-
#740
by
Chris Bergin
on 01 Feb, 2008 17:35
-
Hose cleared for flight (based on good retract on Monday). Specialist engineer from Boeing (Huntington Beach) will be flown out to perform the assist with the long pole/stick.
Three plans are drawn up on resulting retract.
1) Press to S0007
2) R&R at the pad (one month delay).
3) R&R in OPF (two month delay).
Huge presentation of the situation was presented to today's Daily PRCB, so will probably do another article.
Fuel Cell 2 has been cleared for flight.
Presentations going into L2.
-
#741
by
Lee Jay
on 01 Feb, 2008 17:44
-
Chris Bergin - 1/2/2008 11:35 AM
Hose cleared for flight (based on good retract on Monday). Specialist engineer from Boeing (Huntington Beach) will be flown out to perform the assist with the long pole/stick.
LOL. [Global email at Boeing] If you've had graduate level "poking a hose with a stick", please respond to this email for a special assignment in Florida. Thank you. -- The management. :laugh:
-
#742
by
trlstyle
on 01 Feb, 2008 20:16
-
I'm entering launch fever again! I hope Monday's closing of the payload doors produces nothing of concern.
-
#743
by
Ford Mustang
on 01 Feb, 2008 20:54
-
trlstyle - 1/2/2008 4:16 PM
I'm entering launch fever again! I hope Monday's closing of the payload doors produces nothing of concern.
Has been cleared for flight.
-
#744
by
DaveS
on 01 Feb, 2008 21:12
-
Ford Mustang - 1/2/2008 10:54 PM
trlstyle - 1/2/2008 4:16 PM
I'm entering launch fever again! I hope Monday's closing of the payload doors produces nothing of concern.
Has been cleared for flight.
On the condition the hose retracts nicely into it's box. If it don't, no launch.
-
#745
by
CTdave
on 01 Feb, 2008 22:01
-
Is that hose steel braided? If so, it might not be that easy to "poke" into place. I've worked with aircraft steel braid hoses before & once they have been kinked, they are not that easy to straighten out
-
#746
by
Chris Bergin
on 01 Feb, 2008 22:05
-
CTdave - 1/2/2008 11:01 PM
Is that hose steel braided? If so, it might not be that easy to "poke" into place. I've worked with aircraft steel braid hoses before & once they have been kinked, they are not that easy to straighten out
Still going through the large L2 presentation from this afternoon for the purpose of another article (previewing the retract, which is vital. That goes wrong, no launch)...but this might help you from one of the images in that presentation:
-
#747
by
sts1canada
on 02 Feb, 2008 00:08
-
The first revision of the STS-122 NASA-TV preflight & flight TV schedule is now posted at this link below in PDF and XLS formats from NASA.gov; this schedule will be updated during the STS-122 flight as event times change as needed.
http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/mission_schedule.htmlRichard
-
#748
by
sts1canada
on 02 Feb, 2008 00:27
-
The STS-122 press kit has now been revised and updated with the February 7 launch date & current mission time line information and it is posted here at the Nasa.gov site:
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/203212main_sts122_presskit2.pdfIt is about 5.5 MB and it is a faster PDF file to scan through & view compared to the first revision of this press kit released in late November 2007 which was 14.5 MB in size!
Richard
-
#749
by
sts1canada
on 02 Feb, 2008 00:36
-
-
#750
by
ChrisC
on 02 Feb, 2008 02:07
-
Excellent links, thanks sts1canada! Nice to see everything spooling back up into launch posture again.
And you currently have 666 posts. You should correct that
-
#751
by
jacqmans
on 02 Feb, 2008 03:10
-
Mission: STS-122 - 24th International Space Station Flight - Columbus
laboratory
Vehicle: Atlantis (OV-104)
Location: Launch Pad 39A
Launch Date: Feb. 7
Crew: Frick, Poindexter, Schlegel, Eyharts, Love, Melvin, Walheim
Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles
Launch Pad 39A
- Launch countdown preparations continue.
- Call to stations is scheduled for Feb. 4 at 4:30 p.m.
- Payload bay door radiator retract hose issue fix under way
- Hose located on starboard aft
- X-rays show hose is in good condition and no leaks were detected
- Engineers designed tool to guide flex hose back into storage box
- Technician performing work tested the method Thursday with success
- Payload bay doors scheduled to close using method on Sunday
- Orbiter aft closeout was completed Thursday
- Leak check was performed at the purge port of fuel cell No. 2, where
no leaks were detected
- Flight crew stow operations were conducted
-
#752
by
Lawntonlookirs
on 02 Feb, 2008 13:56
-
Launch fever. Lets all hope that the hose issue is taken care of on Monday. This may have been in a previous thread, but if they are having the hose problem now, what happens when they are prepairing to land and close the doors. What if the same kink occurs then?
-
#753
by
psloss
on 02 Feb, 2008 14:19
-
Lawntonlookirs - 2/2/2008 9:56 AM
Launch fever. Lets all hope that the hose issue is taken care of on Monday. This may have been in a previous thread, but if they are having the hose problem now, what happens when they are prepairing to land and close the doors. What if the same kink occurs then?
Details can be found by reading the stories published on this site. Chris posted details about in-flight mitigation possibilities in a story here; he also posted in this thread with links:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=11113&start=706#M236698
-
#754
by
JohnV
on 02 Feb, 2008 14:23
-
Lawntonlookirs - 2/2/2008 8:56 AM
Launch fever. Lets all hope that the hose issue is taken care of on Monday. This may have been in a previous thread, but if they are having the hose problem now, what happens when they are prepairing to land and close the doors. What if the same kink occurs then?
I believe it is a non-issue. Once the doors are closed for landing, the radiators are not used. Even if the kink was bad enough to restrict flow at that point, the system is isolated and poses no risk or problem.
At launch, as I understand it, the concern is the 'loop' of the kink vibrating enough to cause a leak. And even if it does leak, it is not a safety of flight issue. Reduced cooling would perhaps force them to land early, but would not endanger the crew.
From what I have read here, I gather that Discovery flew at least 2 flights with a similar problem and never had a leak or other problem. That hose has been removed, put through door cycles, tested in other ways, and it still does not leak.
I don't think it is Launch Fever as you put it. Rather this is just one of those nagging problems that you wish weren't there, but are not a reason to postpone a trip. Like a worn out windshield wiper on your car; it is an irritation that you know might force you to cut a drive short to get a new one, but you go anyway because it probably won't be an issue.
-
#755
by
psloss
on 02 Feb, 2008 14:52
-
JohnV - 2/2/2008 10:23 AM
I believe it is a non-issue. Once the doors are closed for landing, the radiators are not used. Even if the kink was bad enough to restrict flow at that point, the system is isolated and poses no risk or problem.
At launch, as I understand it, the concern is the 'loop' of the kink vibrating enough to cause a leak. And even if it does leak, it is not a safety of flight issue. Reduced cooling would perhaps force them to land early, but would not endanger the crew.
The success of each mission may not be as high a priority as crew safety, but it is critical at this point in time. If they had to isolate a coolant loop early and come home with the payload, that's a mission that would have to be flown twice. At least currently there's no plans to buy more tanks and if a mission is aborted it cuts into fixed hardware reserves.
-
#756
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Feb, 2008 15:04
-
Can't believe someone said launch fever (though I'm not sure of the context in which it was posted), when the one thing you should learn from being on this site is to know just how much goes into ensuring every element of the vehicle is safe to fly before they proceed. Of course, everyone's entitled to their opinion.
Anyhoo, I'll be writing up the excellent presentation from yesterday's PRCB as a lead up to Monday's PLBD closure and hopefully that will show anyone who thinks they are just brushing this issue under the carpet that it's anything but.
-
#757
by
Jim
on 02 Feb, 2008 15:05
-
Don't forget landing with Columbus. Maybe not a safety issue but a reflight one
-
#758
by
Jim
on 02 Feb, 2008 15:10
-
JohnV - 2/2/2008 10:23 AM
From what I have read here, I gather that Discovery flew at least 2 flights with a similar problem and never had a leak or other problem. That hose has been removed, put through door cycles, tested in other ways, and it still does not leak.
I don't think it is Launch Fever as you put it. Rather this is just one of those nagging problems that you wish weren't there, but are not a reason to postpone a trip. Like a worn out windshield wiper on your car; it is an irritation that you know might force you to cut a drive short to get a new one, but you go anyway because it probably won't be an issue.
Where I have I heard that logic before?
Many earlier shuttles experienced O-ring erosion and never had any problems
Many Orbiters experienced debris hits and never had any problems.
Care to revise your statement?
-
#759
by
Jim
on 02 Feb, 2008 15:12
-
Lawntonlookirs - 2/2/2008 9:56 AM
Launch fever. Lets all hope that the hose issue is taken care of on Monday. This may have been in a previous thread, but if they are having the hose problem now, what happens when they are prepairing to land and close the doors. What if the same kink occurs then?
No problem because they are landing
