Shuttle Questions Q & A (Part 4)

• #480 by psloss on 08 Feb, 2008 11:18
• Quote

  Susan27 - 8/2/2008  7:12 AM
  
  2) Yesterday I heard something about Rendezvous Maneuver NC-1 (bytheway: what does NC stand for?). What is this maneuver exactly about? ANd what is the NC-2 burn they will do today?
  
  3) And what is the TI-burn (Terminal insertion)?
  

  I can't believe I haven't already bookmarked these, but you're forcing me to do so!    Here's a Jorge post to start with:
  http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=8306&start=346#M146609
  
  Edit -- adding more links...we really need an FAQ page...
  
  Here's an overview of shuttle-station rendezvous:
  http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=4273&start=1#M66595
  
  Another answer to a question about NC (phasing) burns:
  http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=6156&start=1156#M197928
  
  
• #481 by Jim on 08 Feb, 2008 11:31
• READ all the Shuttle Q&A.  It is great reading and we are getting to the point where there aren't "new" question
• #482 by Jim on 08 Feb, 2008 11:33
• Quote

  Susan27 - 8/2/2008  7:12 AM
  
  
  1) Is this the way NASA will do it in reality? I doubt because it seems that those maneuvers will need much, much fuel, so there must be a method to rendezvous with less fuel consumtion...
  

  
  That is why it is done this way to save prop
• #483 by Susan27 on 08 Feb, 2008 13:55
• Thanks very much!
  
  @psloss
  
  Specially the second link is brilliant and nice for understanding...
  
  
• #484 by psloss on 08 Feb, 2008 13:59
• Quote

  Susan27 - 8/2/2008  9:55 AM
  
  Thanks very much!
  
  @psloss
  
  Specially the second link is brilliant and nice for understanding...
  
  

  You're welcome, but the thanks go to Jorge; he's the one who took the time to post those.  (I'm just a URL monkey.)
  
• #485 by Susan27 on 08 Feb, 2008 14:21
• When seeing all this "correction" burns (OMS-2,NC1 to 3, later TI etc.) I am wondering what would happen if OMS or RCS fail (e.g. the jet component etc.)? On previous missions I saw EVAs where the crew had to repair even complex parts/systems of the shuttle.
  
  1) But would a repair also be possible for the crew concerning those propulsion systems (OMS, RCS)? Lets say - to make it dramatic - otherwise the deorbit burn would be impossible.. Are they qualified to do those complex (rocket-) engineering tasks with the help of MCC experts?
  
  2) Does the orbiter carries those tools to repair OMS, RCS systems on board?
  
  Thanks very much!
• #486 by Jim on 08 Feb, 2008 14:32
• Quote

  Susan27 - 8/2/2008  10:21 AM
  
  When seeing all this "correction" burns (OMS-2,NC1 to 3, later TI etc.) I am wondering what would happen if OMS or RCS fail (e.g. the jet component etc.)? On previous missions I saw EVAs where the crew had to repair even complex parts/systems of the shuttle.
  
  1) But would a repair also be possible for the crew concerning those propulsion systems (OMS, RCS)? Lets say - to make it dramatic - otherwise the deorbit burn would be impossible.. Are they qualified to do those complex (rocket-) engineering tasks with the help of MCC experts?
  
  2) Does the orbiter carries those tools to repair OMS, RCS systems on board?
  
  Thanks very much!

  
  they don't repair those systems, there is enough redundancy.  44 RCS jets and 2 OME's
  
  
• #487 by Susan27 on 08 Feb, 2008 23:30
• Quote

  Jim - 8/2/2008  9:32 AM
  
  they don't repair those systems, there is enough redundancy.  44 RCS jets and 2 OME's
  

  
  
  Well, lets say...a whole system of RCS fail...e.g. those jets "blowing" up to move the orbiter downwards...what would happen in this case? Or what happens if both OMS (what are OMEs?) fail at the same time due to a big malfunction?
  
  Is it then possible (theoretically) that the actual flight crew can repair the propulsion system meaning they have the needed engine knowledge and the tools onboard each STS flight...?
• #488 by Susan27 on 08 Feb, 2008 23:33
• Quote

  Jim - 8/2/2008  6:16 AM
  
  Starboard wing is the right wing of the orbiter

  
  Do you know the reason for that or is it just NASA slang?
  
  And how is the left wing called?
  
  Thanks again!
• #489 by Jim on 08 Feb, 2008 23:36
• Quote

  Susan27 - 8/2/2008  7:33 PM
  
  

  Quote

  Jim - 8/2/2008  6:16 AM
  
  Starboard wing is the right wing of the orbiter

  
  Do you know the reason for that or is it just NASA slang?
  
  And how is the left wing called?
  
  Thanks again!

  
  Standard nautical and aeronautical terms, not NASA
  
  The left wing is the port wing
  
  A discussion of this is in the flight day 2 thread
• #490 by Susan27 on 08 Feb, 2008 23:41
• A little bit OT (please dont mind):
  
  When looking TV coverage of the MCC (FCC?) room there is this person sitting directly left of CAPCOM. The two guys speak a lot together... What is this job about, is this FLIGHT (director) or "only" something like CAPCOM assistant etc.?
  
  Thanks!
• #491 by Jim on 08 Feb, 2008 23:54
• Quote

  Susan27 - 8/2/2008  7:41 PM
  
  A little bit OT (please dont mind):
  
  When looking TV coverage of the MCC (FCC?) room there is this person sitting directly left of CAPCOM. The two guys speak a lot together... What is this job about, is this FLIGHT (director) or "only" something like CAPCOM assistant etc.?
  
  Thanks!

  
  MCC
  
  It is the flight director
  
  http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/reference/mcc/index.html
• #492 by TJL on 09 Feb, 2008 00:44
• Anyone know where this long range tracker is located?
  Thank you.

  ---

  
• #493 by Susan27 on 09 Feb, 2008 11:13
• Hi,
  
  when watching live coverage showing the shuttle cruising the orbit I recognized that the orbiter is situated Upside-down towards the earth nearly all the time...
  
  Do you know the reason for that kind of positioning? Does that have something to do with the radiators, the TDRS-signal quality or why is it that way...?
  
  Thanks!
  
  Kind regards
  
  
• #494 by elmarko on 09 Feb, 2008 12:42
• Bit of a specific Audio/Visual question that I promised someone on another forum I'd ask about.
  
  Can someone give me some information on the "path" of the signal from the ET tank? And approximately how long after separation the signal can be picked up? Is it coming from the ET to the Orbiter to the ground? Or via a satellite? Or is it direct from the ET to it's destination.
  
  Secondly, the SRB cameras, how do they work? I'm assuming it's solid state storage of some kind?
• #495 by psloss on 09 Feb, 2008 12:53
• This doesn't exactly fit your ET camera question, but here's some existing details:
  http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=9814&start=1#M186120
  
  (I think you'll find more by searching on ET camera here or on Google.)
  
• #496 by kimmern123 on 09 Feb, 2008 12:57
• Quote

  Susan27 - 9/2/2008  1:13 PM
  
  Hi,
  
  when watching live coverage showing the shuttle cruising the orbit I recognized that the orbiter is situated Upside-down towards the earth nearly all the time...
  
  Do you know the reason for that kind of positioning? Does that have something to do with the radiators, the TDRS-signal quality or why is it that way...?
  
  Thanks!
  
  Kind regards
  
  

  
  I think this is so the crew has some sort of visual reference at all times. I also doubt the crew eould enjoy having the belly turned against the ground so they only see the blackness of space .
• #497 by nacnud on 09 Feb, 2008 13:05
• Not sure if this is an ISS or Shuttle question but can someone explain the Shuttles approach path as see below, I presume that is to do with the relationship between the two orbits. IE the shuttle is approaching from below with a perigee lower than the stations but a apogee at the same hight. Burns take place at the apogee to speed up the shuttle and raise the perigee. Therefore each loop is an orbit?
  
  Is this right?
  
  Pic from Ford Mustang in the day three thread

  ---

  
• #498 by Jorge on 09 Feb, 2008 13:07
• Quote

  nacnud - 9/2/2008  8:05 AM
  
  Not sure if this is an ISS or Shuttle question but can someone explain the Shuttles approach path as see below, I presume that is to do with the relationship between the two orbits. IE the shuttle is approaching from below with a perigee lower than the stations but a apogee at the same hight. Burns take place at the apogee to speed up the shuttle and raise the perigee.
  
  Is this right?
  
  Pic from Ford Mustang in the day three thread

  
  Yes. Speed is fastest at perigee so the orbiter is catching up at the bottoms of those loops. Speed is slowest at apogee so the orbiter is falling behind a bit.
• #499 by nacnud on 09 Feb, 2008 13:15
• That was quick, thanks.
  
  

  Quote

  Jorge - 9/2/2008  2:07 PM
  Speed is slowest at apogee so the orbiter is falling behind a bit.

  
  Ok so the shuttle has a higher apogee than the station then I suppose to help manage the rate of approach. Is a (small) burn at perigee is needed to lower this?