-
#940
by
Jorge
on 11 Feb, 2010 04:37
-
Thanks, that makes sense.
Any idea what the TEA is for this STS-130?
Biased ISS -XVV, as has been standard since STS-107, and is almost certain to remain so for the remaining flights.
Does the terminology "biased -XVV" essentially mean start with -XVV (or whatever the particular reference) and rotate predetermined amounts about one or more of the PRY axes?
Yes, except that for ISS it's defined as a YPR sequence, not PRY.
-
#941
by
Antares
on 11 Feb, 2010 20:41
-
I can't find a post on it. What's the ballast for in the Orbiter aft compartment? I know it's CG, but for which phase(s) of flight?
-
#942
by
Jorge
on 11 Feb, 2010 20:47
-
I can't find a post on it. What's the ballast for in the Orbiter aft compartment? I know it's CG, but for which phase(s) of flight?
Entry/landing for both nominal and aborts (assumes a prop dump for the aborts).
-
#943
by
Brian P
on 12 Feb, 2010 12:34
-
Hi,
Does anyone know the procedures if a shuttle/station astronaut is outside during an EVA and something happens that requires an evacuation of the ISS? Would they re pressurize, get out of the EMU and into a Soyuz suit or would they remain outside? I assume the EMU's would not fit in the Soyuz capsule, but I could be wrong. What about shuttle astronauts on an EVA if the same happened?
Thanks
-
#944
by
cozmicray
on 12 Feb, 2010 16:53
-
What is the reason for evacuation?
Well you could say the EVA astronaut is all ready evacuated, in his own safe
environment with life support for some 8 hours.
Evacuation of ISS may be for de-pressurization, fire, or pending collision.
As the other IVA astronauts would take safe haven in other parts of ISS
and isolate the problem, or take refuge in soyuz crafts, The EVA astronaut
could provide assistance from outside, ie put his finger in the hole causing
de-pressurization until he could put a bandage on it.
-
#945
by
Fequalsma
on 12 Feb, 2010 22:30
-
What is the maximum and nominal amount of ballast?
I can't find a post on it. What's the ballast for in the Orbiter aft compartment? I know it's CG, but for which phase(s) of flight?
Entry/landing for both nominal and aborts (assumes a prop dump for the aborts).
-
#946
by
Fequalsma
on 12 Feb, 2010 22:31
-
Anyone know how much the TSMs weigh?
-
#947
by
Brian P
on 13 Feb, 2010 03:56
-
Something really serious like a major fire. What happens if it takes longer than 8 hours to get the situation under control so they can go back on the station? Or, if it happens near the end of a 6 hour space walk and they only have 2 hrs of life support left?
-
#948
by
Hungry4info3
on 13 Feb, 2010 05:56
-
Something really serious like a major fire. What happens if it takes longer than 8 hours to get the situation under control so they can go back on the station? Or, if it happens near the end of a 6 hour space walk and they only have 2 hrs of life support left?
Seal off problematic module. Astronaut then returns like normal.
That's my guess.
-
#949
by
Mapperuo
on 13 Feb, 2010 15:03
-
Searched hard but couldn't figure which topic this fitted into.
What site is NASA Tv produced in? Eg Kennedy Space Center or is it at Johnson?
Also, Are there any photos of this room?
Thanks.
-
#950
by
dgates
on 15 Feb, 2010 00:43
-
This may have been addressed in some earlier post but....
Given the limited number of remaining STS flights, why bother recovering the SRB's at this point? Now, I have not studied the logistics or anything, but at some point there aren't going to be any further flights to reuse the SRB's on, right?
So, stipulate that the SRB's are expendables at some point: Can upmass be saved by removing some parts of the recovery system like, say the parachutes? Just let them splash and sink.
Can this upmass then be used for cargo aboard the orbiter?
Thanks!
-
#951
by
Jorge
on 15 Feb, 2010 00:51
-
This may have been addressed in some earlier post but....
Given the limited number of remaining STS flights, why bother recovering the SRB's at this point?
The economics of SRB reuse have long understood to be largely a wash. The SRBs are now recovered primarily for safety reasons. They are examined to reveal any flaws that might cause problems for the remaining launches. There will be no compromise on this. Remember Challenger.
-
#952
by
dgates
on 15 Feb, 2010 00:58
-
OK, you have a point -- except for the last launch, after which there won't be any more SRB's used. One would have to think that the "R&D" element value would be diluted to nearly nothing at this point, having examined so many SRB's in the past.
-
#953
by
Jorge
on 15 Feb, 2010 01:01
-
OK, you have a point -- except for the last launch, after which there won't be any more SRB's used. One would have to think that the "R&D" element value would be diluted to nearly nothing at this point, having examined so many SRB's in the past.
If 133 remains the last flight, its SRBs will be recovered to reveal any problems that may affect its LON rescue flight, 335.
If 135 is baselined, or if 335 must be launched, you have a point. Barely.
-
#954
by
ginahoy
on 15 Feb, 2010 05:55
-
I just watched the STS-130 ascent video from inside the cabin and have a couple of questions:
1) I was surprised to see the crew open their helmets not long after SRB separation. Is this a recent procedure? I don't recall seeing this in earlier flights.
2) I noticed a flickering light reflecting off the crew's helmets, apparently emanating from outside and in front of the vehicle. It began about midway through ascent and continued until MECO. What could be causing that?
-
#955
by
Jim
on 15 Feb, 2010 10:52
-
I just watched the STS-130 ascent video from inside the cabin and have a couple of questions:
1) I was surprised to see the crew open their helmets not long after SRB separation. Is this a recent procedure? I don't recall seeing this in earlier flights.
2) I noticed a flickering light reflecting off the crew's helmets, apparently emanating from outside and in front of the vehicle. It began about midway through ascent and continued until MECO. What could be causing that?
1. No, it is common to every flight for quite some time
2. The SSME plume
-
#956
by
mtakala24
on 15 Feb, 2010 12:05
-
2. The SSME plume
and to lesser extent the APU plume.
-
#957
by
ugordan
on 15 Feb, 2010 12:38
-
If it's the rhytmic flashes, I'd say that's mostly the APU plume.
-
#958
by
ginahoy
on 15 Feb, 2010 15:27
-
If it's the rhytmic flashes, I'd say that's mostly the APU plume.
Yes, the reflections are rhythmic. However, the light source appears to be coming from the front of the orbiter, based on position of reflections on front of helmets.
Could the APU plume be reflecting off the orbiter nose area in front of the windshield? Given the slope of the nose area, the geometry doesn't seem right.
OTOH, could plume light be entering from topside windows behind the crew and then reflect off the forward interior glass surfaces (panel, windshields, etc) and then back to the helmets? If so, it seems like we'd see evidence on cabin walls below the windows. Interesting....
-
#959
by
JayP
on 16 Feb, 2010 05:15
-
1) I was surprised to see the crew open their helmets not long after SRB separation. Is this a recent procedure? I don't recall seeing this in earlier flights.
That has been done ever since they started wearing the suits. The reason is that the suits are preasurized with pure oxygen and they are open loop (gas is vented out of the suit into the cabin instead of being rerouted back to the ECS) that leads to the concentration of O2 in the cabin building up more the longer they are in use, which is a fire hazard (remeber Apollo1). That is also why they don't close the visors at all durring entry after the preasure test.