-
#440
by
spaceshuttle
on 07 Nov, 2006 00:05
-
Jim - 6/11/2006 6:36 PM
repairs.
Wow, save the STS-106 photo for all the discussions on the sunlight darkening the foam. The RSS shadowing is very pronounced.
yeah, i incorporated that (the shadowing) in the models i'm working on as it is often neglected...
but what kind of repairs were going on? was it to reduce weight?
-
#441
by
Rob in KC
on 07 Nov, 2006 00:55
-
They change color in the light of day and with the way they interact with the air. Blotches are just where they've pasted over parts at MAF. Probably more reasons but that's as much as I've read
-
#442
by
psloss
on 07 Nov, 2006 15:58
-
-
#443
by
spaceshuttle
on 07 Nov, 2006 17:50
-
psloss - 7/11/2006 10:41 AM
Jim - 6/11/2006 7:36 PM
repairs and modifications
Wow, save the STS-106 photo for all the discussions on the sunlight darkening the foam. The RSS shadowing is very pronounced.
Looks like this one:
http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/detail.cfm?mediaid=4560
it is. i wonder why we haven't been seeing that on the last couple tanks?
-
#444
by
Flightstar
on 11 Nov, 2006 01:16
-
It varies per tank. There's no reason to any couple of tanks that have less.
-
#445
by
riceville98
on 13 Nov, 2006 22:47
-
Does anyone remember who the CAPCOM's were for STS 111. Bill Harwood
usually puts out a key personnel list for each flight but, I can't find one
for 111
Any info would be appreciated
Brian Foss
-
#446
by
DaveS
on 13 Nov, 2006 23:00
-
-
#447
by
shuttlefan
on 14 Nov, 2006 00:11
-
Can someone give a rundown, in detail, about how the standard Main Engine Flight Readiness Test works. This is the test that's being conducted on the STS-116 vehicle as we speak.
-
#448
by
Jim
on 14 Nov, 2006 00:57
-
It exercises the engine valves and systems.
-
#449
by
spaceshuttle
on 14 Nov, 2006 04:34
-
i think sts-49 was the final one...why don't they do FRF anymore?
-
#450
by
Jim
on 14 Nov, 2006 05:48
-
spaceshuttle - 14/11/2006 12:17 AM
i think sts-49 was the final one...why don't they do FRF anymore?
No need, there aren't any new orbiters
-
#451
by
spaceshuttle
on 14 Nov, 2006 06:22
-
Jim - 14/11/2006 12:31 AM
spaceshuttle - 14/11/2006 12:17 AM
i think sts-49 was the final one...why don't they do FRF anymore?
No need, there aren't any new orbiters
that's true, huh? i never noticed that...FRFs were for the orbiters' maiden flights...pretty neat!
-
#452
by
Jim
on 14 Nov, 2006 06:59
-
except for the "recert" FRF before STS-26
-
#453
by
shuttlefan
on 14 Nov, 2006 12:53
-
spaceshuttle - 13/11/2006 11:17 PM
i think sts-49 was the final one...why don't they do FRF anymore?
Hi, spaceshuttle! FRF actually was not what I was referring to. You are correct, STS-49/Endeavour was the most recent one.
The test I am referring to, called the Main Engine Flight Readiness Test , is conducted prior to every launch, as a standard test. I THINK they basically do everything with the engines, except cycle fuel through them and ignite them. All engines you see on the Space Shuttle HAVE been fired, during a previous flight, or if it is a new engine, it has been fired on the test stand at Stennis Space Center. FRFs are definitely a thing of the past as they were only a requirement prior to the maiden flights of each of the orbiters. The second one for STS-6 was to verify the hydrogen leaks and the STS-26 FRF was not actually required, but was done as part of the recertification process.
I hope this helps explain the difference between these two tests.
-
#454
by
riceville98
on 14 Nov, 2006 13:05
-
DaveS - 13/11/2006 5:43 PM
riceville98 - 14/11/2006 12:30 AM
Does anyone remember who the CAPCOM's were for STS 111. Bill Harwood
usually puts out a key personnel list for each flight but, I can't find one
for 111
Any info would be appreciated
Brian Foss
You already asked that in this thread and got it answered: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=5292&posts=3&start=1
That link doesn't work so just repost your answer
Thanks
Brian
-
#455
by
psloss
on 14 Nov, 2006 15:19
-
-
#456
by
spaceshuttle
on 14 Nov, 2006 16:51
-
shuttlefan - 14/11/2006 7:36 AM
spaceshuttle - 13/11/2006 11:17 PM
i think sts-49 was the final one...why don't they do FRF anymore?
Hi, spaceshuttle! FRF actually was not what I was referring to. You are correct, STS-49/Endeavour was the most recent one.
The test I am referring to, called the Main Engine Flight Readiness Test , is conducted prior to every launch, as a standard test. I THINK they basically do everything with the engines, except cycle fuel through them and ignite them. All engines you see on the Space Shuttle HAVE been fired, during a previous flight, or if it is a new engine, it has been fired on the test stand at Stennis Space Center. FRFs are definitely a thing of the past as they were only a requirement prior to the maiden flights of each of the orbiters. The second one for STS-6 was to verify the hydrogen leaks and the STS-26 FRF was not actually required, but was done as part of the recertification process.
I hope this helps explain the difference between these two tests.
thanx much!
-
#457
by
outward
on 15 Nov, 2006 12:41
-
Hi Folks,
A while back someone on this forum was asking about whether the orbiter’s thermal protection system (TPS) was hot after landing. I think the answer was, no – not to the touch. But I’m curious about something…the quantity of thermal energy that becomes stored in the TPS must be substantial considering the loss of potential and kinetic energy the orbiter experiences. Now, although the outer surface of the TPS cools during the last parts of the descent, internally there must still be a considerable quantity of heat. How long does it take the internal volume of the TPS to cool to ‘room’ temperature? And is there any concern that the TPS heat will radiate inward and over- heat critical parts of the orbiter?
Thanks, (from a curious observer)
Phil
-
#458
by
Jim
on 15 Nov, 2006 15:15
-
outward - 15/11/2006 8:24 AM
Hi Folks,
A while back someone on this forum was asking about whether the orbiter’s thermal protection system (TPS) was hot after landing. I think the answer was, no – not to the touch. But I’m curious about something…the quantity of thermal energy that becomes stored in the TPS must be substantial considering the loss of potential and kinetic energy the orbiter experiences. Now, although the outer surface of the TPS cools during the last parts of the descent, internally there must still be a considerable quantity of heat. How long does it take the internal volume of the TPS to cool to ‘room’ temperature? And is there any concern that the TPS heat will radiate inward and over- heat critical parts of the orbiter?
Thanks, (from a curious observer)
Phil
That's why ground cooling and purge is hooked up to the orbiter at landing
-
#459
by
dutch courage
on 15 Nov, 2006 15:52
-
outward - 15/11/2006 2:24 PM
How long does it take the internal volume of the TPS to cool to ‘room’ temperature? And is there any concern that the TPS heat will radiate inward and over- heat critical parts of the orbiter?
I've seen a documentary about heat shields. There was a test with a piece of TPS heated orange hot with a blowtorch. The temperature on the other side of the TPS did not raise at all.
A few seconds after removing the blowtorch it could be picked up by hand.
Pretty amazing.
