-
#300
by
kimmern123
on 02 Dec, 2007 16:44
-
When is the crew scheduled to arrive in Florida today?
-
#301
by
psloss
on 02 Dec, 2007 16:52
-
-
#302
by
psloss
on 02 Dec, 2007 17:04
-
spaceshuttle - 2/12/2007 12:19 PM
Sheer ignorance here, looking at camera 61, some techs are playing with the tank; I'm assuming that they may be fixing some sort of divot. Any clue as to what exactly is going on?
They were working on it yesterday, too. Not sure why, but maybe another bird was getting friendly with the tank. (IIRC I read that this tank had attracted a bird to perch on it at the pad a while back.)
-
#303
by
spaceshuttle
on 02 Dec, 2007 18:01
-
psloss - 2/12/2007 12:04 PM
spaceshuttle - 2/12/2007 12:19 PM
Sheer ignorance here, looking at camera 61, some techs are playing with the tank; I'm assuming that they may be fixing some sort of divot. Any clue as to what exactly is going on?
They were working on it yesterday, too. Not sure why, but maybe another bird was getting friendly with the tank. (IIRC I read that this tank had attracted a bird to perch on it at the pad a while back.)
Thanks! At this point, the last thing we need is another STS-70.
-
#304
by
ChrisGebhardt
on 02 Dec, 2007 18:48
-
Not sure where to put this, so I'll ask it here. At the presser on Friday, Mike Leinbach said that they would entertain the option to conduct three launch attempts in a row and that they feel comfortable doing this given the launch time. My question is: I thought the consumable status was what drove the luanch attempts and that they prefered to stand down after two attemtps to top off their cryo. So what does the time of day have to do with cryo status?
Thanks in advance.
-
#305
by
TJL
on 02 Dec, 2007 19:21
-
I recall Mike mentioning that due to the "reasonable" launch time, it was easier for his crew to attempt 3 in a row.
-
#306
by
psloss
on 02 Dec, 2007 20:04
-
Trekkie07 - 2/12/2007 2:48 PM
My question is: I thought the consumable status was what drove the luanch attempts and that they prefered to stand down after two attemtps to top off their cryo. So what does the time of day have to do with cryo status?
They are independent factors, and there are likely others.
-
#307
by
galileo
on 02 Dec, 2007 21:04
-
psloss - 2/12/2007 12:04 PM
spaceshuttle - 2/12/2007 12:19 PM
Sheer ignorance here, looking at camera 61, some techs are playing with the tank; I'm assuming that they may be fixing some sort of divot. Any clue as to what exactly is going on?
They were working on it yesterday, too. Not sure why, but maybe another bird was getting friendly with the tank. (IIRC I read that this tank had attracted a bird to perch on it at the pad a while back.)
What you are looking at are 3 minor foam repairs that are being prepared for PDL foam application. What i've been told is humidity is too high to do the repairs today (showers near the pad) but weather is forecasted to be good to get them complete on Monday. The rumor is the damage may be undetected damage from roof material falling on the tank at MAF during hurricane Katrina. This tank, ET-125 came to KSC with open work to evaluate and repair some known Katrina damage a little further up on the LOX ogive while the tank was in the checkout cell in the VAB. Hope this answers the questions.....and yes, a detailed inspection of the tank has been done to make sure KSC didnt miss anything else. Once these repairs are done on Monday, ET-125 will be ready to fly. GO ATLANTIS
-
#308
by
psloss
on 02 Dec, 2007 22:05
-
Thanks for the update.
-
#309
by
James (Lockheed)
on 02 Dec, 2007 22:24
-
galileo - 2/12/2007 4:04 PM
The rumor is the damage may be undetected damage from roof material falling on the tank at MAF during hurricane Katrina.
Every inch of that tank was inspected prior to shipping. Do not listen to rumors.
-
#310
by
galileo
on 02 Dec, 2007 22:37
-
Every inch of that tank was inspected prior to shipping. Do not listen to rumors.[/QUOTE]
Well said James (Lockheed), rumors hardly ever end up being the truth. I know that MAF does an extremely thorough job of inspecting the tank before it is shipped. The truth is there will be a lengthy review of all the photos KSC has for this tank going all the way back to the recieving inspection that occured when it arrived from the plant. Only after that process is complete will it be possible to know where/when the damage occured. That review process will be ongoing well after ET-125 is flown and gone.
-
#311
by
erioladastra
on 03 Dec, 2007 01:36
-
"They are independent factors, and there are likely others. "
Not really true - time of year, and to a lesser extent time of day, affect atmospheric density which affects ascent performance.
The key issue for 122/1E is that for up to 3 days we can still do a fligth day 3 rendezvous and can get the 4th EVA - but each day makes the power down to get the 4th EVA deeper (read 'more painful').
-
#312
by
DaveS
on 03 Dec, 2007 16:30
-
The STA(N945NA) with the STS-122 flight crew has touched down at the SLF RWY15 and is not taxiing towards the parking apron.
-
#313
by
generic_handle_42
on 03 Dec, 2007 16:31
-
-
#314
by
DaveS
on 03 Dec, 2007 16:32
-
The crew is now leaving the STA.
-
#315
by
generic_handle_42
on 03 Dec, 2007 16:32
-
-
#316
by
generic_handle_42
on 03 Dec, 2007 16:33
-
-
#317
by
generic_handle_42
on 03 Dec, 2007 16:34
-
-
#318
by
generic_handle_42
on 03 Dec, 2007 16:35
-
-
#319
by
generic_handle_42
on 03 Dec, 2007 16:37
-