-
#100
by
steveS
on 03 Feb, 2010 11:59
-
Does it mean that after STS 132 Atlantis will not go through a processing flow as previously stated ?. If so soon after STS 132 will Atlantis be decommissioned?
-
#101
by
psloss
on 03 Feb, 2010 12:08
-
Does it mean that after STS 132 Atlantis will not go through a processing flow as previously stated ?. If so soon after STS 132 will Atlantis be decommissioned?
No, Atlantis is still the LON vehicle for STS-133, so processing will occur until the program stands down that LON (STS-335) when 133 is cleared for entry.
-
#102
by
daniela
on 04 Feb, 2010 18:33
-
ISS does not have a shortage of consumable supplies, in fact there is ample supplies that can cover most contingencies, short of an extended contingency stay of a number of extra crew (that's what the cargo of STS-335 LON would be for). And the current status with automatic resupply vehicles is very good. By the way, the abundance of supplies is also partly thanks to the addition of two "contingency" logistics flights to the Shuttle manifest. I am unaware of serious planning of the STS-135 payload, bringing up critical spares that would be difficult to send with the other existing vehicles, which indicates that at NASA the possibility of a STS-135 baselining was not taken very seriously; also, most large and critical spares have already been included in the existing manifest. The option for the flight will be protected for now, and nothing is changed with regards to Orbiter processing for the LON of STS-133. There is no reason to fly STS-135 with the cargo of STS-335, but, there may be good reasons (that do not have to be catastrophic failures) to take the expense and the risk to fly it. If not, it's likely that the option will be unofficially protected even a little bit beyond the landing of STS-133, while the safing of the other two orbiters begins, and then someone will take responsibility to sign the end of the program and use the Shuttle budget of FY2011 for decommissioning.
-
#103
by
robertross
on 05 Feb, 2010 02:32
-
Thanks Daniela. I'm getting through the 'language barrier' just fine now.
-
#104
by
joseamatos
on 08 Feb, 2010 16:47
-
Can somebody please tell me if STS-135 will happen or NOT?!
-
#105
by
rdale
on 08 Feb, 2010 16:48
-
Can somebody please tell me if STS-135 will happen or NOT?!
Nobody can tell you that, since it has not been decided.
However if you take just one minute and read the article, you'll see it is very unlikely.
-
#106
by
clb22
on 09 Feb, 2010 07:16
-
Can somebody please tell me if STS-135 will happen or NOT?!
Nobody can tell you that, since it has not been decided.
However if you take just one minute and read the article, you'll see it is very unlikely.
I would say it's TBD if it is "very unlikely". STS-135 is very much depending on the progress of CRS contractors. If SpaceX and OSC remain on schedule in the next 6 months, STS-135 isn't necessary. If SpaceX has big problems with Falcon 9 and/or Dragon and OSC runs into problems with Taurus II and/or Cygnus, a compelling need for STS-135 will arise. At that point, the decision will be contingent on how much risk there is to the ISS program with regard to upmass. If by September we are in a "grey zone" regarding an STS-135 decision, it probably very much depends on the specific workout of the Soyuz rescue plan, how large the STS schedule slips have been until then and whether there are certain required spares needed on the ISS at that time.
-
#107
by
K466
on 11 Feb, 2010 16:20
-
Sure would love to see that last Shuttle mission launch on April 12, 2011... :-)
Yeah! That'd be awesome!
-
#108
by
steveS
on 12 Feb, 2010 08:09
-
Has NASA released the names of the astronauts of the LON mission for STS 133?
-
#109
by
faustod
on 12 Feb, 2010 08:19
-
Has NASA released the names of the astronauts of the LON mission for STS 133?
No.
Probably they will be four astronauts of STS-132 or 134 crew.
-
#110
by
steveS
on 12 Feb, 2010 08:23
-
Any idea of when will NASA release the names? (assuming the LON crew has to go some sort of training even if some of the STS 132 or STS 134 crews are selected)
Has NASA released the names of the astronauts of the LON mission for STS 133?
No.
Probably they will be four astronauts of STS-132 or 134 crew.
-
#111
by
racshot65
on 14 Feb, 2010 09:36
-
-
#112
by
clb22
on 14 Feb, 2010 09:47
-
http://spacelaunchnews.blogspot.com/2010/02/breaking-news-nasa-to-add-extra-shuttle.html
There claiming this has been confirmed
STS-135 is off and on and off and on all the time... at the end, if the announcement is true, the Shuttle managers convinced top managers that at least baselining STS-135 and training the crew makes a lot of sense. You can still not fly STS-135 if the current manifest is drawn out to wide, there are too large budget overruns, there is a problem with the Soyuz rescue plan etc.
But given the continued slips of the first Falcon 9 launch and potential Taurus II/Cygnus problems, in addition to potential problems with the solar arrays, it's prudent to baseline STS-135. Mid-Nov or Feb 2011 doesn't exceed the budget. The budget is baselined for flights until March 2011, it's prudent to use the available funds. Unfortunately this decision hasn't been made a year ago, alongside a decision to baseline two PMMs on STS-133 and then STS-135. Cargo storage will become a problem at some point down the line eventually especially with an extension to 2020 and maybe beyond. The configuration could have been something like the one proposed for the Habitation Extension Modules (below): after STS-132, relocate Node 3 to Node 1 nadir and add the two PMMs to port and starboard of Node 3 (like the original config, which had the CRV on starboard and the US Hab Module on port) with PMA-3 on nadir available for future spacecraft to dock (Cupola stays where it is and is thus located on Node 3 Forward).
-
#113
by
spinkao
on 14 Feb, 2010 10:02
-
So there is still a chance that STS-135 will fly eventually? I thought it was off the table already. It would definitely make sense to fly since the hardware would be in place and paid for anyway, and to deliver critical spare parts and supplies for the ISS would be very prudent. I never really understood why STS-135 ever was in question in the first place...
-
#114
by
clongton
on 14 Feb, 2010 12:29
-
http://spacelaunchnews.blogspot.com/2010/02/breaking-news-nasa-to-add-extra-shuttle.html
There claiming this has been confirmed
STS-135 is off and on and off and on all the time... at the end, if the announcement is true, the Shuttle managers convinced top managers that at least baselining STS-135 and training the crew makes a lot of sense. You can still not fly STS-135 if the current manifest is drawn out to wide, there are too large budget overruns, there is a problem with the Soyuz rescue plan etc.
But given the continued slips of the first Falcon 9 launch and potential Taurus II/Cygnus problems, in addition to potential problems with the solar arrays, it's prudent to baseline STS-135. Mid-Nov or Feb 2011 doesn't exceed the budget. The budget is baselined for flights until March 2011, it's prudent to use the available funds. Unfortunately this decision hasn't been made a year ago, alongside a decision to baseline two PMMs on STS-133 and then STS-135. Cargo storage will become a problem at some point down the line eventually especially with an extension to 2020 and maybe beyond. The configuration could have been something like the one proposed for the Habitation Extension Modules (below): after STS-132, relocate Node 3 to Node 1 nadir and add the two PMMs to port and starboard of Node 3 (like the original config, which had the CRV on starboard and the US Hab Module on port) with PMA-3 on nadir available for future spacecraft to dock (Cupola stays where it is and is thus located on Node 3 Forward).
If ISS is extended to 2020 or beyond, then spares of large items becomes more conceivable; potentially including an array. For operations beyond 2020 it becomes possible to consider actually flying some of the things left on the ground, like the centrifuge, or never built, like the hab module. If large spares are to be flown, perhaps even a warehouse node if storage of these could be a problem. If STS135 is actually flown, then IMO it would be in support of a 2020 and beyond lifespan for ISS and the things I mentioned become conceivable. If they do, then either Shuttle extension or rapid deployment of a HLV replacement would be back on the table.
-
#115
by
psloss
on 14 Feb, 2010 13:04
-
The budget is baselined for flights until March 2011, it's prudent to use the available funds.
Do you have a source for this? The proposed budget added $600 million, which is about half of the number I saw from 'Augustine' to support March. $600 million provides margin for operations through the first quarter of FY11, but not sure about well into the second quarter, which is what the commission discussed and suggested.
Beyond authorization and money from Washington, another issue may be the divergence of the LON mission (CSCS replenish) and what might be 'optimal' for an additional mission. (Which would end up being another Washington decision about money.)
-
#116
by
clb22
on 14 Feb, 2010 19:48
-
The budget is baselined for flights until March 2011, it's prudent to use the available funds.
Do you have a source for this? The proposed budget added $600 million, which is about half of the number I saw from 'Augustine' to support March. $600 million provides margin for operations through the first quarter of FY11, but not sure about well into the second quarter, which is what the commission discussed and suggested.
I thought I had heard Bolden say March 2011 once, but looking at the budget docs again and the Bolden speech, it looks like the general message is a. "fly out the final five flights until end of calendar year 2010" or b. "fly out the final five flights even if they slip into FISCAL year 2011". The OMB statement includes a bit more ambiguous language "The President’s Budget promotes a safe and orderly
retirement of the Space Shuttle program by providing funding for the Shuttle to fly its final five missions, even if their schedule slips into 2011." (no calendar OR fiscal year in that one).
Anyway, the STS budget for FY2011 is 1.1bn, I guess that might allow for STS-135 in either Nov 2010 or Feb 2011.
-
#117
by
Bubbinski
on 14 Feb, 2010 20:28
-
If it's true that STS-135 will fly, that's good news. If it flies in Nov 2010, would there be room for maybe an STS-136 or 137? I don't know if there are available ET and SRB parts for those though.
-
#118
by
clongton
on 14 Feb, 2010 20:54
-
If it's true that STS-135 will fly, that's good news. If it flies in Nov 2010, would there be room for maybe an STS-136 or 137? I don't know if there are available ET and SRB parts for those though.
We know beyond a doubt that there are. We have personally spoken with officials who keep track of those specific things, among others.
-
#119
by
rdale
on 14 Feb, 2010 21:06
-
There are two full sets of SRB/ET's that can be ready for 136 & 137?