-
#1360
by
Jim
on 11 Oct, 2008 00:39
-
Question about the ACTS/TOS satellite launched by DISCOVERY's crew during STS-51. Reading all the information available, it sounds like the ACTS tested technology that was later used by companies like DirectTV and Dish Network for small, home-based ground stations. Is this an accurate statement?
yes and different bands (Ka)
-
#1361
by
Analyst
on 11 Oct, 2008 06:30
-
Yes, ACTS was pioneering new technologies later used in commercial applications. The old ATS satellites in the 1960ies and 1970ies did the same. Even before the ATS-6 launch in 1974 going all commercial became en vouge, pushed by companies who were essentially saying NASA does not have to do their business. This and the budget shortfall in the 1970ies let Congress / NASA discontinue the ATS program - a mistake imho. Europe and Japan did technology communication satellites in the 1970ies and 1980ies - the US did not. ACTS was born out of this "fear" of falling behind. It was very successful, but discontinued as well. Developing key technologies is a key task of NASA. In this field NASA is very often prevented from doing so. ACTS does not prove different, it is just an exeption. This is probably be one mayor reason - besides ITAR of course - why the US is falling behind in GEO communication satellite sales.
Analyst
-
#1362
by
TJL
on 12 Oct, 2008 16:33
-
I've been listening to "in cabin" tapes during shuttle launches. I believe most if not all of the conversation is from the CDR and PLT
There is one call shortly after tower is cleared..."LV-LH".
Is that call made by the Flight Engineer or MS-2 on all missions?
Thank you.
-
#1363
by
Danny Dot
on 12 Oct, 2008 16:54
-
I've been listening to "in cabin" tapes during shuttle launches. I believe most if not all of the conversation is from the CDR and PLT
There is one call shortly after tower is cleared..."LV-LH".
Is that call made by the Flight Engineer or MS-2 on all missions?
Thank you.
It is a call that the artificial horizon (attitude indicator) is put in the "local vertical/local horizonal" mode. It is a switch throw made by both the CDR and the PLT. The CDR is probably the one making the call.
Danny
-
#1364
by
Harlan
on 12 Oct, 2008 18:27
-
Yes, ACTS was pioneering new technologies later used in commercial applications.
I interned at LeRC during the ACTS period, in the division that worked on the thing. The satellite was delayed so much, due to various shuttle delays, that by the time it was actually orbited, it was barely pioneering at all. Commercial comsats using similar technologies were already in the pipeline, and ACTS is not really considered, to the best of my knowledge, a great success story for NASA. It might have been had it launched on the original schedule, and certainly a lot of the technologies were incorporated into later satellites, but it probably would have had the same impact had it stayed on the ground. (Please correct me if I'm wrong on any of this...)
Incidentally, the lab I worked in had a giant (for the time) projection television, and when it came to attempt a launch of the shuttle with ACTS onboard, everybody crowded in to watch it. Turned out to be one of the more exciting launch aborts, with main-engine start and a giant cloud of steam, before everything got shut down in a hurry! (They later launched it, of course, but I wasn't around to see it...)
-
#1365
by
Eerie
on 13 Oct, 2008 20:19
-
What was planned for Shuttles before Columbia incident? For how long were they supposed to fly?
-
#1366
by
Jim
on 13 Oct, 2008 20:30
-
100 missions each
-
#1367
by
Eerie
on 13 Oct, 2008 20:41
-
100 missions each
I mean not what was planned when they were built, but just before Columbia. 100 each was planned when they were supposed to fly every week, isn`t it?
-
#1368
by
Jorge
on 13 Oct, 2008 22:08
-
What was planned for Shuttles before Columbia incident? For how long were they supposed to fly?
NASA was planning to fly the shuttle fleet through at least 2020, and possibly longer than that.
-
#1369
by
Danny Dot
on 14 Oct, 2008 00:25
-
Yes, ACTS was pioneering new technologies later used in commercial applications.
I interned at LeRC during the ACTS period, in the division that worked on the thing. The satellite was delayed so much, due to various shuttle delays, that by the time it was actually orbited, it was barely pioneering at all. Commercial comsats using similar technologies were already in the pipeline, and ACTS is not really considered, to the best of my knowledge, a great success story for NASA. It might have been had it launched on the original schedule, and certainly a lot of the technologies were incorporated into later satellites, but it probably would have had the same impact had it stayed on the ground. (Please correct me if I'm wrong on any of this...)
Incidentally, the lab I worked in had a giant (for the time) projection television, and when it came to attempt a launch of the shuttle with ACTS onboard, everybody crowded in to watch it. Turned out to be one of the more exciting launch aborts, with main-engine start and a giant cloud of steam, before everything got shut down in a hurry! (They later launched it, of course, but I wasn't around to see it...)
I was the "Control/Prop" instructor for STS-51. I remember the scrubs and aborts well. The crew sleep schedule was set so ascent and entry sims were at about 3:00 am. Many a night I either stayed up very late or got up very early to support a sim. My wife was very grateful when they finally flew.
Danny
-
#1370
by
Eerie
on 14 Oct, 2008 11:06
-
NASA was planning to fly the shuttle fleet through at least 2020, and possibly longer than that.
Were there any plans for a replacement then?
-
#1371
by
Namechange User
on 14 Oct, 2008 14:21
-
NASA was planning to fly the shuttle fleet through at least 2020, and possibly longer than that.
Were there any plans for a replacement then?
There was no serious effort. Effort really focused on what it what take to fly these vehicles until the end of time.
-
#1372
by
Jim
on 14 Oct, 2008 14:31
-
NASA was planning to fly the shuttle fleet through at least 2020, and possibly longer than that.
Were there any plans for a replacement then?
SLI
OSP
X-33
-
#1373
by
Namechange User
on 14 Oct, 2008 14:47
-
NASA was planning to fly the shuttle fleet through at least 2020, and possibly longer than that.
Were there any plans for a replacement then?
SLI
OSP
X-33
None of those were replacement programs. They were development programs that someday/perhaps could lead to something to replace the shuttle. OSP was an augmentation at best, but none of these were tied to a retirement date of the shuttle.
-
#1374
by
Eerie
on 15 Oct, 2008 19:40
-
Another question. Endeavour was built after Challenger disaster, so I understand that the equipment to build a new Shuttle still existed then. Is it still possible now? And if not, then until what period was it possible?
-
#1375
by
ChrisGebhardt
on 15 Oct, 2008 19:48
-
Another question. Endeavour was built after Challenger disaster, so I understand that the equipment to build a new Shuttle still existed then. Is it still possible now? And if not, then until what period was it possible?
It is not possible now nor would it be needed since the shuttle fleet will be retired soon. As such, the support structures for shuttles at Palmdale were dismantled after the 2010 retirement date was set.
-
#1376
by
Eerie
on 15 Oct, 2008 20:30
-
It is not possible now nor would it be needed since the shuttle fleet will be retired soon. As such, the support structures for shuttles at Palmdale were dismantled after the 2010 retirement date was set.
So it was possible before the dismantle?
-
#1377
by
psloss
on 15 Oct, 2008 20:33
-
Another question. Endeavour was built after Challenger disaster, so I understand that the equipment to build a new Shuttle still existed then. Is it still possible now? And if not, then until what period was it possible?
Even Endeavour was assembled from a set of "structural spares" that were contracted and mostly completed by the time of 51-L.
Here's an old post (May 1996) on Usenet by Dennis Jenkins about the short life of a plan for a second set of spares:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.shuttle/msg/08624dc71bf19418(Google on "structural spares" for more.)
So it was possible before the dismantle?
Maybe, but even if it were theoretically possible, it was very unlikely due to the expense. (Even if the second set of spares had been finished, it still would have cost billions to assemble into an orbiter, as it did with OV-105.)
-
#1378
by
christra1
on 21 Oct, 2008 07:25
-
Hi,
I am looking for a complete AOA-profile (AOA vs. time) during first and second stage of the Shuttles ascent.
Thanks
Rainer
-
#1379
by
Jim
on 21 Oct, 2008 11:16
-
What do you mean? The times during ascent that AOA is viable?
AOA can be a normal ascent with a deorbit burn.
There isn't a standard AOA timeline
P.S. This should be in the shuttle Q&A thread