way down to T-31 seconds or did they scrub at T-9?
Either the hold at T-9 or earlier. No reason to go inside T-5 minutes if any position was no-go.
-
#1155
by
maxx
on 12 Jul, 2008 14:02
-
I have some questions about the development of the SSMEs.
How far did they pushed the SSMEs during initial testing?
Currently they use them up to 104% of rated thrust (and I have the idea that they can push them up to 106-8%? in case of a emergency. Correct? I can't remember where I got this).
How many tests were run? If available how many did succeed and how many failed.
I've seen some impressive failures in a documentary on L2.
How many test failures were directly imputable to the SSME design? (ie: not due to contamination, human error,...)
Thanks,
-
#1156
by
Jim
on 12 Jul, 2008 20:40
-
They were going to be used at 109%.
-
#1157
by
TyMoore
on 13 Jul, 2008 16:28
-
I was reading about the new 'cross over cable' being used to electrically connect the two NASA Standard Detonator Cartridges on the frangible nuts holding the SRB's down on the Launch Pad. In the past either an incompletely seperated nut or fragment of nut jammed against the stud causing a "Stud Hangup" incident as the SRB pulls free of the pad.
Why didn't NASA just go for an explosive bolt design similar to the unit used in the forward SRB/ET attachmet point?
-
#1158
by
Zpoxy
on 13 Jul, 2008 21:11
-
Well, first, they're not electrically connected. They are now pyrotechnically connected, like you see in those shows about strip mining or blasting for coal. The interconnecting lines are like a ultra fast burning fuse encased in a metal tube. Now both boosters will fire to split the nut even if only one NSI is electrically fired. Pyro's aren't my field so I apologize if the terms aren't correct but I think I'm getting the theory right anyway.
Don't know off hand why they chose a stud over the sep bolt but my guess would be strength, cost and simplicity.
-
#1159
by
marsguy
on 14 Jul, 2008 20:44
-
When an orbiter lands at the SLF on runway 15, why do they deploy the drag chute? It would seem that they would want to end up close to the southeast end of the runway, closer to the OPF.
