-
#480
by
rdale
on 09 Sep, 2006 22:23
-
MarkD - 9/9/2006 6:09 PM
Any videos of the engineering views? I didn't see those.
They just finished a few minutes ago, I'm sure that if they are going to be posted it may be a bit yet.
-
#481
by
rdale
on 09 Sep, 2006 22:28
-
ARGHHH!!! Anyone have contacts at KSC press that can talk to Drew Levinson? His package today AGAIN says that "ISS construction was halted after Columbia blew up in 2003."
-
#482
by
psloss
on 09 Sep, 2006 22:31
-
Some thanks:
Thanks to Chris, the NSF staff, and content contributors for their great service during this STS-115 launch campaign, particularly all the content in the last two-plus weeks and managing the load.
Thanks to the news sources, public and private -- I think this site was three hours ahead of almost everyone yesterday because someone from the team was nice enough let us know about the ECO sensor that failed WET.
And thanks to the regulars and people who do spaceflight and launch operations for real, who stop by here and fill in the blanks for us armchair spectators.
Philip Sloss
-
#483
by
nathan.moeller
on 09 Sep, 2006 22:34
-
Alright ladies and gents. I'm gonna sign off for this thread. Great job to everyone at NASA for a beautiful launch this morning. We're looking forward to a great mission for the next week and a half. To the NSF staff: thanks for your patience and hard work keeping these threads working so the news can be brought to enthusiasts and workers worldwide. It's much appreciated. Great job and I'll catch you all on the next thread for Flight Day 2. As always: GO ATLANTIS!
-
#484
by
rdale
on 09 Sep, 2006 22:38
-
Deleted. Duh.
-
#485
by
Mark Dave
on 09 Sep, 2006 22:41
-
I heard some foam hit the orbiter in the recent press conference. Is this going to threaten the mission or did the data from the radar say it is too tiny to seem a danger?
-
#486
by
DaveS
on 09 Sep, 2006 22:43
-
rdale - 10/9/2006 12:25 AM
Maybe I missed it - but out of curiosity did the ECO sensor go dry at the expected time?
During the ascent? No.
That would have meant that something was wrong with SSMEs as they would have used way more LH2 than predicted and it would have been a "low-level cut-off" leaving the orbiter in a lower than planned MECO orbit.
It was a normal velocity triggered MECO.
-
#487
by
DaveS
on 09 Sep, 2006 22:45
-
MarkD - 10/9/2006 12:28 AM
I heard some foam hit the orbiter in the recent press conference. Is this going to threaten the mission or did the data from the radar say it is too tiny to seem a danger?
No danger. All events was after the 2 min, 15 sec danger time.
-
#488
by
sbt
on 09 Sep, 2006 22:50
-
For those that didn't follow it all, and for myself to wrap it all up in my mind
Launch Day Summary
==================
Everything behaved itself except:
A fuel level sensor on a generator at the Landing Facility
A Tyvok cover (Left it a bit late leaving the Orbiter)
A Flash Evaporator (Brief presence of Ice on accent)
Minor bits and pieces of foam (and maybe a little ice) of no consequence
My kludged together 'Launchomatic (Version Less than Zero)' countdown spreadsheet
- oh, and the ET Handheld Digital Video was blurry.
Boy will the 'Darkside' press be annoyed!
Rick
-
#489
by
triddirt
on 09 Sep, 2006 22:57
-
-
#490
by
Mark Dave
on 09 Sep, 2006 22:59
-
I see.
So how is that fuel cell going? Is it behaving or will this misson be cut short?
-
#491
by
sbt
on 09 Sep, 2006 23:07
-
I don't think it has read the Darkside script. Ticking over as easily as kiss my hand and showing little or no difference in behaviour from the other two.
Isn't euphoria wonderful!
Rick
-
#492
by
DaveS
on 09 Sep, 2006 23:10
-
MarkD - 10/9/2006 12:46 AM
I see.
So how is that fuel cell going? Is it behaving or will this misson be cut short?
Nominal performance on FC#1.
-
#493
by
psloss
on 09 Sep, 2006 23:17
-
DaveS - 9/9/2006 6:57 PM
Nominal performance on FC#1.
I believe I heard a call up before crew sleep to put the circuit breaker back in for the problematic phase on the fuel cell coolant pump.
-
#494
by
daveglo
on 10 Sep, 2006 00:35
-
I watched the HDNet broadcast (woo, if you've got HD and didn't see it, there's another replay tonight at 1:00 a.m. EDT), and someone mentioned firing the OMS during ascent? Can't say I've ever heard that before. Was that to be expected, or just an idiot commentator?
-
#495
by
Chris Bergin
on 10 Sep, 2006 00:38
-
daveglo - 10/9/2006 1:22 AM
I watched the HDNet broadcast (woo, if you've got HD and didn't see it, there's another replay tonight at 1:00 a.m. EDT), and someone mentioned firing the OMS during ascent? Can't say I've ever heard that before. Was that to be expected, or just an idiot commentator?
It's correct.
The OMS engines fire to assist the ascent not long after SRB seperation.
They can also be used if the MECO results in a lower than planned orbit.
Then (and more known) they are used in the deorbit burn before re-entry.
-
#496
by
logickal23
on 10 Sep, 2006 01:54
-
Also for larger orbital changes/rendezvous burns.
-
#497
by
shuttlefan
on 10 Sep, 2006 02:06
-
Chris Bergin - 9/9/2006 7:25 PM
daveglo - 10/9/2006 1:22 AM
I watched the HDNet broadcast (woo, if you've got HD and didn't see it, there's another replay tonight at 1:00 a.m. EDT), and someone mentioned firing the OMS during ascent? Can't say I've ever heard that before. Was that to be expected, or just an idiot commentator?
It's correct.
The OMS engines fire to assist the ascent not long after SRB seperation.
They can also be used if the MECO results in a lower than planned orbit.
Then (and more known) they are used in the deorbit burn before re-entry.
The OMS Assist Manuever, as it is called, was created for ISS launches to help boost shuttles with heavy ISS components in the payload bay.
-
#498
by
rdale
on 10 Sep, 2006 02:39
-
MarkD - 9/9/2006 6:46 PM
Is it behaving or will this misson be cut short?
Do you honestly think that if the mission would be cut short - it would be information wouldn't post, and instead wait for someone to ask?
-
#499
by
Avron
on 10 Sep, 2006 03:36
-
A great day in the world of NASA spaceflight...
thanks to all..
Avron
