Author Topic: STS-124 Processing Latest (Read 117259 times)

nathan.moeller · « **Reply #240 on:** 04/01/2008 07:48 pm »

Quote

psloss - 1/4/2008 2:16 PM

Quote
nathan.moeller - 1/4/2008 3:10 PM

Not sure why they'd change it. I could see them docking to PMA-3 under Node 3 on STS-133 for the heck of it, but we know that isn't the way things are done at NASA (though it would be awesome to see).
They aren't changing it.

I know they aren't. I was trying to understand why someone would think they would. Sorry for the mix-up.

erioladastra · « **Reply #241 on:** 04/02/2008 12:57 am »

"The reason it's taken days is due to their wish to ensure JAXA PAO had a heads up of the announcement."

The real reason was to wait until the Japanese budget was passed.

March 31 is NET, it is likely to slip a bit beyond that (few days).

erioladastra · « **Reply #242 on:** 04/02/2008 12:59 am »

"I could see them docking to PMA-3 under Node 3 on STS-133 "

Check out the Node 3 thread in ISS. PMA3 will not be attached to Node 3 (which will now be on Node 1 port with Cupola on its nadir port).

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #243 on:** 04/02/2008 01:19 am »

Quote

erioladastra - 2/4/2008 1:57 AM

"The reason it's taken days is due to their wish to ensure JAXA PAO had a heads up of the announcement."

The real reason was to wait until the Japanese budget was passed.

March 31 is NET, it is likely to slip a bit beyond that (few days).

Yeah, no contingecy days. They've managed it before..but I am writing that up in the latest article (John Shannon's comments).

Speaking of which, on the delay to the NET May 31 announcement, he said:

"JAXA asks that if a change is made, NASA not release the new date before Monday, so they can coordinate with their public affairs office. NASA plans to release the revised date on Monday." so that's an added element you've noted there with the Japanese budget.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #244 on:** 04/02/2008 02:42 am »

And I've written that article up:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5393

Lee Jay · « **Reply #245 on:** 04/02/2008 02:51 am »

Good solid article, Chris. Nice summary of where they are.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #246 on:** 04/02/2008 04:11 am »

Quote

Lee Jay - 2/4/2008 3:51 AM

Good solid article, Chris. Nice summary of where they are.

Thanks. Really enjoy writing about processing :cool:

Chandonn · « **Reply #247 on:** 04/02/2008 05:32 pm »

Quote

Chris Bergin - 1/4/2008 12:11 AM

That's really enjoy writing about processing :cool:

And to think they say Brits speak a completely different and harder to understand version of English than we Yanks

janmb · « **Reply #248 on:** 04/03/2008 03:13 pm »

Quote

Chris Bergin - 7/11/2007 11:53 PM

Discovery will be carrying JEM PM with JEM RMS.

wow, didn't realize the arm was being launched with the module, assumed that was to be part of the exposed facility launch next year.

Do we have any info on how the arm will be stowed for launch?

Will it be attached to the PM at its normal mounting point, or mounted separately in the PLB?

janmb · « **Reply #249 on:** 04/03/2008 03:14 pm »

Quote

psloss - 8/11/2007 12:22 AM

Overall, not close to Chandra/AXAF + IUS, but that went to 28.5. To 51.6 it's in the ballpark of the power modules (P3/P4 or S3/S4), but not quite as heavy/massive at launch.

Chandra, wasn't that the STS-93 launch, with the LOX cutoff right before MECO?

janmb · « **Reply #250 on:** 04/03/2008 03:16 pm »

Quote

Lee Jay - 8/11/2007 3:56 AM
Found it! (L2 is a bit like drinking from a fire hose).

That's possibly the best description of L2 ever

anik · « **Reply #251 on:** 04/03/2008 03:46 pm »

Quote

janmb - 3/4/2008 7:13 PM

Do we have any info on how the arm will be stowed for launch? Will it be attached to the PM at its normal mounting point, or mounted separately in the PLB?

At launch it will be attached to the module.

janmb · « **Reply #252 on:** 04/03/2008 06:34 pm »

Thanks, great image

btw, those "holes" near the airlock... are those windows?

nathan.moeller · « **Reply #253 on:** 04/03/2008 09:24 pm »

Quote

janmb - 3/4/2008 10:14 AM

Quote
psloss - 8/11/2007 12:22 AM

Overall, not close to Chandra/AXAF + IUS, but that went to 28.5. To 51.6 it's in the ballpark of the power modules (P3/P4 or S3/S4), but not quite as heavy/massive at launch.

Chandra, wasn't that the STS-93 launch, with the LOX cutoff right before MECO?

Yep. And Chandra was in the neighborhood of 25 tons wasn't it? The power modules for ISS are in the neighborhood of 17.5 tons.

Bubbinski · « **Reply #254 on:** 04/03/2008 11:37 pm »

I'm very glad ATV docked today. Are there any solid numbers on what kind of CSCS capability it will give? I've seen info in articles and posts on this site that talk about a 3 month CSCS from the STS-124 launch.

Edit to add: I would assume now that CSCS would probably not be the main concern now for the launch date since ATV docked. Am I right?

Fuji · « **Reply #255 on:** 04/04/2008 12:51 am »

Quote

janmb - 2/4/2008 2:34 PM

btw, those "holes" near the airlock... are those windows?

Yes. JPM has two windows.

Endeavour118 · « **Reply #256 on:** 04/04/2008 01:14 am »

with the airlock does that mean that the japanese will be doing EVA'S

Chandonn · « **Reply #257 on:** 04/04/2008 02:50 am »

Quote

Endeavour118 - 3/4/2008 9:14 PM

with the airlock does that mean that the japanese will be doing EVA'S

The JPM airlock is a small airlock, for experiments to be placed outside the lab only (on the Exposed Facility, for example). If Japanese astronauts want to do EVAs they can always use Quest!

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #258 on:** 04/05/2008 04:33 am »

Processing update:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5396

faustod · « **Reply #259 on:** 04/05/2008 08:57 am »

Thank you Chris.
Your excellent article is what I was waiting!
The situation is acceptable. The STS program is always in race to meet the 2010 target line.