Author Topic: General ISS Q&A thread  (Read 654113 times)

Offline dutch courage

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 643
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #80 on: 10/29/2006 12:04 PM »
Yesterday I was watching the National Geographic documentary 'Inside: space launch' which showed the training and spaceflight of Greg Olson. Returning with expedition 11 Sergei Krikalev and John Philips there was air leaking from the docking port. In 1971 three cosmonauts died when air leaked from their Soyuz.

I haven't heard anything on this during/after Expedition 11 neither from NASA nor from the media.

From MSNBC: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9888881/ Dangling strap to blame for scary space leak?



Online hop

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3327
  • Liked: 464
  • Likes Given: 816
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #81 on: 10/29/2006 08:52 PM »
Quote
dutch courage - 29/10/2006  4:47 AM
I haven't heard anything on this during/after Expedition 11 neither from NASA nor from the media.
The problems were mentioned, although as usual for the Russian side, the details didn't come out until after the landing.

Offline Suzy

  • Reality disappoints me
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 597
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Portal
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #82 on: 10/30/2006 06:41 AM »

Quote
dutch courage - 29/10/2006  9:47 PM

 

Yesterday I was watching the National Geographic documentary 'Inside: space launch' which showed the training and spaceflight of Greg Olson. Returning with expedition 11 Sergei Krikalev and John Philips there was air leaking from the docking port. In 1971 three cosmonauts died when air leaked from their Soyuz.

 

I haven't heard anything on this during/after Expedition 11 neither from NASA nor from the media.

 
 

From the ISS-11 Post-Increment Evaluation Report PDF document mentioned in this post:

 
 

The separation command initiation and physical separation were approximately 4 minutes later than originally planned due to discussions on the Descent Module pressure integrity. It was noted by Sergei Krikalev and the Russian Mission Control that the pressure in the Habitation Module) was holding steady; however the pressure in the Descent Module was slowly decreasing. Subsequent evaluation determined that the pressure decrease was primarily driven by the crew’s consumption of the Descent Module Oxygen (O2) and the removal of CO2 by the Soyuz CO2 scrubber system. Prior to this, two other small issues were found and resolved. The first issue occurred during the leak check between the Habitation Module and the Descent Module. Sergei Krikalev noted an audible leak during the leak check and isolated it to the pressure equalization valve between the modules. After cycling the equalization valve the leak was eliminated and the leak check was successfully completed. The second issue occurred during the pressure leak check of the crews SOKOL suits. It was noted that there was no oxygen flow to the suits. The crew re-initialized the leak check, cycled the Soyuz O2 valve and successful O2 flow was initiated with the suit. The de-orbit burn was nominally performed with a delta velocity of 115.2 meters per second.

 

Offline dutch courage

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 643
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #83 on: 10/30/2006 01:36 PM »
Thanks Suzy. Nice site you have by the way with all kinds of Russian spacenews.
What's your special interest in Russian spaceflight?


Offline Suzy

  • Reality disappoints me
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 597
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Portal
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #84 on: 10/31/2006 02:25 AM »
Thanks :) Don't know, I just like it, and the way they do things (except for dumb advertising stunts).

Offline dutch courage

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 643
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #85 on: 11/07/2006 02:57 PM »
I was watching the animation of the mating of P5 to P4 and I saw that the station arm was almost fully stretched. I'm wondering if the arm can reach the end of P5 to mate P6?


Offline Gary

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 469
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #86 on: 11/07/2006 05:16 PM »
Don't forget that CanadaArm2 can 'inchworm' it's way across the ISS to special attachment points so that it can be in the best place for any work it needs to do.

Offline spacedreams

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 177
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #87 on: 11/08/2006 05:57 AM »
The arm will be based off the Mobile Servicer which can translate down the track to a parking spot close enough for the mate.

Offline dutch courage

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 643
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #88 on: 11/10/2006 03:22 PM »
The JAXA KIBO module is being moved. Any reason?

Offline Spirit

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 180
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Regards,
Atanas

Offline Spirit

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 180
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #90 on: 12/02/2006 08:40 PM »
In a recent NASAcast Mike Leinbach said that Discovery launched P3/4 because it was too heavy for Atlantis and that Atlantis is heavier than Discovery. But Atlantis is launching S3/4! Does this mean that P3/4 is heavier than S3/4?
Regards,
Atanas

Offline psloss

  • Veteran armchair spectator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17317
  • Liked: 1801
  • Likes Given: 1094
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #91 on: 12/02/2006 09:15 PM »
Quote
Spirit - 2/12/2006  4:23 PM

In a recent NASAcast Mike Leinbach said that Discovery launched P3/4 because it was too heavy for Atlantis and that Atlantis is heavier than Discovery. But Atlantis is launching S3/4! Does this mean that P3/4 is heavier than S3/4?
Other way around -- Atlantis launched P3/P4 on ISS-12A (STS-115, as shown) and is also scheduled to launch S3/S4 on ISS-13A (STS-117).  From what I understand, the weight difference is only a few hundred pounds, but those two launches have narrow performance margins.  In that situation, a couple hundred pounds becomes more significant.

Offline triddirt

  • Pack my box with five dozen liquor jugs
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 505
  • Rochester, NY
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #92 on: 12/09/2006 12:33 AM »
Based on the recent performance by the Expedition 14 Astronaut Happy Birthday band there is obviously an electronic keyboard and an acoustic guitar on board.
Does someone have a list of other musical instruments currently on board and their status (permanent or personal).

I've got to believe a harmonica has come and gone at some time.

So who is our ISS Musical history buff?

Offline nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2336
  • Liked: 508
  • Likes Given: 227
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #93 on: 12/12/2006 02:17 AM »
The P6 truss as currently mounted to the Z1 truss has three radiators sticking out of it. However when finally attached to the P5 truss it only seems to have one radiator. What happens to the other two? Will they be attached to the either of the three panel radiators inboard of the solar arrays?

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6180
  • Liked: 32
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #94 on: 12/12/2006 05:20 AM »
Quote
nacnud - 11/12/2006  9:00 PM

The P6 truss as currently mounted to the Z1 truss has three radiators sticking out of it. However when finally attached to the P5 truss it only seems to have one radiator. What happens to the other two? Will they be attached to the either of the three panel radiators inboard of the solar arrays?

Nope, they are different types of radiators. The three panel radiators inboard (P1/S1) are the External Active Thermal Control System (EATCS) while the additional radiators on P6 are Early EATCS (EEATCS). The EEATCS radiators are actually Photo Voltaic Radiators (PVRs) taken from the S4 and S6 truss segments. They are smaller than the EATCS radiators and are not interchangeable. The center EATCS radiators on each have been deployed, and the other two are still retracted and will be deployed later (this can't be done until after the FGB solar arrays are retracted, since they stick out far enough to interfere with TRRJ rotation).

The PVR on the forward side of P6 is the permanent one; the starboard and aft PVRs are EEATCS. Originally, the plan was to launch the S3/S4 and S6 truss segments without PVRs and relocate the P6 EEATCS radiators to them via EVA. That plan has changed for STS-117. The flight was oversubscribed on EVA hours and as a get-well NASA decided to launch S3/S4 with its own PVR. As far as I know, NASA still plans to launch S6 without a PVR on STS-119 and relocate an EEATCS radiator to it. The EEATCS radiator that would have gone to S4 will simply be retracted and remain on P6.
--
JRF
JRF

Offline fburnell

  • Gawker
  • Member
  • Posts: 45
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #95 on: 12/12/2006 05:30 AM »
From my understanding, it was originally planned to transfer the extra two radiators to S4 and S6.  However, it was later decided to fly S4 and S6 with radiators attached. I believe they will be stored on P6 as on-orbit spares.

Offline jarthur

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 117
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #96 on: 12/14/2006 04:26 PM »
This question goes back aways, but why is the PMA from Unity to the FGB angled? Why not just have all the modules, i.e.  Destiny, Unity, Zarya and Zvesda in line with each other instead of the US and Russian segments slightly offset from each other?

Offline Squid.erau

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • ETHOS
  • JSC
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 80
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #97 on: 12/14/2006 05:05 PM »
Another question, probably easy to answer, but i'm curious.  I know for the last few shuttle missions to the ISS, whenever an EVA was planned, the astronauts had to 'camp out' in the Quest airlock overnight before the EVA.  So, I'm guessing that this means that they have to eat/go to the bathroom etc. while in the airlock, prior to EVA.  Are there specific facilities in the airlock for this, or do they just use the EVA suit equipment?  Thanks in advance.

Matt

Offline dutch courage

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 643
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #98 on: 12/14/2006 05:38 PM »
Quote
Squid.erau - 14/12/2006  6:48 PM

Another question, probably easy to answer, but i'm curious.  I know for the last few shuttle missions to the ISS, whenever an EVA was planned, the astronauts had to 'camp out' in the Quest airlock overnight before the EVA.  So, I'm guessing that this means that they have to eat/go to the bathroom etc. while in the airlock, prior to EVA.  Are there specific facilities in the airlock for this, or do they just use the EVA suit equipment?  Thanks in advance.
After the EVA crew wake up they will put on masks and breath pure oxigen.
They will than go back into the station and do their business.


Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32428
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11169
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: General ISS Q&A thread
« Reply #99 on: 12/14/2006 05:56 PM »
Quote
jarthur - 14/12/2006  12:09 PM

This question goes back aways, but why is the PMA from Unity to the FGB angled? Why not just have all the modules, i.e.  Destiny, Unity, Zarya and Zvesda in line with each other instead of the US and Russian segments slightly offset from each other?

Because it uses the same PMA design as PMA1 & 2 which the shuttle docks to.