-
#180
by
Ronsmytheiii
on 19 Apr, 2010 22:50
-
Out of interest, with the exception of the 132/134/133 crews, are any other astronauts involved in Shuttle simulator training at present?
No. There is no generic shuttle training involving astronauts at all. As of STS-131, the remaining generic integrated shuttle orbit sims will be crewed by MOD volunteers.
Where can I sign up
-
#181
by
jjknap
on 24 Apr, 2010 19:15
-
If STS 135 is flown with a Logistics Module, where would they dock it? Is there a convienient port left open after the attachment of the PLM?
-
#182
by
perian
on 24 Apr, 2010 19:18
-
If STS 135 is flown with a Logistics Module, where would they dock it? Is there a convienient port left open after the attachment of the PLM?
Harmony nadir, as usual.
-
#183
by
nathan.moeller
on 24 Apr, 2010 21:19
-
If STS 135 is flown with a Logistics Module, where would they dock it? Is there a convienient port left open after the attachment of the PLM?
It's actually called the PMM now instead of PLM. Remember that the PMM will be berthed to the nadir port of Unity (Node 1), leaving the nadir port of Harmony (Node 2) open for STS-135, should that mission be flown.
-
#184
by
steveS
on 25 Apr, 2010 23:23
-
What are the chances that Atlantis will be retained after STS 132 ? Which way is NASA's current inclination? to retire or not to retire?
Regardless of 135 quick approval, Atlantis may or may not be retired to a "near-flight condition" after 132, if that happens the remaining two orbiters will be in charge of flying the remaining manifest.
-
#185
by
Aobrien
on 25 Apr, 2010 23:28
-
What are the chances that Atlantis will be retained after STS 132 ? Which way is NASA's current inclination? to retire or not to retire?
Regardless of 135 quick approval, Atlantis may or may not be retired to a "near-flight condition" after 132, if that happens the remaining two orbiters will be in charge of flying the remaining manifest.
She already has to be prepared for LON for STS-133 regardless of what happens
-
#186
by
steveS
on 13 May, 2010 05:38
-
During the STS 132 post L-2 MMT news conference, Mike Moses mentioned that "if someone gives the approval" they are ready to fly an additional mission. My question is who are th e "someone"? more specifically
-
#187
by
arkaska
on 13 May, 2010 08:35
-
During the STS 132 post L-2 MMT news conference, Mike Moses mentioned that "if someone gives the approval" they are ready to fly an additional mission. My question is who are th e "someone"? more specifically
Congress who has to approve the extra funding for another mission.
-
#188
by
wally
on 13 May, 2010 09:24
-
Does anyone knows, at this point, when a YES/NO decision will be made about STS-135?
-
#189
by
arkaska
on 13 May, 2010 10:35
-
Does anyone knows, at this point, when a YES/NO decision will be made about STS-135?
We are not waiting for a YES/NO decision. Until we hear otherwise it is a big NO since STS-135 is not a planned mission.
-
#190
by
wally
on 13 May, 2010 10:38
-
So, to put it on other words, until when it's realistic to wait for a YES decision?
-
#191
by
psloss
on 13 May, 2010 11:27
-
So, to put it on other words, until when it's realistic to wait for a YES decision?
We're waiting, but there's no guarantee. A "decision" by Congress may not come until the end of the year, and by then it may be too late.
-
#192
by
ChrisC
on 13 May, 2010 11:39
-
Does anyone knows, at this point, when a YES/NO decision will be made about STS-135?
In recent briefings (including yesterday's) they've said they need to make a decision by the end of June, for planning purposes.
-
#193
by
steveS
on 13 May, 2010 12:03
-
So, to put it on other words, until when it's realistic to wait for a YES decision?
We're waiting, but there's no guarantee. A "decision" by Congress may not come until the end of the year, and by then it may be too late.
1. In yesterday's meeting Mike Moses mentioned that the June deadline is not an ultimatum but "it would be nice to know by then" to proceed. If the "someone" he was referring to is the congress and as psloss says they may not make a decision till end of the year, why this was not mentioned explicitly? (I interpret this as chances of STS-135 happening is low because end of the year is far too down the track from this June deadline) I initially thought that this "someone" is one/panel from the top NASA management.
2. Can any of you mention about the costs involved of the STS-135 flight. Atlantis is confirmed to be processed for the LON of STS-134 and then what additional costs are needed if it turns into STS-135?. I read somewhere that NASA has allocated budget for the shuttle program till February. I also assume that they have allocated budget for an "unlikely" LON mission launch because they have to. Hence is it correct to say that if STS-135 does not happen, it was due to a "lack of will" from "someone" rather than limitations of the space shuttle program or hardware?
-
#194
by
psloss
on 13 May, 2010 12:13
-
So, to put it on other words, until when it's realistic to wait for a YES decision?
We're waiting, but there's no guarantee. A "decision" by Congress may not come until the end of the year, and by then it may be too late.
1. In yesterday's meeting Mike Moses mentioned that the June deadline is not an ultimatum but "it would be nice to know by then" to proceed. If the "someone" he was referring to is the congress and as psloss says they may not make a decision till end of the year, why this was not mentioned explicitly? (I interpret this as chances of STS-135 happening is low because end of the year is far too down the track from this June deadline) I initially thought that this "someone" is one/panel from the top NASA management.
There are multiple variables -- the explanation that I think best described things was Bill Gerstenmaier's last week: there are several possible scenarios. As I wrote before we'll just have to wait.
2. Can any of you mention about the costs involved of the STS-135 flight. Atlantis is confirmed to be processed for the LON of STS-134 and then what additional costs are needed if it turns into STS-135?. I read somewhere that NASA has allocated budget for the shuttle program till February.
This has been noted in more than one recent briefing -- how much it would cost to fly an additional flight depends on when it is flown.
Hence is it correct to say that if STS-135 does not happen, it was due to a "lack of will" from "someone" rather than limitations of the space shuttle program or hardware?
Yes, I think so. It's not that the Shuttle program can't fly more flights, it's that the decision was made to stop flying Shuttles and use the money to do something else. (And now that 'something else' might change.)
Given all the questions you have on this, I would recommend watching the recent briefings. They are all available for download:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=21321.0
-
#195
by
Ben the Space Brit
on 13 May, 2010 12:14
-
Hence is it correct to say that if STS-135 does not happen, it was due to a "lack of will" from "someone" rather than limitations of the space shuttle program or hardware?
No direct point to make as to Steve's questions. However, it did trigger the Dilbert fan in me. I am reminded of the old office credo that 'making decisions' are synonymous for 'volunteering to accept the blame if something goes wrong'. The modern 'leader' is somewhat allergic to making decisions.
-
#196
by
arkaska
on 13 May, 2010 12:42
-
Bolden also talked about the problem with LON for a possible STS-135 in the congressional hearing yesterday. Thats a problem that needs to be solved both financially and with the Russians if Soyuz would be the LON vehicle.
-
#197
by
steveS
on 13 May, 2010 13:10
-
Bolden also talked about the problem with LON for a possible STS-135 in the congressional hearing yesterday. Thats a problem that needs to be solved both financially and with the Russians if Soyuz would be the LON vehicle.
Does a NASA panel or the congress "actively" looking into these important issues on the feasibility of STS-135 or are they just time passing? (to date (and till last moment) have they actively taken steps/explored options to genuinely say that "NASA looked at STS-135 seriously"?
Seems to me that they want to end the shuttle program the very sooner the possible (I did not hear the congressional hearing and do not know whether Bolden sounded optimistic or pessimistic ; E.g. Yes there are problems and issues to overcome, but we can find solutions to them or just 'there are problems').
-
#198
by
psloss
on 13 May, 2010 13:35
-
Does a NASA panel or the congress "actively" looking into these important issues on the feasibility of STS-135 or are they just time passing? (to date (and till last moment) have they actively taken steps/explored options to genuinely say that "NASA looked at STS-135 seriously"?
No, NASA has already done the preparatory work it can do on this without getting more direction. Congress has a lot of other issues it is working on; NASA is one of those, but it isn't the highest priority.
This was discussed in yesterday's prelaunch news conference, you can download and watch that via this link:
http://www.space-multimedia.nl.eu.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5943As has been written before, it's not a question of feasibility, it's mostly a question of money and whether Congress wants to spend it on another year of Shuttle Operations. This hasn't changed.
Seems to me that they want to end the shuttle program the very sooner the possible (I did not hear the congressional hearing and do not know whether Bolden sounded optimistic or pessimistic ; E.g. Yes there are problems and issues to overcome, but we can find solutions to them or just 'there are problems').
You can watch a replay of the hearing here:
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Hearings&ContentRecord_id=54f5c39e-f62c-487f-b9ed-fd4be38d096f
-
#199
by
cd-slam
on 21 May, 2010 04:14
-
Not sure which thread is the most appropriate.
The below message appeared today on ATKRocketNews twitter site:
It was a historic & solemn occasion yesterday as the last train carrying ATK solid rocket boosters for the shuttle left Utah bound for KSC.
These are the SRBs for the STS-335 LON mission which would become STS-135 if added.
Sad.
