Author Topic: STS-124: Rollout and Pad Flow Latest (Read 90462 times)

LostInSpace · « **Reply #100 on:** 05/13/2008 06:30 pm »

What are the timeline impacts from this R&R and retest? Do they still have 6 days of schedule pad?

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #101 on:** 05/13/2008 07:27 pm »

We're following the GPC issue (and I'll update this article to reflect when we get another update):

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5422

But yeah, they do have about five days of contingency (if they worked through the upcoming holiday) - should it be required.

rdale · « **Reply #102 on:** 05/13/2008 08:59 pm »

Quote

Chris Bergin - 13/5/2008 3:27 PM
they do have about five days of contingency (if they worked through the upcoming holiday) - should it be required.

The Flame Trench says 3 days of contingency will be used up for the repair...

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #103 on:** 05/13/2008 09:17 pm »

Quote

rdale - 13/5/2008 9:59 PM

Quote
Chris Bergin - 13/5/2008 3:27 PM
they do have about five days of contingency (if they worked through the upcoming holiday) - should it be required.

The Flame Trench says 3 days of contingency will be used up for the repair...

Two days for R&R and re-test, not three, is what we have.

Launch Fan · « **Reply #104 on:** 05/13/2008 11:39 pm »

Quote

Chris Bergin - 13/5/2008 4:17 PM

Quote
rdale - 13/5/2008 9:59 PM

Quote
Chris Bergin - 13/5/2008 3:27 PM
they do have about five days of contingency (if they worked through the upcoming holiday) - should it be required.

The Flame Trench says 3 days of contingency will be used up for the repair...

Two days for R&R and re-test, not three, is what we have.

Flame Trench concur now and have changed to align with your two days.

rdale · « **Reply #105 on:** 05/14/2008 03:46 am »

Quote

Launch Fan - 13/5/2008 7:39 PM

Flame Trench concur now and have changed to align with your two days.

Wonder where they go that update from

Not to get too excited - but the weather pattern we're in is FAR from normal for this time of the year. The long range should keep Florida HOT towards the end of the month, but the flow isn't likely to product a whole lot of thunderstorm action (given what the calendar says they should be getting as summer starts...)

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #106 on:** 05/14/2008 12:26 pm »

R&R has not yet started. They need a go from the noon PRCB.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #107 on:** 05/14/2008 02:41 pm »

Noon board give go to R&R.

NavySpaceFan · « **Reply #108 on:** 05/14/2008 04:16 pm »

Are the wild fires in the area creating any issues at KSC?

rdale · « **Reply #109 on:** 05/14/2008 05:01 pm »

Something would be posted if KSC ops were impacted. But with none near KSC, I think they're doubly-safe.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=100072999532765452134.000445fb17739a95fa1d9&ll=28.343065,-83.540039&spn=6.765716,9.338379&z=6&source=embed

erioladastra · « **Reply #110 on:** 05/15/2008 01:12 am »

"Fill us in - how would the Soyuz issue delay launch? "

As other have already noted - it is the question on whether we want to launch someone if the Soyuz is suspeect. Folks are evaluating the risk of different types of emergencies (meidcal, fire, etc) that would mean an evac. Folks are looking at options where you have time to divert a shuttle. Everything being evaluated. Question is what, if any results we will have by 1J launch. The Russians are not allowing any one in or data out. Personally, my bet is that we won't have any more info by then and little data. RIght now, nothing is decided, just lots of "what ifs".

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #111 on:** 05/15/2008 01:20 am »

Quote

erioladastra - 15/5/2008 2:12 AM

"Fill us in - how would the Soyuz issue delay launch? "

As other have already noted - it is the question on whether we want to launch someone if the Soyuz is suspeect. Folks are evaluating the risk of different types of emergencies (meidcal, fire, etc) that would mean an evac. Folks are looking at options where you have time to divert a shuttle. Everything being evaluated. Question is what, if any results we will have by 1J launch. The Russians are not allowing any one in or data out. Personally, my bet is that we won't have any more info by then and little data. RIght now, nothing is decided, just lots of "what ifs".

Not to be morbid, but rather than assuming....

In the highly unlikely event there was an evac called on Station, and the orbiter also happened to be disabled - say via a post docking event - at the same time, then we're talking about a capability of saving three souls on the ISS, rather than none?

Does this mean there's currently an unsatisfactory situation with the ISS crew right now - given Soyuz investigation is ongoing? Or does this only kick in on a Shuttle flight rule?

robertross · « **Reply #112 on:** 05/15/2008 01:32 am »

I don't see it as a morbid issue, it's a relaity and fact of manned spaceflight.

All scenarios put into the mix introduce risks for saving a crew requiring evac, whether it be a suspect Soyuz, an orbiter issue, or risks to the crews saving them (a LON shuttle). I'm sure these types of risk assessments have been made by NASA, and to present a LON shuttle option means sending up a second orbiter is an acceptable risk.

Having the recent issues with Soyuz might throw a wrench in the works (as it seems to have), but in the whole risk scenario, the call might be to go for launch and accept that level of risk with Soyuz, a proven design (with a few issues).

catfry · « **Reply #113 on:** 05/15/2008 12:16 pm »

Japanese can't be happy with a potential delay. Wasn't there some mumblings about serious political fallout if sts-123 weren't launched on time back then? Perhaps shuttle management experiences pressure from that side.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #114 on:** 05/15/2008 12:46 pm »

Quote

catfry - 15/5/2008 1:16 PM

Japanese can't be happy with a potential delay. Wasn't there some mumblings about serious political fallout if sts-123 weren't launched on time back then? Perhaps shuttle management experiences pressure from that side.

For what it's worth, there's absolutely zero references to such a thing on documentation and memos (L2) and there likely would have been if that was the case. In fact, all notes point to them being both understanding and very positive about the upcoming launch.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #115 on:** 05/15/2008 01:49 pm »

MDM has been successfully removed. They've found a scratch in the area of removal - checking into that - but the current plan is to install the replacement today and re-test. Final confirmation is now expected on Saturday of a successful conclusion to this issue.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #116 on:** 05/15/2008 08:36 pm »

Quick L2 processing update:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5424

We're going through the FRR presentations, so there's going to be a lot of articles to come.

Stowbridge · « **Reply #117 on:** 05/16/2008 12:04 am »

Very interesting article again! The image you used, is that photoshopped?

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #118 on:** 05/16/2008 12:21 am »

Quote

Stowbridge - 16/5/2008 1:04 AM

Very interesting article again! The image you used, is that photoshopped?

Thanks and no - that's a real flight deck.

rocketguy101 · « **Reply #119 on:** 05/16/2008 12:35 am »

is it available in hi res somewhere? L2 maybe?