-
#40
by
FinalFrontier
on 30 Sep, 2010 15:14
-
With the passage of S. 3729 last night by the House and after being signed by the President, STS-335 will officially become STS-135
Signing should occur within the next week (to my understanding). For all intents and purposes we are now looking at STS 135. However, it will probably retain the 335 status until 134 lands safely. Then it will become 135 and actually fly.
-
#41
by
Ford Mustang
on 07 Dec, 2010 17:07
-
Noting that SSME installation is going on today. This should be the last time that the Space Shuttle Main Engines will be installed for flight. Another last in the list of milestones.
-
#42
by
ChrisGebhardt
on 07 Dec, 2010 19:13
-
Noting that SSME installation is going on today. This should be the last time that the Space Shuttle Main Engines will be installed for flight. Another last in the list of milestones.
Should be the last time the SSMEs are ever installed seeing as how the RSMEs are going to be used for museum display configuration of the orbiters.
-
#43
by
Ronsmytheiii
on 09 Dec, 2010 18:06
-
-
#44
by
Space Pete
on 09 Dec, 2010 21:48
-
Just as a note, the house approved H.R. 3082 today, which includes nearly $1B for Shuttle Program in 2011. So it looks like the final hurdle for 135 (funding) is out of the way!
-
#45
by
psloss
on 09 Dec, 2010 22:18
-
Just as a note, the house approved H.R. 3082 today, which includes nearly $1B for Shuttle Program in 2011. So it looks like the final hurdle for 135 (funding) is out of the way!
House passage isn't a final outcome. That would be if/when the President signs a bill passed by both the House and the Senate and it is the language in that bill that would become law.
Also, note that the specific "not less than" $989M for Shuttle Ops in this bill only matches the administration's original request for FY11, which didn't necessarily anticipate the subsequent schedule changes. There's also the additional $825M set aside within Space Operations -- part of which could be applied to Shuttle "costs," but also might be needed to some extent for the other things in that list (mostly infrastructure).
The program has been watching the money spent/allocated under the first two CRs since October 1. I believe that "counts against" these numbers, and that could be a significant amount of money at ~1/6th the $3.2B FY10 number.
-
#46
by
Space Pete
on 10 Dec, 2010 18:58
-
NASA TV Video: Shuttle's Main Engines Installed for Final Planned Flight.
-
#47
by
Ronsmytheiii
on 14 Dec, 2010 06:23
-
And it looks like sTS-135 is on the chopping board:
Another $1.8 billion would fund NASA’s space shuttle orbiters in 2011, including $825 million for “additional Space Shuttle costs.” Unlike the NASA authorization act, however, the draft appropriations language does not call for an additional shuttle mission. It also guts the president’s $429 million request to fund a 21st Century Launch Complex initiative to modernize range infrastructure at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla.
http://www.spacenews.com/policy/101207-draft-increases-nasa-budget.html
-
#48
by
Jorge
on 14 Dec, 2010 06:28
-
And it looks like sTS-135 is on the chopping board:
Another $1.8 billion would fund NASA’s space shuttle orbiters in 2011, including $825 million for “additional Space Shuttle costs.” Unlike the NASA authorization act, however, the draft appropriations language does not call for an additional shuttle mission.
Think 51D Mascot could explain this better, but IIRC since the Authorization act already gave NASA permission to do the flight, the appropriations bill or CR doesn't have to explicitly call for the flight, as long as it appropriates sufficient funds to the shuttle program and doesn't contain a clause specifically *dis*allowing the extra flight.
-
#49
by
ChrisGebhardt
on 14 Dec, 2010 12:07
-
And it looks like sTS-135 is on the chopping board:
Another $1.8 billion would fund NASA’s space shuttle orbiters in 2011, including $825 million for “additional Space Shuttle costs.” Unlike the NASA authorization act, however, the draft appropriations language does not call for an additional shuttle mission.
Think 51D Mascot could explain this better, but IIRC since the Authorization act already gave NASA permission to do the flight, the appropriations bill or CR doesn't have to explicitly call for the flight, as long as it appropriates sufficient funds to the shuttle program and doesn't contain a clause specifically *dis*allowing the extra flight.
That's how it's been explained to me -- along with the fact that since Congress passed the authorization act and the President signed it into law, STS-135 is technically mandated by law.
-
#50
by
psloss
on 14 Dec, 2010 13:13
-
And it looks like sTS-135 is on the chopping board:
Another $1.8 billion would fund NASA’s space shuttle orbiters in 2011, including $825 million for “additional Space Shuttle costs.” Unlike the NASA authorization act, however, the draft appropriations language does not call for an additional shuttle mission.
Think 51D Mascot could explain this better, but IIRC since the Authorization act already gave NASA permission to do the flight, the appropriations bill or CR doesn't have to explicitly call for the flight, as long as it appropriates sufficient funds to the shuttle program and doesn't contain a clause specifically *dis*allowing the extra flight.
That's how it's been explained to me -- along with the fact that since Congress passed the authorization act and the President signed it into law, STS-135 is technically mandated by law.
Yes, provided there are sufficient funds to fly it -- which the full-year CR passed by the House would provide. (Though that's not necessarily the only way it could happen.)
NASA is a small part of the overall federal government and the Senate hasn't gotten to appropriations yet (Bush tax cut expiration right now -- much bigger deal). The current CR runs out at the end of this week; given that and that the House has already passed an appropriations bill (the full year CR), we may be getting close to an outcome.
-
#51
by
Chris Bergin
on 15 Dec, 2010 05:51
-
-
#52
by
Ronsmytheiii
on 16 Dec, 2010 04:35
-
-
#53
by
Ronsmytheiii
on 04 Jan, 2011 13:41
-
View of the Spacelab Pallets wrapped in shrink wrap in the SSPF, One would be used to return PMA-3 on this flight
-
#54
by
ChrisGebhardt
on 04 Jan, 2011 14:15
-
View of the Spacelab Pallets wrapped in shrink wrap in the SSPF, One would be used to return PMA-3 on this flight
Good catch, there, Ron.
-
#55
by
bodge
on 27 Jan, 2011 03:54
-
Ah hem...any updates on the MPLMs ..135 vs 133 impacts? (FYI not an L2 member)
-
#56
by
ChrisGebhardt
on 27 Jan, 2011 03:59
-
Ah hem...any updates on the MPLMs ..135 vs 133 impacts? (FYI not an L2 member)
Ah hem... WHAT? What possible impacts would there be? STS-133 is launching and leaving Leonardo on the ISS, and STS-135 will be launching and returning MPLM Raffaello to/from the ISS.
I'm at a complete loss to understand what possible impacts you're thinking there could be... let alone why you think we'd keep that information (if it were out there) a secret?
-
#57
by
Sesquipedalian
on 27 Jan, 2011 06:28
-
One impact that I could think of would be flight readiness... Raffaello has not been flown since 2005 so there could be preparatory work required, similarly to the OMDP requirement for Shuttles.
Of course, if there is such a constraint, I'm sure NASA has already accounted for it.
(Out of insatiable curiosity, is there?)
-
#58
by
ChrisGebhardt
on 27 Jan, 2011 13:08
-
One impact that I could think of would be flight readiness... Raffaello has not been flown since 2005 so there could be preparatory work required, similarly to the OMDP requirement for Shuttles.
Of course, if there is such a constraint, I'm sure NASA has already accounted for it.
(Out of insatiable curiosity, is there?)
Even though STS-
135 was just baselined last week, MPLM Raffaello has been in processing for STS-335/135 for over a full year now and was originally processing for an April 28th launch on STS-335/135.
So, again, there are no processing issues to speak of in terms of the MPLM Raffaello.
-
#59
by
bodge
on 27 Jan, 2011 13:12
-
Ah hem...any updates on the MPLMs ..135 vs 133 impacts? (FYI not an L2 member)
Ah hem... WHAT? What possible impacts would there be? STS-133 is launching and leaving Leonardo on the ISS, and STS-135 will be launching and returning MPLM Raffaello to/from the ISS.
I'm at a complete loss to understand what possible impacts you're thinking there could be... let alone why you think we'd keep that information (if it were out there) a secret?
Heard murmurs about inspections needing to be performed on Raffaello that could lead to inpsections of Leonardo. Curious if anyone else has information....
