-
Node 4 status thread
by
PeterAlt
on 03 May, 2011 14:45
-
This thread is to watch the status of Node 4. Last I heard was that they were cleaning it up and repairing any corrosion. Is that the most recent news on it's status? What would be the necessary steps to get it flight worthy?
-
#1
by
Jim
on 03 May, 2011 14:50
-
-
#2
by
Jorge
on 03 May, 2011 14:58
-
It is not an approved project yet and there is a possibility that it will never be one.
There is a thread for it here
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=22088.0
This is a recurring theme for you. Do some searching and reading before starting threads
That thread is L2. Perhaps PeterAlt doesn't have L2 access?
-
#3
by
PeterAlt
on 03 May, 2011 16:21
-
I don't have L2 access. I do plan on subscribing, though.
Concerning this whole business about my track record of not doing research before posting, I've made a few mistakes of jumping the gun on posting before checking thoroughly, but for the most part I do research before posting, and now more so that I have been made aware due to recent scrutiny. <sigh>
Back to the subject, which office or account will Node 4 approval/funding need to come from? Station operations?
-
#4
by
Jorge
on 03 May, 2011 16:29
-
I don't have L2 access. I do plan on subscribing, though.
Concerning this whole business about my track record of not doing research before posting, I've made a few mistakes of jumping the gun on posting before checking thoroughly, but for the most part I do research before posting, and now more so that I have been made aware due to recent scrutiny. <sigh>
Back to the subject, which office or account will Node 4 approval/funding need to come from? Station operations?
It would be funded by Exploration, and in fact if it had to be funded by station, it probably wouldn't happen. Station doesn't want it badly enough to pay for it.
How this will change once ESMD and SOMD are merged is anyone's guess.
-
#5
by
psloss
on 03 May, 2011 16:47
-
Back to the subject, which office or account will Node 4 approval/funding need to come from? Station operations?
Right now, the more important questions are whether or not funding / authority to proceed happens, and then if so, when that happens.
Working backwards, it may be that when that module might be needed has changed since we first read about it last year. In that time, there's been a decent amount of uh...fiscal turmoil.
-
#6
by
Space Pete
on 11 Jun, 2011 15:50
-
-
#7
by
psloss
on 11 Jun, 2011 16:08
-
-
#8
by
Jim
on 11 Jun, 2011 16:10
-
Attachment is from page 13 of the following presentation:
International Space Station as a Platform for Exploration Beyond Low Earth Orbit (PDF, 3.07 MB).
http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/telecon/Raftery_5-25-11/Raftery_5-25-11.pdf
The DHS tunnel has been replaced by PMA-2. It also appears that the Zenith, Forward and Nadir ports will be IDSS, while Port & Starboard will be CBMs.
The use of the PMA will hamper its use for logistics vehicles
-
#9
by
sdsds
on 11 Jun, 2011 16:32
-
It's good to see that Boeing appears totally supportive of Node 4! I think the point off the presentation is that Node 4 makes the current ISS able to function as a "base camp" that could support a "high camp" at EML1 or EML2.
-
#10
by
Space Pete
on 11 Jun, 2011 16:54
-
The use of the PMA will hamper its use for logistics vehicles
Agreed - that narrow hatchway will make transfers very difficult, especially with all the drag-through ducting & cables.
-
#11
by
erioladastra
on 11 Jun, 2011 20:59
-
Attachment is from page 13 of the following presentation:
International Space Station as a Platform for Exploration Beyond Low Earth Orbit (PDF, 3.07 MB).
http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/telecon/Raftery_5-25-11/Raftery_5-25-11.pdf
The DHS tunnel has been replaced by PMA-2. It also appears that the Zenith, Forward and Nadir ports will be IDSS, while Port & Starboard will be CBMs.
I believe this part os out of date. DHS has been canceled. NASA is moving out on attaching the NASA Docking System (NDS) on PMA2 at Node 2 forward and on PMA3, probably on N1 or N3 nadir.
-
#12
by
Space Pete
on 11 Jun, 2011 21:10
-
I believe this part os out of date. DHS has been canceled. NASA is moving out on attaching the NASA Docking System (NDS) on PMA2 at Node 2 forward and on PMA3, probably on N1 or N3 nadir.
Interesting (but sad that DHS has been cancelled).
So where would the back-up cargo VV port be? N2Z (although Cygnus can't go there)?
I take it the PMM is pretty much certain to go to N3A at this point, and if N3N becomes a crewed VV port via PMA-3, then the Cupola would go to N1N?
The bad thing about this plan is that it doesn't leave any ports open for expansion - so no inflatable (unless Cupola goes to N3F, leaving N3N/N1N for a crew/cargo port and N2Z for an inflatable).
This is all so complicated!
-
#13
by
Jason1701
on 12 Jun, 2011 03:24
-
Very interesting PDF. Thanks for the link.
Pete, why would there still be so many port problems after Node 4 adds another four ports?
-
#14
by
Jim
on 12 Jun, 2011 12:09
-
Very interesting PDF. Thanks for the link.
Pete, why would there still be so many port problems after Node 4 adds another four ports?
Node 4 is not funded.
-
#15
by
Orbiter
on 12 Jun, 2011 12:45
-
Any reason why CBM Node 2 port cant link up with CBM Node 4 aft with PMA2 at the end of Node 4?
Orbiter
-
#16
by
notherspacexfan
on 12 Jun, 2011 15:01
-
Any reason why CBM Node 2 port cant link up with CBM Node 4 aft with PMA2 at the end of Node 4?
Orbiter
If you directly berth N2F with N4A there wouldn't be enough space to use the radial ports on node 4. Some sort of spacer is needed.
-
#17
by
Space Pete
on 12 Jun, 2011 18:55
-
Pete, why would there still be so many port problems after Node 4 adds another four ports?
The problem with the USOS in its current configuration is that, while there are enough ports for VVs and the back-ups, there aren't enough ports for expansion.
Adding Node 4 (which seems unlikely now) would solve the port problems by providing three additional VV ports, and two additional CBMs for expansion.
Any reason why CBM Node 2 port cant link up with CBM Node 4 aft with PMA2 at the end of Node 4?
Node 4 could berth directly to Node 2 Forward providing Node 4 had a CBM extender in order to provide enough clearances between new modules and the JPM/Columbus. But, PMA-2 would still need an NDS adaptor - so you might as well launch Node 4 with the NDS adaptor pre-integrated.
-
#18
by
PeterAlt
on 14 Jun, 2011 06:38
-
How's this for a solution...
The Bigelow inflatable module is to have CBM ports on both sides of the module. Launch the Bigelow module first - ahead of Node 4. Move PMA-2, currently at Node 2 forward, out of the way, to one of the unusable ports on Node 3. Dock the Bigelow module to the now-freed Node 2 forward. At a later date, launch Node 4 and dock it to the Bigelow module's free foward CBM port. The Bigelow module, in this configuration, would provide the needed extended space between Nodes 2 & 4. No need to use PMA-2 or "tunnel".
-
#19
by
Jim
on 14 Jun, 2011 11:53
-
How's this for a solution...
The Bigelow inflatable module is to have CBM ports on both sides of the module. Launch the Bigelow module first - ahead of Node 4. Move PMA-2, currently at Node 2 forward, out of the way, to one of the unusable ports on Node 3. Dock the Bigelow module to the now-freed Node 2 forward. At a later date, launch Node 4 and dock it to the Bigelow module's free foward CBM port. The Bigelow module, in this configuration, would provide the needed extended space between Nodes 2 & 4. No need to use PMA-2 or "tunnel".
Where is the money for the Bigelow inflatable module?
Also, Node 4 needs to connect to Node 2 to get services, which Node 2 supplies to Bigelow.
