-
#240
by
psloss
on 06 Sep, 2006 21:52
-
gordo - 6/9/2006 5:35 PM
I think hats off to the team, they are working through the issues to get a better feel of what the siutation is, so that they can maybe get comfortable with the issue so a on Fri or Sat is a possibility
If they have to do the repoelacement time is not an big problem
Saturday will probably be asked about at the briefing given the news, but AFAIK, it's not a possibility. Even launching Friday reduces their on-orbit planning flexibility somewhat due to the commitment to undock no later than the 17th.
-
#241
by
mkirk
on 06 Sep, 2006 21:53
-
I can confirm that the teams have been told that they are in another 24 hour extension.
Another MMT is shcheduled for 1 pm eastern tomorrow to discuss the fault tree and go forward plan.
Mark Kirkman
-
#242
by
psloss
on 06 Sep, 2006 21:53
-
The briefing just went to NET 6 pm Eastern.
-
#243
by
Chris Bergin
on 06 Sep, 2006 21:54
-
NASA memo:
It was decided to wait 24 hrs for more data and hope for a Friday launch. MMT tomorow at 12 noon Central time.
-
#244
by
mkirk
on 06 Sep, 2006 21:58
-
Let me also add to my previous post that another meeting is just now starting (5:30 Eastern) to further discuss the fualt tree. I don't know if that meeting includes the senior MMT managers, but maybe that is why the delay until NET 6pm.
Mark Kirkman
-
#245
by
Chris Bergin
on 06 Sep, 2006 21:59
-
Friday's attempt is in doubt, but they are giving it a chance. So, officially, Thursday is ruled out.
Full MMT notes on L2 now.
-
#246
by
jacqmans
on 06 Sep, 2006 22:20
-
-
#247
by
Chris Bergin
on 06 Sep, 2006 22:21
-
NASA Memo:
2006:249:21:18:58
09/06/06 16:18:58 MER MGR MMT Decision - Take Another 24 Hours To Review FCP History, Launch NET Friday 9/8/06 (wagstelr)
After initially trying to direct that we proceed towards a Thursday launch, while simultaneously trying to review FCP history in an attempt to get more comfortable with possible common cause failure modes, the MMT chair was redirected by the SSP program manager to push out to a launch NET Friday. This came after several other MMT members expressed a preference to push out until Friday.
A primary driver for this decision was that the engineering team involved in researching the problem would also be on console for launch. In addition, there would not be enough time to research the problem sufficiently and present it at the tanking telecon on Thursday morning. An additional 24 hours would give a lot more time to come to grips with the data.
There will be a MMT on Thursday at 12:00 CDT (1:00 pm EDT) to further discuss the problem.
-
#248
by
Stardust9906
on 06 Sep, 2006 22:22
-
-
#249
by
psloss
on 06 Sep, 2006 22:25
-
We may get the numbers publicly in the press briefing, but can you post the fuel cell R&R numbers? I think the folks here would be interested...
-
#250
by
Chris Bergin
on 06 Sep, 2006 22:25
-
They are going to review a load of data from the imfamous STS-93, due to "At approximately 5 seconds into the launch of STS-93, a momentary short occurred on AC1 phase A." Check out the launch video on the video section for all the fun and games that launch had.
-
#251
by
DaveS
on 06 Sep, 2006 22:29
-
Chris Bergin - 7/9/2006 12:12 AM
They are going to review a load of data from the imfamous STS-93, due to "At approximately 5 seconds into the launch of STS-93, a momentary short occurred on AC1 phase A." Check out the launch video on the video section for all the fun and games that launch had.
Didn't that have to do with exposed wiring under the payload bay coming in contact with a screwhead?
-
#252
by
Chris Bergin
on 06 Sep, 2006 22:55
-
Eh? Wayne Hale says they don't have the blueprint drawings.........yet they are on one of the documents we put on L2. That is confusing.
Here's one of the several of such drawings.
-
#253
by
just-nick
on 06 Sep, 2006 22:59
-
Chris Bergin - 6/9/2006 3:42 PM
Eh? Wayne Hale says they don't have the blueprint drawings.........yet they are on one of the documents we put on L2. That is confusing.
Here's one of the several of such drawings.
Perhaps NASA should be watching this forum rather than the other way around?
-
#254
by
dbhyslop
on 06 Sep, 2006 23:02
-
This is a very interesting press conference. I wasn't expecting to learn how much clean underwear Wayne Hale has with him
When he said they didn't have the blueprints, perhaps he didn't mean so much the scale drawings but detailed specs about the parts?
Dan
-
#255
by
Chris Bergin
on 06 Sep, 2006 23:04
-
dbhyslop - 6/9/2006 11:49 PM
This is a very interesting press conference. I wasn't expecting to learn how much clean underwear Wayne Hale has with him
When he said they didn't have the blueprints, perhaps he didn't mean so much the scale drawings but detailed specs about the parts?
Dan
That would make more sense. A few of us (on instant messenger) all said "hold on!!" at the same time, but we're all shattered, so he could have meant it differently
And we have the Wayne Hale underwear manifest for STS-115
-
#256
by
dougb
on 06 Sep, 2006 23:11
-
I think I heard circuit diagram. What is posted here is a mechanical drawing.
But to be fair, they may not have every single detail of a part built years ago.
-
#257
by
Norm Hartnett
on 06 Sep, 2006 23:12
-
I think Wayne said they didn't have the wireing diagrams.
And thank goodness the W.H. U.W. manifest is restricted to L2
-
#258
by
Stardust9906
on 06 Sep, 2006 23:12
-
DaveS - 6/9/2006 11:16 PM
Chris Bergin - 7/9/2006 12:12 AM
They are going to review a load of data from the imfamous STS-93, due to "At approximately 5 seconds into the launch of STS-93, a momentary short occurred on AC1 phase A." Check out the launch video on the video section for all the fun and games that launch had.
Didn't that have to do with exposed wiring under the payload bay coming in contact with a screwhead?
Yes, that’s correct.
-
#259
by
spaceshuttle
on 06 Sep, 2006 23:13
-
ok...so, what are they going to do about launching?
