-
#60
by
shaula1247
on 19 May, 2009 11:56
-
My lone contribution for today, new job
Good luck with it.
-
#61
by
Herb Schaltegger
on 19 May, 2009 11:57
-
I'm not sure who "expects" 2020 to be much longer than systems are expected to last, but with the upgraded gyros and new batteries what would surprise anybody by being operational in 15 years?
It would surprise me. It's taken four very intensive servicing missions to keep HST operational for 19 years. This is IT, folks. The next major failure or combination of failures and it's Game Over.
-
#62
by
Cbased
on 19 May, 2009 11:59
-
There would also be a component due to the reaction of the arm pushing on the telescope mass. Telescope moves one way, shuttle the other.
...now rotate and you've got artificial gravity
(joking)
I wasn't able to contribute to the EVAs converage (very inconvenient time zone) but I was reading everything (sometimes even via Blackberry). A big thank you to everyone! Chris, this site rocks!
I can't wait to see Hubble in action again.
-
#63
by
shaula1247
on 19 May, 2009 11:59
-
The telescope is now in the release position. One hour to release.
-
#64
by
shaula1247
on 19 May, 2009 12:02
-
Now setting up to maneuver the shuttle and telescope to the release attitude. Brakes are on shuttle arm. Will take approx 29 min for about 80 degrees of attitude change. Heavy telescope, fragile arm.
-
#65
by
Analyst
on 19 May, 2009 12:04
-
I'm not sure who "expects" 2020 to be much longer than systems are expected to last, but with the upgraded gyros and new batteries what would surprise anybody by being operational in 15 years?
It would surprise me. It's taken four very intensive servicing missions to keep HST operational for 19 years. This is IT, folks. The next major failure or combination of failures and it's Game Over.
I promise, I stop after this, because it gets OT: If you have the costless option to keep this opportunity - whatever you rate the probability of HST staying operational - why not use this option?
Analyst
PS: Five, not four servicing missions.
-
#66
by
ChrisC
on 19 May, 2009 12:05
-
Question about Flight Day 3. During rendezvous they had trouble with the BSA (Bit Sync Assembly) which prevented them from getting command confirmation back from Hubble, and so they had to rely on the TDRS-to-ground link and verbal uplink to shuttle to confirm all commands. During a later press briefing Tony said they'd resolved that problem and it would not be a problem during deploy. I believe he said that the wrong bitrate (1 Mbps?) was configured on Hubble. Do I have that right? I found nothing to confirm Tony's statement it in the FD3 thread or L2. L2 has really nice BSA background info though
And I guess that the BSA has indeed been working today, or is that setup still in work?
-
#67
by
shaula1247
on 19 May, 2009 12:10
-
-
#68
by
shaula1247
on 19 May, 2009 12:12
-
And I guess that the BSA has indeed been working today, or is that setup still in work?
I'm not positive but I believe there has been telescope commanding going on today and I haven't heard any verbal confirmations to indicate lack of communication.
-
#69
by
shaula1247
on 19 May, 2009 12:18
-
Much telescope commanding to do and may not be complete by open of release window.
-
#70
by
DavisSTS
on 19 May, 2009 12:19
-
What is that badge like logo on the door the controllers walk through that we keep seeing on NTV?
-
#71
by
Chris Bergin
on 19 May, 2009 12:21
-
What is that badge like logo on the door the controllers walk through that we keep seeing on NTV?
Looks like - and would make sense that - it's the MOD logo:
-
#72
by
shaula1247
on 19 May, 2009 12:29
-
-
#73
by
tblaxland
on 19 May, 2009 12:30
-
I promise, I stop after this, because it gets OT: If you have the costless option to keep this opportunity - whatever you rate the probability of HST staying operational - why not use this option?
Because it is not costless. If you do the reboost you lose the fuel for orbit lowering. If you don't do the orbit lowering, your MM/OD risk exceeds program requirements. If you look at todays exec pkg, the OMS dV remaining after orbit lowering is only 284 fps. I'm not sure what the dV for de-orbit will be on this mission but I would expect >250 fps.
-
#74
by
psloss
on 19 May, 2009 12:33
-
Ground says should see aperture door movement in the next minute or so.
-
#75
by
psloss
on 19 May, 2009 12:34
-
Aperture door is open; Tony Ceccacci polling flight control room for go for release.
-
#76
by
Analyst
on 19 May, 2009 12:39
-
I promise, I stop after this, because it gets OT: If you have the costless option to keep this opportunity - whatever you rate the probability of HST staying operational - why not use this option?
Because it is not costless. If you do the reboost you lose the fuel for orbit lowering. If you don't do the orbit lowering, your MM/OD risk exceeds program requirements. If you look at todays exec pkg, the OMS dV remaining after orbit lowering is only 284 fps. I'm not sure what the dV for de-orbit will be on this mission but I would expect >250 fps.
You should read the discussion. The reason to not perform reboost is
not MMOD risk. Btw. reboost is not done using OMS.
Analyst
-
#77
by
shaula1247
on 19 May, 2009 12:40
-
Still going. Ground commanding of the telescope should be nearly complete with the opening of the main aperture door.
-
#78
by
psloss
on 19 May, 2009 12:45
-
Commanding complete. Go for release on time.
-
#79
by
NavySpaceFan
on 19 May, 2009 12:45
-
Go for release!!!
(joking)