-
#520 by psloss on 09 Feb, 2008 19:04
-
Quote
TJL - 9/2/2008 2:53 PM
Most, but at the very least the two dockings that pre-positioned a module on the orbiter docking system (STS-74 and STS-88) had FD-4 rendezvous.
Of the 9 Shuttle / MIR dockings and 24 Shuttle / ISS link-ups, have all of them occured on FD-3?
Thanks.
-
#521 by ChrisGebhardt on 09 Feb, 2008 19:19
-
Quote
psloss - 9/2/2008 3:04 PM
QuoteTJL - 9/2/2008 2:53 PM
Most, but at the very least the two dockings that pre-positioned a module on the orbiter docking system (STS-74 and STS-88) had FD-4 rendezvous.
Of the 9 Shuttle / MIR dockings and 24 Shuttle / ISS link-ups, have all of them occured on FD-3?
Thanks.
STS-98 (launched Feb 7, 2001) docked with the ISS on FD-2 (Feb
according to the official mission page on the NASA website.
-
#522 by psloss on 09 Feb, 2008 19:22
-
Quote
Trekkie07 - 9/2/2008 3:19 PM
Likely a typo and it contradicts what PAO said today...but I'll go check the FD highlights to confirm...
STS-98 (launched Feb 7, 2001) docked with the ISS on FD-2 (Feb according to the official mission page on the NASA website.
Edit -- yeah, 98 was a FD-3 rendezvous and docking. (And in fact a Progress undocked from Zarya on the mission's Flight Day 2.)
-
#523 by ChrisGebhardt on 09 Feb, 2008 19:44
-
Quote
psloss - 9/2/2008 3:22 PM
QuoteTrekkie07 - 9/2/2008 3:19 PM
Likely a typo and it contradicts what PAO said today...but I'll go check the FD highlights to confirm...
STS-98 (launched Feb 7, 2001) docked with the ISS on FD-2 (Feb according to the official mission page on the NASA website.
Edit -- yeah, 98 was a FD-3 rendezvous and docking. (And in fact a Progress undocked from Zarya on the mission's Flight Day 2.)
Hmm... ok. I'll note that for the furture.
Also, as I was researching that, I came across something else that struck me as very interesting. As we all know, NASA is attempting a 6 mission calendar year for 2008. The last time that was accomplished was in 2001 when Atlantis, Discovery, and Endeavour each made 2 visits to the ISS. The following are the launch dates of the six 2001 missions and the orbiters that flew them:
Feb 7 -- Atlantis STS-98 (first lab module)
March 8 -- Discovery STS-102
April 19 -- Endeavour STS-100
July 12 -- Atlantis STS-104
Aug 10 -- Discovery STS-105
Dec 5 -- Endeavour STS-108
If NASA's current manifest plays out in a fashion similar to what is planned we have/will see the following:
Feb 7 -- Atlantis STS-122 (second lab module)
March 11 -- Endeavour STS-123
April 24 -- Discovery STS-124
Aug 28 -- Atlantis STS-125
Oct 16 -- Endeavour STS-126
Dec 4 -- Discovery STS-119
The similarity in the first 3 launches and the last launch dates caught my attention as well as the fact that a lab module was the first mission launched in both years on Atlantis.
Here's to history repeating itself safely!!
-
#524 by psloss on 09 Feb, 2008 19:50
-
Quote
Trekkie07 - 9/2/2008 3:44 PM
Trivia, but another possible parallel -- the 104 and 105 pad flows overlapped, as is the plan for 125 and 126.
Here's to history repeating itself safely!!
The station is a much more mature complex now (well, and a more complex complex) and they had some SSRMS issues after it was launched on ISS-6A/STS-100 that pushed 7A back a little bit...no need to repeat that...
-
#525 by elmarko on 09 Feb, 2008 20:36
-
Thanks for the A/V answers, Jim.
-
#526 by DaveS on 09 Feb, 2008 20:43
-
Quote
psloss - 9/2/2008 9:50 PM
Not SSRMS issues, but C&C computer problems! Lost all three C&Cs and it took quite an effort by the ground teams to fugure it out in time for Endeavour's undocking, despite it had already been delayed 24 hrs.
The station is a much more mature complex now (well, and a more complex complex) and they had some SSRMS issues after it was launched on ISS-6A/STS-100 that pushed 7A back a little bit...no need to repeat that...
It was even bad enough that the ground control team couldn't even do a simple task like turn off the lights in Destiny!
Here's a good write-up on the subject by Interspacenews.com: http://www.interspacenews.com/interspace%20News%20Web%202/sections/feature%20stories/sts100%20overview.htm -
#527 by psloss on 09 Feb, 2008 21:01
-
Quote
DaveS - 9/2/2008 4:43 PM
Not during 6A, after -- i.e., during the 6A stage. During the checkout period, there was some unexpected behavior on the secondary string. To be fair, it only resulted in a delay of a couple of weeks.Quotepsloss - 9/2/2008 9:50 PM
Not SSRMS issues, but C&C computer problems! Lost all three C&Cs and it took quite an effort by the ground teams to fugure it out in time for Endeavour's undocking, despite it had already been delayed 24 hrs.
The station is a much more mature complex now (well, and a more complex complex) and they had some SSRMS issues after it was launched on ISS-6A/STS-100 that pushed 7A back a little bit...no need to repeat that...
Delay reference:
http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/status/stsstat/2001/may/5-30-01s.htm
Bill Harwood's archive for STS-104 also notes those issues:
http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/STS-104_Archive.txt
-
#528 by mtakala24 on 09 Feb, 2008 23:11
-
When looking at ATV rendezvouz certification materials on L2, I began to wonder if the first ever shuttle-station (=MIR) docking was done directly, or was a last minute abort rehearsed as ATV will do on its demo days, and the real docking done afterwards on the second try?
-
#529 by psloss on 09 Feb, 2008 23:28
-
Quote
mtakala24 - 9/2/2008 7:11 PM
It was done directly. They "rehearsed" the rendezvous on STS-63, although on that flight I believe they did a plus V-bar approach vs. the plus R-bar approach for STS-71.
When looking at ATV rendezvouz certification materials on L2, I began to wonder if the first ever shuttle-station (=MIR) docking was done directly, or was a last minute abort rehearsed as ATV will do on its demo days, and the real docking done afterwards on the second try?
-
#530 by Jorge on 10 Feb, 2008 04:02
-
Quote
psloss - 9/2/2008 6:28 PM
Quotemtakala24 - 9/2/2008 7:11 PM
It was done directly. They "rehearsed" the rendezvous on STS-63, although on that flight I believe they did a plus V-bar approach vs. the plus R-bar approach for STS-71.
When looking at ATV rendezvouz certification materials on L2, I began to wonder if the first ever shuttle-station (=MIR) docking was done directly, or was a last minute abort rehearsed as ATV will do on its demo days, and the real docking done afterwards on the second try?
That's correct. STS-63 did not even have a docking mechanism installed; I believe they used a camera mounted in the Spacehab window to stand-in for the centerline docking camera.
The +Rbar approach was first tested on STS-66 but by that time it was too late in the STS-63 crew training flow to switch, so they stuck with +Vbar. -
#531 by brodo on 10 Feb, 2008 10:09
-
The three EVA MS seem to cross-train for each other, as can be seen by STS-122's 1st EVA. But what about PLT and CDR? Has one of the MS sufficient training to replace one of them, or could either the PLT or the CDR de-orbit and land on his or her own?
-
#532 by DaveS on 10 Feb, 2008 10:34
-
MS2/FE backs-up the CDR and PLT.
-
#533 by ntschke on 10 Feb, 2008 19:21
-
I've always wondered about this and sure someone here knows...
When docked, do some of the members from the shuttle sleep on the ISS? Obviously they have a spot on the shuttle, but curious when they've got more "room" do they have the option to spend the night where they want? I'm sure their days are planed down to minute details but during off-duty times and sleep periods, do they have free roam?
Thanks -
#534 by DaveS on 10 Feb, 2008 19:36
-
Quote
ntschke - 10/2/2008 9:21 PM
Yes. During STS-116/12A.1 Mike Lopez-Alegria became temporarly "homeless" as Suni Williams took over his regular sleeping location in the Destiny Lab.
I've always wondered about this and sure someone here knows...
When docked, do some of the members from the shuttle sleep on the ISS? Obviously they have a spot on the shuttle, but curious when they've got more "room" do they have the option to spend the night where they want? I'm sure their days are planed down to minute details but during off-duty times and sleep periods, do they have free roam?
Thanks -
#535 by janmb on 10 Feb, 2008 19:43
-
sorry if this as been covered before, but couldn't find anything like it...
When standing on the pad, what is actually holding the shuttle stack (carrying the weight and keeping it stable)? Or put even more clearly, at which points is the shuttle components attached to the pad...
Of all the thousands of great pad images I've seen, I've yet to see anything really covering this... The large gray clamps holding the shuttle are fairly apparent, but there's gotta be more weight transfer points than that? -
#536 by Jorge on 10 Feb, 2008 19:50
-
Quote
janmb - 10/2/2008 2:43 PM
sorry if this as been covered before, but couldn't find anything like it...
When standing on the pad, what is actually holding the shuttle stack (carrying the weight and keeping it stable)? Or put even more clearly, at which points is the shuttle components attached to the pad...
Eight hold-down posts, four on each SRB. The ET is supported entirely by the SRBs and the orbiter is supported entirely by the ET.QuoteOf all the thousands of great pad images I've seen, I've yet to see anything really covering this... The large gray clamps holding the shuttle are fairly apparent, but there's gotta be more weight transfer points than that?
Those "clamps" are the T-0 umbilical masts. They provide no structural support to the stack. -
#537 by triddirt on 10 Feb, 2008 19:50
-
Quote
janmb - 10/2/2008 3:43 PM
I'm sure this is in the Q/A somewhere.. The entire weight of the stack (including orbiter) is carried by the SRBs. What you have called clamps are in fact the tail service masts and do not carry any weight.. The SRB bolts are holding it all.
sorry if this as been covered before, but couldn't find anything like it...
When standing on the pad, what is actually holding the shuttle stack (carrying the weight and keeping it stable)? Or put even more clearly, at which points is the shuttle components attached to the pad...
Of all the thousands of great pad images I've seen, I've yet to see anything really covering this... The large gray clamps holding the shuttle are fairly apparent, but there's gotta be more weight transfer points than that? -
#538 by ntschke on 10 Feb, 2008 20:56
-
Quote
triddirt - 10/2/2008 3:50 PM
Quotejanmb - 10/2/2008 3:43 PM sorry if this as been covered before, but couldn't find anything like it... When standing on the pad, what is actually holding the shuttle stack (carrying the weight and keeping it stable)? Or put even more clearly, at which points is the shuttle components attached to the pad... Of all the thousands of great pad images I've seen, I've yet to see anything really covering this... The large gray clamps holding the shuttle are fairly apparent, but there's gotta be more weight transfer points than that?
I'm sure this is in the Q/A somewhere.. The entire weight of the stack (including orbiter) is carried by the SRBs. What you have called clamps are in fact the tail service masts and do not carry any weight.. The SRB bolts are holding it all.That is what I thought...but found it hard to believe. Basically we're talking about something the size of a passenger plane mounted to one side of a stack. Are those bolts and SRBs THAT stable to be able to overcome that imbalance alone?
Obviously yes, but still amazing. Especially when considering it moves 3+ miles and up a ramp (which the MLP comepensates for)...
-
#539 by Jim on 10 Feb, 2008 21:06
-
Quote
ntschke - 10/2/2008 4:56 PM
That is what I thought...but found it hard to believe. Basically we're talking about something the size of a passenger plane mounted to one side of a stack. Are those bolts and SRBs THAT stable to be able to overcome that imbalance alone?Obviously yes, but still amazing. Especially when considering it moves 3+ miles and up a ramp (which the MLP comepensates for)...
Think harder (not being snotty). What happens from T-6 sec to T-0?
according to the official mission page on the NASA website.
