-
#20
by
Jurschen
on 29 Sep, 2006 18:00
-
Is it to be moved?
-
#21
by
dutch courage
on 29 Sep, 2006 18:07
-
-
#22
by
Namechange User
on 29 Sep, 2006 18:19
-
dutch courage - 29/9/2006 12:21 PM
Does anybody have a clue why they are erecting some scaffolding around the S3/S4 truss?
Can't speek specifically for ISS processing but something like this is typical for access reasons. This would allow you to work on the truss, etc without having to stand/sit on it during parts of processing where collateral damage could occur.
-
#23
by
Jim
on 29 Sep, 2006 18:24
-
dutch courage - 29/9/2006 1:21 PM
Does anybody have a clue why they are erecting some scaffolding around the S3/S4 truss?
To get access to the top
-
#24
by
Chris Bergin
on 02 Oct, 2006 23:56
-
ET-124 update:
ET124-next tank out, still planning on supporting a mid-December delivery. Schedule is showing us about 7-10 days down. Hope to update the status when move the tank to final production location.
-
#25
by
nathan.moeller
on 03 Oct, 2006 00:48
-
Chris Bergin - 2/10/2006 6:39 PM
ET-124 update:
ET124-next tank out, still planning on supporting a mid-December delivery. Schedule is showing us about 7-10 days down. Hope to update the status when move the tank to final production location.
I read on the headline article that it has to be on-dock at KSC NLT December 11 to support LON STS-317 for 116 rescue. Since the completion target is December 12, what are their intentions as far as getting the tank to KSC in time? It stands to reason, at least in my mind, that the most sensible course of action would be to slow down, do the job right and and bump the 116 launch a bit. I can understand wanting to let the workers off for Christmas, but if they're that intent on getting it off this year, bumping Discovery's flight a week or so to get ET-124 to KSC in good shape wouldn't hurt too much.
-
#26
by
MKremer
on 03 Oct, 2006 09:21
-
nathan.moeller - 2/10/2006 7:31 PM
I read on the headline article that it has to be on-dock at KSC NLT December 11 to support LON STS-317 for 116 rescue. Since the completion target is December 12, what are their intentions as far as getting the tank to KSC in time? It stands to reason, at least in my mind, that the most sensible course of action would be to slow down, do the job right and and bump the 116 launch a bit. I can understand wanting to let the workers off for Christmas, but if they're that intent on getting it off this year, bumping Discovery's flight a week or so to get ET-124 to KSC in good shape wouldn't hurt too much.
Is that for the previously scheduled launch dates, or for the updated, earlier night launch date schedule?
-
#27
by
nathan.moeller
on 03 Oct, 2006 16:50
-
MKremer - 3/10/2006 4:04 AM
nathan.moeller - 2/10/2006 7:31 PM
I read on the headline article that it has to be on-dock at KSC NLT December 11 to support LON STS-317 for 116 rescue. Since the completion target is December 12, what are their intentions as far as getting the tank to KSC in time? It stands to reason, at least in my mind, that the most sensible course of action would be to slow down, do the job right and and bump the 116 launch a bit. I can understand wanting to let the workers off for Christmas, but if they're that intent on getting it off this year, bumping Discovery's flight a week or so to get ET-124 to KSC in good shape wouldn't hurt too much.
Is that for the previously scheduled launch dates, or for the updated, earlier night launch date schedule?
It's for the new December 7 launch date.
-
#28
by
Avron
on 04 Oct, 2006 04:16
-
nathan.moeller - 2/10/2006 8:31 PM
It stands to reason, at least in my mind, that the most sensible course of action would be to slow down, do the job right and and bump the 116 launch a bit. I can understand wanting to let the workers off for Christmas, but if they're that intent on getting it off this year, bumping Discovery's flight a week or so to get ET-124 to KSC in good shape wouldn't hurt too much.
Unless this push for a launch.. (Got nothing to do with Christmas) is a executive call, and not down at the program management level?... I still think its a show for the press that they are trying to be efficient with tax dollars... but if the ET is really the issue, what actions have been taken to shorten the processing times.. overtime? I see some actions at KSC.. but just wonder if this is the case at MAF..
Got to follow the money.. and moving the launch up as not to delay does the reverse, it could end up with the program finishing on schedule.. in the money game.. you never want to finish any program/project.... hummm, unless you collect more on the next one...
All in all we need to see some constraints removed.. if not, then we have the year end problem... and that could be an easy call to delay.. but based on the last launch we have seen something new... a move to get going. ( a push from above??)
Just another view.. need more proof..
Is this Dec 7 for real? I really hope it is !
-
#29
by
nathan.moeller
on 04 Oct, 2006 04:58
-
Hey Avron. The December 7 is actually the set launch date. It would be nice to see constraints removed but I wouldn't get my hopes up. I'm not sure what's being done to shorten the processing times (19 year old Architecture student, not a KSC tech). And you're right, the YERO could become an issue. It's one reason why they're shooting for the 7th instead of the 14th. As for Christmas, I did read that some of the upper level KSC management wanted to give workers Christmas Day off. How much that fed into the decision to bump up the launch date one week I'm not sure but I'm willing to bet it wasn't much. Several shuttle missions have been in orbit during Christmas (STS-103 was the last I believe), but I think part of that mentality is that they want Discovery back on the ground before Christmas so KSC can close down. But again, I'm not sure. I read a lot of this information in the NSF article concerning the launch date. Check it out and see if I missed something.
http://nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=4843Lemme know if it helps!
-
#30
by
shuttlefan
on 04 Oct, 2006 14:35
-
nathan.moeller - 3/10/2006 11:41 PM
Hey Avron. The December 7 is actually the set launch date. It would be nice to see constraints removed but I wouldn't get my hopes up. I'm not sure what's being done to shorten the processing times (19 year old Architecture student, not a KSC tech). And you're right, the YERO could become an issue. It's one reason why they're shooting for the 7th instead of the 14th. As for Christmas, I did read that some of the upper level KSC management wanted to give workers Christmas Day off. How much that fed into the decision to bump up the launch date one week I'm not sure but I'm willing to bet it wasn't much. Several shuttle missions have been in orbit during Christmas (STS-103 was the last I believe), but I think part of that mentality is that they want Discovery back on the ground before Christmas so KSC can close down. But again, I'm not sure. I read a lot of this information in the NSF article concerning the launch date. Check it out and see if I missed something.
http://nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=4843
Lemme know if it helps!
STS-103 was the only SHUTTLE that was in orbit over Christmas. One of the Skylab missions was also up over Christmas.
-
#31
by
nathan.moeller
on 04 Oct, 2006 16:09
-
shuttlefan - 4/10/2006 9:18 AM
STS-103 was the only SHUTTLE that was in orbit over Christmas. One of the Skylab missions was also up over Christmas.
Guess I shoulda done my homework first! Sorry about that. But we can't forget Apollo 8! Any updates on ET-124?
-
#32
by
Chris Bergin
on 04 Oct, 2006 18:17
-
From L2:
OV-104 (STS-117)
OV-104 is red overall. Completed SSME removal yesterday. Big activity this week is preparation for ball valve cavity drain, which is scheduled to start second shift tomorrow night.
Chin panel removal will pick up today to support nose cap repair, which is scheduled later in the flow.
They will pick up FRCS functional and continue TPS inspection (TPS is 76% complete).
-
#33
by
Seattle Dave
on 05 Oct, 2006 00:44
-
Looks like they are really moving on with the TPS. 76 percent is great going.
-
#34
by
Avron
on 05 Oct, 2006 05:14
-
If the components make it to KSC in time there is a very good chance to make the 7th... KSC folks just seem to make it happen against the odds each time.. ref: KU bolt changeout.. it just happened.. I have no worries there.. its the components I think will be the issue as we close in on the 7th... unless some work has been done to speed up processing of say the ET.. there may be an issue..( I would guess the folks at MAF must be getting some processing efficiencies now on changes post sts-107.)
Again I hear of activity to make it happen at KSC.. but that is not enough proof that this is for real ... need to hear more of a risk mitigation plans elsewhere.. but it sounds great thus far.. lets hope that no cracks etc are found it processing that may put a spanner in the works..
Three STS flight in 6 months... when was the last time that happened?
-
#35
by
nathan.moeller
on 05 Oct, 2006 12:54
-
Avron - 4/10/2006 11:57 PM
Three STS flight in 6 months... when was the last time that happened?
March-June 2002 with STS-109-111
What have we heard about the processing progress on ET-124? KSC folks look to be getting putting their own feet to the fire!
-
#36
by
Martin FL
on 05 Oct, 2006 13:03
-
nathan.moeller - 5/10/2006 7:37 AM
What have we heard about the processing progress on ET-124?
You're on L2, so you should be able to see the big memo on ET-124 from yesterday on there.
-
#37
by
nathan.moeller
on 05 Oct, 2006 13:19
-
Martin FL - 5/10/2006 7:46 AM
You're on L2, so you should be able to see the big memo on ET-124 from yesterday on there.
Sounds like they're picking up the pace! These standup reports are amazing. Thanks Chris!
-
#38
by
Davie OPF
on 06 Oct, 2006 05:30
-
So far so good, but there's no contingency days left for any problems that come up in this current OV-103/104 flow, especially with the potential loss of CSCS days with ISS issues.
-
#39
by
Chris Bergin
on 06 Oct, 2006 22:32
-
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
Technicians continue performing post-landing inspections on orbiter
Atlantis and are about 85 percent complete with the review of the
thermal protection system. During inspections, a 0.1-inch diameter
impact was noted on Atlantis' right-hand payload bay door radiator.
The damage has been preliminarily identified as caused by
micrometeoroid orbital debris (MMOD), which passed through the
radiator's face (outer) sheet, interior honeycomb structure and inner
sheet. The MMOD did not impact the payload bay door itself. Ground
operations personnel at Kennedy Space Center will repair the damage
as soon as a plan is developed and approved, while ensuring the site
is protected for analysis by orbital debris experts at Johnson Space
Center.
This week, technicians performed the forward reaction control system
functional test and checkout, with a similar test scheduled for the
orbiter maneuvering system this weekend. On Oct. 1, technicians
removed the three space shuttle main engines from the aft of the
vehicle. Wing leading edge thermography on the reinforced
carbon-carbon panels is complete and the chin panel, located under
the nose cap, has been removed.
