-
#300
by
rdale
on 02 Aug, 2010 20:34
-
JimO: Can you use another set of hands out there?
C: No. It's not a manpower issue, it is a choreography issue.
-
#301
by
rdale
on 02 Aug, 2010 20:36
-
J: Arm is single string?
C: If we hadn't had problems, we would run it single string anyways, but have backup string. We don't have that string for this case, but analysis shows we have flight rules in place to run uncooled DDCU's for a certain length of time in critical situations. We know we can do it long enough to get crew to safety, team is analyzing to see if DDCU's would last long enough to actually move the PM through the entire EVA.
-
#302
by
rdale
on 02 Aug, 2010 20:37
-
J: Losing cooling doesn't mean you lose power immediately?
C: Yes, power is still good, just managing heat vs overheating. We know it's okay to run to certain limit which works for crew safety, we're checking to make sure it's okay to use til EVA is done.
-
#303
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2010 20:37
-
-
#304
by
rdale
on 02 Aug, 2010 20:38
-
J: How much life support is left in segment if Loop B lost? 5 days?
M: Not that long due to CO2, but LiOH / etc should give us a few days. Temps would rise but with Russian segment running we would still have time.
-
#305
by
rdale
on 02 Aug, 2010 20:38
-
Sounds like the Big 14 list is on the way
-
#306
by
rdale
on 02 Aug, 2010 20:39
-
My fingers are done. Total weight of PM is 780lbs, they are going to KSC for questions in case someone wants to pick up.
-
#307
by
psloss
on 02 Aug, 2010 20:43
-
Marcia Dunn (AP) asking about when the decision on whether the first EVA can go ahead on Thursday would be...first assessment on where things are will be after today's NBL run.
-
#308
by
psloss
on 02 Aug, 2010 20:47
-
James Dean (Florida Today) asking about the original EVA tasks and whether any of them are needed for STS-133.
Mike says they'll have to think about where that will fit.
-
#309
by
psloss
on 02 Aug, 2010 20:49
-
James Dean asked about EVA duration and the current planning is for the standard 6.5 hour duration for both.
-
#310
by
psloss
on 02 Aug, 2010 20:50
-
Up to HQ; Mark Matthews with the Orlando Sentinel asked whether the plan is to bring the failed pump module back on the next flight. Mike answered that it doesn't fit on the next two flights. It could find a home on the additional third flight (assuming that was approved).
Asked about Russian segment cooling; Mike confirmed that the cooling is independent.
-
#311
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Aug, 2010 20:51
-
Failed PM not coming back on 133 or 134. Potentially STS-135.
-
#312
by
psloss
on 02 Aug, 2010 20:53
-
Ken Chang w/New York Times asking about design life; design life was 10 years. MTBF estimated around 100000 hours, this one was at about 80000 hours depending on how you look at it. The failure was a little early.
-
#313
by
psloss
on 02 Aug, 2010 21:01
-
Tariq Malik w/Space.com asked about whether another spare would be built. Mike said that the analysis based on the mean time between failure numbers was that they would need three spares over the life of the program. (And as already said, they build four spares to provide margin and those are all on-orbit.) They are starting studying a redesign that would have dual pump motors. They do have a development pump that could possibly be brought to flight status.
-
#314
by
psloss
on 02 Aug, 2010 21:03
-
Irene Klotz asked whether there would be any impact to the STS-133 launch date. Mike said they're looking at it.
She asked how important it is to get the failed ORU back since it failed "early." Mike said it would be nice to get this one back to look at how that would affect the sparing philosophy. It would also allow comparisons with other processes that were similar to ones used for this.
If they don't get it back, they can still look at this data point and see whether they need to change the MTBF number and whether that means they need to do something about spares.
-
#315
by
Norm Hartnett
on 02 Aug, 2010 21:04
-
Really good work guys!
Thanks
Edit: Very nice article too Chris!
-
#316
by
John44
on 02 Aug, 2010 21:38
-
-
#317
by
brahmanknight
on 02 Aug, 2010 23:06
-
And this is why I love this site. Great job all around, gents!
-
#318
by
Space Pete
on 02 Aug, 2010 23:08
-
-
#319
by
psloss
on 03 Aug, 2010 00:11
-
