-
#340
by
generic_handle_42
on 11 May, 2009 18:15
-
Great work. Really was thrown by that transient at T+10 seconds or so!
Got my heart going for sure! Great coverage all, that was my 9th launch on-site, and each gets better than the last!
-
#341
by
kneecaps
on 11 May, 2009 18:15
-
Atlantis trying to get visual on the tank. Go for APU/HYD shutdown...go for everything upto 3-4.
Prelim OMS 2 TIG: 43:30
-
#342
by
psloss
on 11 May, 2009 18:16
-
Nominal MECO. OMS-1 not required.
When will we learn more about the MPS transducer malfunction? I understand that it was related to the engines. Will this affect the mission in any way?
No impact to the mission or the ascent. We may hear something about that at the post launch press conference.
Launch replays coming up.
-
#343
by
kneecaps
on 11 May, 2009 18:16
-
Nominal MECO. OMS-1 not required.
When will we learn more about the MPS transducer malfunction? I understand that it was related to the engines. Will this affect the mission in any way?
Negative....no mission impact from this. (Side thread for explanations?)
-
#344
by
Nick L.
on 11 May, 2009 18:17
-
Replays coming up.
-
#345
by
Jeff Lerner
on 11 May, 2009 18:17
-
Anyone note if the umbilical cameras worked this time ??
-
#346
by
kneecaps
on 11 May, 2009 18:19
-
MCC planning to uplink OMS 2 Targets. No changes to checklist through 3-8.
-
#347
by
rdale
on 11 May, 2009 18:19
-
Anyone note if the umbilical cameras worked this time ??
I think we only noticed off the bat from the lack of flashes noticed from the ET cam after sep. We didn't have ET cam after sep live this time.
-
#348
by
elmarko
on 11 May, 2009 18:20
-
Can someone please explain spreading for me? I've always forgotten to ask.
-
#349
by
psloss
on 11 May, 2009 18:20
-
Anyone note if the umbilical cameras worked this time ??
I think we only noticed off the bat from the lack of flashes noticed from the ET cam after sep. We didn't have ET cam after sep live this time.
Yes, we'll find out later today what the crew can see from a "data inventory" once the laptops/network are set up on board.
-
#350
by
Chris Bergin
on 11 May, 2009 18:21
-
Great work. Really was thrown by that transient at T+10 seconds or so!
Site being hit 370 times a second 
And I am experiencing occasional "can't connect" errors while refreshing the page on my browser.
Yes, looking at the servers, the webmaster said it was for about 80 seconds, during the period of 370 page requests a second (that's a huge number) and intermittent - so not everyone would have experienced it. It became nominal for all immediately after that 80 second period.
Remember, we can cope with the large numbers, but no site can cope with hundreds and hundreds of people refreshing at the same time. Also note the "read" counter at the top of the thread is only the uniques it "decides" to count. This thread is over 100,000 pages views already!
-
#351
by
rdale
on 11 May, 2009 18:22
-
Small grass fire near the LH2 transfer line, but it pretty much self-extinguished.
-
#352
by
eeergo
on 11 May, 2009 18:22
-
Great and LOUD launch, combined with awesome coverage = we overloaded the site
That MPS alarm was unsettling, no doubt. I assume it could have signalled an RTLS abort if it had been a real issue?
-
#353
by
Lawntonlookirs
on 11 May, 2009 18:23
-
I don't know if it was me or what, but the ET seperation did not look the same as in other flights.
-
#354
by
kneecaps
on 11 May, 2009 18:23
-
Go for LOAD of the targets. New tig: 00/43:45
-
#355
by
eeergo
on 11 May, 2009 18:24
-
I don't know if it was me or what, but the ET seperation did not look the same as in other flights.
Well, for one we couldn't see it
But agreed, the increased altitude made for quite different ET camera views.
-
#356
by
chksix
on 11 May, 2009 18:24
-
My tv coverage is still "s-band" stills. I guess the HD broadcast killed the normal users bandwidth
-
#357
by
NASAJim
on 11 May, 2009 18:24
-
We saw a small brush fire near the pad in one of the pad camera images (not on the NASA TV feed). Can anyone at KSC confirm? The grassy areas near the pad looked pretty dry and brown in the images.
-
#358
by
William Graham
on 11 May, 2009 18:26
-
Great work. Really was thrown by that transient at T+10 seconds or so!
Site being hit 370 times a second
And I am experiencing occasional "can't connect" errors while refreshing the page on my browser.
Yes, looking at the servers, the webmaster said it was for about 80 seconds, during the period of 370 page requests a second (that's a huge number) and intermittent - so not everyone would have experienced it. It became nominal for all immediately after that 80 second period.
Its certainally better than it used to be (when you had the old forum software).
-
#359
by
Chris Bergin
on 11 May, 2009 18:26
-
Good solution, go to attitude on time.
That MPS alarm was unsettling, no doubt. I assume it could have signalled an RTLS abort if it had been a real issue?
