Author Topic: STS-124: Rollout and Pad Flow Latest (Read 90464 times)

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #120 on:** 05/16/2008 12:41 am »

I'll copy it here. Just trying to find the hi res version....

There's another similar one here:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/photos/show-album.asp?albumid=1&photoid=2

Ford Mustang · « **Reply #121 on:** 05/16/2008 12:58 am »

NASA has a page of twelve images of glass cockipts, but I do not see the one you used in the article, Chris.

http://oea.larc.nasa.gov/news_rels/2000/GCTHUMBNAILS.HTML

[small]Click the image to make it larger (high resolution)[/small]

ChrisC · « **Reply #122 on:** 05/16/2008 03:27 am »

Quote

Chris Bergin - 15/5/2008 4:36 PM
Quick L2 processing update:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5424

From the beginning of the article:
"the on-time delivery requirement of the CO2 scrubber [has] previously been reported".

Can someone point me to that report? If this is about something besides the ISS freon contamination, for which they were briefly using the CO2 scrubbers, I don't what you're talking about. I scanned the last 3 Discovery articles (specifically, I searched for "CO2") and came up empty ...

James Lowe1 · « **Reply #123 on:** 05/16/2008 03:47 am »

I think Chris has gotten ahead of himself. It's L2, mentioned in a standup report, then again a few more times and now in FRR. But I think he didn't actually mention it in an article. Bill Harwood's mentioned it recently in his latest status update.

http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/current.html

rdale · « **Reply #124 on:** 05/16/2008 04:27 am »

Quote

ChrisC - 15/5/2008 11:27 PM

If this is about something besides the ISS freon contamination, for which they were briefly using the CO2 scrubbers, I don't what you're talking

It's the CDRA scrubber on the US hail. In the press conferences last week, they mentioned wanting to swap one out and wanting the station side to get it ready to load on the shuttle by May 28th as I recall.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #125 on:** 05/16/2008 12:02 pm »

Oops on the CDRA bed

But yeah, Bill Harwood's got that in the link above, so all is good.

MDM now in retesting. We'll know if all is well with that by tomorrow.

Hyperloading picked up again at 1am local.

Good morning Discovery:

gordo · « **Reply #126 on:** 05/16/2008 05:01 pm »

Quote

Ford Mustang - 16/5/2008 1:58 AM

NASA has a page of twelve images of glass cockipts, but I do not see the one you used in the article, Chris.

http://oea.larc.nasa.gov/news_rels/2000/GCTHUMBNAILS.HTML

[small]Click the image to make it larger (high resolution)[/small]

Could be a set up show in the simulator

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #127 on:** 05/16/2008 09:51 pm »

STS-124 Processing update.

Managers meeting over Soyuz fallout and may either delay STS-124, carry out a 6up/7down or 7up/8down and remove the US presence from the ISS for the interim, or go ahead as planned.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5425

TJL · « **Reply #128 on:** 05/16/2008 10:33 pm »

With a U.S. astronaut scheduled to be launched aboard Soyuz TMA 13 in October, would NASA be satisfied with anything short of a normal (possibly unmanned) landing for TMA 12 before it restores its faith in the vehicle once again?

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #129 on:** 05/16/2008 10:46 pm »

Quote

TJL - 16/5/2008 11:33 PM

With a U.S. astronaut scheduled to be launched aboard Soyuz TMA 13 in October, would NASA be satisfied with anything short of a normal (possibly unmanned) landing for TMA 12 before it restores its faith in the vehicle once again?

Who knows. All we do know is in the article.

erioladastra · « **Reply #130 on:** 05/17/2008 12:51 am »

"Can someone point me to that report? If this is about something besides the ISS freon contamination, for which they were briefly using the CO2 scrubbers, I don't what you're talking about. I scanned the last 3 Discovery articles (specifically, I searched for "CO2") and came up empty ... "

One of the CDRA beds will be replaced on 1J. The program wants it up manifested, installed and the old one brought down so it can be refurbished. The priority is so high that if the new bed is not ready, we will delay the launch. But there is 5 days of pad so that is not likey.

erioladastra · « **Reply #131 on:** 05/17/2008 12:52 am »

"Managers meeting over Soyuz fallout and may either delay STS-124, carry out a 6up/7down or 7up/8down and remove the US presence from the ISS for the interim, or go ahead as planned. "

Smelling the wind, I think we will launch as planned.

erioladastra · « **Reply #132 on:** 05/17/2008 12:53 am »

"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."

While L2 is an amazing place, you are naive if you think because it is not in L2 it does not exist.

The Japanese political situation is very, very real.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #133 on:** 05/17/2008 12:58 am »

Quote

erioladastra - 17/5/2008 1:53 AM

"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."

While L2 is an amazing place, you are naive if you think because it is not in L2 it does not exist.

The Japanese political situation is very, very real.

As in basing it on the three JAXA managers we have in there helping. Sure, they aren't going to tell me any different, but until we see proof otherwise that remains "my" for what it's worth (noting "for all I can say") not "anyone who says any different is a big fat liar"

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #134 on:** 05/17/2008 01:02 am »

Quote

erioladastra - 17/5/2008 1:52 AM

"Managers meeting over Soyuz fallout and may either delay STS-124, carry out a 6up/7down or 7up/8down and remove the US presence from the ISS for the interim, or go ahead as planned. "

Smelling the wind, I think we will launch as planned.

Great. Can you say who the big player is with this all? Astronaut Office? Documentation isn't giving clues, but that seems to be the one place "others" are mentioning a lot.

Norm Hartnett · « **Reply #135 on:** 05/17/2008 01:23 am »

There was mention on this site last year that the Japanese government had passed a law that required Japanese withdrawal from the ISS if the Kibo modules had not been flown by 2008. I have been unable to find this reference or any other references to this on the Internet.

eeergo · « **Reply #136 on:** 05/17/2008 01:50 pm »

Quote

Norm Hartnett - 17/5/2008 2:23 AMThere was mention on this site last year that the Japanese government had passed a law that required Japanese withdrawal from the ISS if the Kibo modules had not been flown by 2008. I have been unable to find this reference or any other references to this on the Internet.

I think nobody would create an official or officially-commented statement with those terms, unless the situation was so critical as to justify it, and even then it would be really quietly done. However, the exact comment you mention was that Japan would withdraw if none of the modules were flown in 2008, and I suppose with "flown" they were referring to being close to fly, that is, they wouldn't withdraw if the first module was to be launched in January 2009. However, that is not the case since March (JLP is on orbit, and JEM is almost ready)Erioladastra surely has more relevant, insider details.

erioladastra · « **Reply #137 on:** 05/17/2008 09:03 pm »

"Great. Can you say who the big player is with this all? Astronaut Office? "

They are big ones of course - but a number of orgs. And not a done deal yet but I think it will go that way since the Russians are not helping and the odds of an evac low.

erioladastra · « **Reply #138 on:** 05/17/2008 09:06 pm »

"I suppose with "flown" they were referring to being close to fly, "

No, they were on the chopping block even if close to fly. Perhaps politics - ESA was doing the same thing (and by that I mean maybe the govt was bluffing to push) but there were discussion in the diet (which I know I always spell wrong) that they were close to cutting off funding. Note when the announcements were made when 1 J/A and 1 J slipped - very last minute.

Norm Hartnett · « **Reply #139 on:** 05/18/2008 12:04 am »

The mention I saw set the date at the beginning of 2008, obviously that has been extended. I believe the government was concerned that they were spending a huge portion of their space money on equipment that would never fly like CAM and wanted to insure they weren’t just throwing good money after bad.

And other than capitalization Diet is correct.