-
STS-117 Processing latest (through to Rollover to VAB) by Chris Bergin on 22 Sep, 2006 13:01
-
STS-318 supporting Discovery as LON, NET (No Earlier Than) Feb 9.
STS-117 NET Feb 22.
This mission is rumoured to be slipping due to ET delay, which could affect the December launch of Discovery on STS-116.
Latest to go in here. -
#1 by shuttlefan on 22 Sep, 2006 13:48
-
Quote
Chris Bergin - 22/9/2006 7:44 AM
STS-318 supporting Discovery as LON, NET (No Earlier Than) Feb 9.
STS-117 NET Feb 22.
This mission is rumoured to be slipping due to ET delay, which could affect the December launch of Discovery on STS-116.
Latest to go in here.
Chris, any idea on the reasons for the ET delays--problems or just behind schedule? -
#2 by Chris Bergin on 22 Sep, 2006 14:00
-
The usual tight processing schedule, but I would prefer to speak to MAF and get the latest, so I'll post an update then.
-
#3 by UK Shuttle Clan on 22 Sep, 2006 17:35
-
I know this could be a Shuttle Q and A question, but I would assume this is related. What will be the first few things they'll carry out on Atlantis?
-
#4 by Jim on 22 Sep, 2006 17:50
-
look at the manifest
-
#5 by Spiff on 24 Sep, 2006 18:12
-
Quote
Chris Bergin - 22/9/2006 2:44 PM
STS-318 supporting Discovery as LON, NET (No Earlier Than) Feb 9.
I've been a bit confused about LON missions being stated with a NET date. Wouldn't it be more logical for launch dates of LON missions to be NLT (No Later Than?)
after all, as already being discussed in this thread, if Atlantis' ET is delayed (making the feb 9 date impossible) this will impact on Discovery's launch. -
#6 by Chris Bergin on 25 Sep, 2006 02:46
-
Quote
Spiff - 24/9/2006 6:55 PM
QuoteChris Bergin - 22/9/2006 2:44 PM
STS-318 supporting Discovery as LON, NET (No Earlier Than) Feb 9.
I've been a bit confused about LON missions being stated with a NET date. Wouldn't it be more logical for launch dates of LON missions to be NLT (No Later Than?)
after all, as already being discussed in this thread, if Atlantis' ET is delayed (making the feb 9 date impossible) this will impact on Discovery's launch.
I bet there is a NLT date, but on the manifests they seem to insist on using NET. -
#7 by Jorge on 25 Sep, 2006 04:05
-
Quote
Chris Bergin - 24/9/2006 9:29 PM
I bet there is a NLT date, but on the manifests they seem to insist on using NET.
With good reason. The manifest is intended to give the date that NASA has to "work-to" to get the vehicle ready. For a LON flight, it's much smarter to shoot for the NET date and give yourself some margin rather than shoot for the NLT date and have no margin at all.
The NLT date is fuzzy anyway. The CSCS L-1 Month Duration Report is a good starting point but there are many variables that can change that.
--
JRF -
#8 by nathan.moeller on 26 Sep, 2006 14:18
-
Quote
Chris Bergin - 22/9/2006 7:44 AM
STS-318 supporting Discovery as LON, NET (No Earlier Than) Feb 9.
Hey sorry Chris, but I'm confused with the mission designation here. I thought STS-117's LON designation was STS-317 and the standby mission for 117 was STS-318 Endeavour. I just remember someone telling me that they replaced the first "1" in the designation with a "3" for an LON flight on the manifest. Also, I read that the latest LON flight on the manifest is STS-322, which was listed as the STS-122 Discovery mission on standby as a LON flight to support a stranded STS-120 Atlantis crew. Possibly a dumb question but I'm trying to keep up with the manifest. Thanks! -
#9 by Spiff on 26 Sep, 2006 15:20
-
Quote
Jorge - 25/9/2006 5:48 AM
With good reason. The manifest is intended to give the date that NASA has to "work-to" to get the vehicle ready. For a LON flight, it's much smarter to shoot for the NET date and give yourself some margin rather than shoot for the NLT date and have no margin at all.
The NLT date is fuzzy anyway. The CSCS L-1 Month Duration Report is a good starting point but there are many variables that can change that.
--
JRF
I see your point on the variables and the 'work to', but still, we're talking about a launch on need. I suppose that in official circles both dates are known.
The NET date is driven by readiness of the vehicle, crew, support, etc. (currently mainly driven by ET, but can be anything.)
The NLT date is driven by available consumables once Discovery gets to orbit and varies greatly as you point out.
If the NET date is later than the NLT date, that means no launch for Discovery until NLT date passes NET date. And I'd make damn sure that I have quite a bit of contingency in both dates (Later in NLT, earlier in NET) Which I'm sure they do.
P.S. Sorry for being ignorant: what is the CSCS L-1?
-
#10 by psloss on 26 Sep, 2006 15:54
-
Quote
Spiff - 26/9/2006 11:03 AM
Hypothetically, last week it's February 25th, this week it's February 7th -- the work schedules would be in as much flux as the CSCS duration itself.
The NLT date is driven by available consumables once Discovery gets to orbit and varies greatly as you point out.
What's the advantage of a highly fluctuating schedule over a constant NET date?
-
#11 by nathan.moeller on 27 Sep, 2006 04:43
-
Quote
psloss - 26/9/2006 10:37 AM
QuoteSpiff - 26/9/2006 11:03 AM
Hypothetically, last week it's February 25th, this week it's February 7th -- the work schedules would be in as much flux as the CSCS duration itself.
The NLT date is driven by available consumables once Discovery gets to orbit and varies greatly as you point out.
What's the advantage of a highly fluctuating schedule over a constant NET date?
Hey Philip, I'll take a crack at this one. Let me know if it helps. A lot of this NET date determination is riding on the progress of ET-124, which we all fear is slipping behind schedule. If it slips too far, the STS-116 mission will be bumped until an acceptable NLT date for a possible STS-317 mission is determined. Again, ET-124 will probably be the biggest driving factor in this equation. The constant NET date is the date they think they can make under current circumstances, with the fluctuation in the schedule being considered. At this time that date remains February 22, but we won't be too surprised if and when that date slips and affects the STS-116 launch date. -
#12 by UK Shuttle Clan on 27 Sep, 2006 09:53
-
I understand that Orbiters don't get a scrub down because of the thermal tiles and blankets, but do they get any level of cleaning, as I would have thought that dust and all manner of contamination would be on the tiles and blankets from landing and roll back into the OPF? So I'm confused as to whether they do get a clean during turnaround processing.
-
#13 by Jim on 27 Sep, 2006 11:24
-
The outside doesn't matter wrt to dirt. It isn't cleaned. The only thing done to the outside (the TPS) is waterproofing. This causes some of the discoloration after entry. The crew cabin and payload bay is cleaned every mission.
-
#14 by dutch courage on 27 Sep, 2006 13:38
-
It looks like the S3/S4 truss is about to be moved.
EDIT: Well, the truss went for a short ride. One bay to the right
-
#15 by Jorge on 27 Sep, 2006 14:10
-
Quote
Spiff - 26/9/2006 10:03 AM
QuoteJorge - 25/9/2006 5:48 AM
With good reason. The manifest is intended to give the date that NASA has to "work-to" to get the vehicle ready. For a LON flight, it's much smarter to shoot for the NET date and give yourself some margin rather than shoot for the NLT date and have no margin at all.
The NLT date is fuzzy anyway. The CSCS L-1 Month Duration Report is a good starting point but there are many variables that can change that.
--
JRF
I see your point on the variables and the 'work to', but still, we're talking about a launch on need. I suppose that in official circles both dates are known.
The NET date is driven by readiness of the vehicle, crew, support, etc. (currently mainly driven by ET, but can be anything.)
The NLT date is driven by available consumables once Discovery gets to orbit and varies greatly as you point out.
P.S. Sorry for being ignorant: what is the CSCS L-1?
Both dates are known, though as I already said, the NLT date is "fuzzy" because it makes a lot of assumptions, and is therefore not included on the manifest.
CSCS stands for "Contingency Shuttle Crew Support". It would have been called simply "Safe Haven", but that name was already appropriated for an earlier study concerning ISS crews with no CRV/Soyuz capability.
L-1 stands for "Launch minus one month", which is when the last prelaunch CSCS Duration Report is published.
--
JRF -
#16 by Spiff on 27 Sep, 2006 15:20
-
Ok thanks that makes sense.
So basically this CSCS L-1 month report is the first moment in time where they can predict with any level of certainty the amount of consumables available? -
#17 by punkboi on 27 Sep, 2006 19:18
-
Photos of the S3/S4 truss being processed for 117:
-
#18 by jacqmans on 29 Sep, 2006 16:57
-
Mission: STS-117 - 21st International Space Station Flight (13A) -
S3/S4 Truss Segment Solar Arrays
Vehicle: Atlantis (OV-104)
Location: Orbiter Processing Facility Bay 1
Launch Date: No earlier than Feb. 22, 2007
Launch Pad: 39B
Crew: Sturckow, Archambault, Reilly, Forrester, Swanson and Olivas
Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles
Following the landing of Atlantis on Sept. 21, technicians towed the
vehicle into the Orbiter Processing Facility to begin preparing it
for its next mission to the International Space Station. Thermal
protection system post-flight inspection is 27 percent complete.
Flight crew equipment removal was completed Monday.
Technicians installed payload bay door strongbacks on Monday in
preparation for the doors to open. On Wednesday, the doors were
opened and the Ku-band antenna was deployed. Nose cap and chin panel
thermography has begun and preparations are under way to begin
thermography on the wing leading edges.
-
#19 by dutch courage on 29 Sep, 2006 17:38
-
Does anybody have a clue why they are erecting some scaffolding around the S3/S4 truss?
