LIVE: STS-116 - Flight Day 10 - EVA 4

[rdale]

Why would you try to match body sizes?

[dutch courage]

rdale - 18/12/2006  4:58 PM

Why would you try to match body sizes?

I meant dividing the EVA time more evenly. (I couln't find the right word, foreigner you know)

[Chris Bergin]

dutch courage - 18/12/2006  4:07 PM

rdale - 18/12/2006  4:58 PM

Why would you try to match body sizes?

I meant dividing the EVA time more evenly. (I couln't find the right word, foreigner you know)

Er is een kleine Nederlandse invasie op het forum, dus ik dacht dat het wel een goed idee zou zijn. Nou, ik heb een Nederlands audiocursus gedownload, en ik heb veel geoefend dit weekend.

[Chris Bergin]

Ah ha. Finally a wide shot of the P6 array. Really is a lot shorter than before (11 bays to go):

[jacqmans]

Chris Bergin - 18/12/2006  5:11 PM


Er is een kleine Nederlandse invasie op het forum, dus ik dacht dat het wel een goed idee zou zijn. Nou, ik heb een Nederlandse audiocursus gedownload, en ik heb veel geoefend dit weekend.

the only mistake I could find...

Goed zo  

[Chris Bergin]

[Chris Bergin]

[jmjawors]

I know this has been asked on other threads but I don't believe it was answered, so I'll bite the bullet:

What is a "bay?"  I've been staring at P6 and I can't make heads or tails of what they're looking at that they can come up with the number 11.  

I hope this wasn't too irritating a question.  

[Chris Bergin]

jmjawors - 18/12/2006  4:28 PM

I know this has been asked on other threads but I don't believe it was answered, so I'll bite the bullet:

What is a "bay?"  I've been staring at P6 and I can't make heads or tails of what they're looking at that they can come up with the number 11.  

I hope this wasn't too irritating a question.  

The only irritating question is the one that's not asked

I believe it works out as - going off the 17.5 and 11 bay count - at about three panels = one bay. I also believe if you look at the blocks on the mast, you can see each "bay" length.

[jmjawors]

Thanks for that.  It'll definitely help us follow their progress once they start retracting.

[rdale]

dutch courage - 18/12/2006  11:07 AM

I meant dividing the EVA time more evenly. (I couln't find the right word, foreigner you know)

Sometimes I forget this is a global forum ;> Now I understand what you were saying...

[Chris Bergin]

15 mins ahead of schedule with the EVA preps.

[rdale]

EVA Procedures (6.2meg file) : http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/165504main_msg102.pdf

[Spiff]

jacqmans - 18/12/2006  5:19 PM

Chris Bergin - 18/12/2006  5:11 PM


Er is een kleine Nederlandse invasie op het forum, dus ik dacht dat het wel een goed idee zou zijn. Nou, ik heb een Nederlandse audiocursus gedownload, en ik heb veel geoefend dit weekend.

the only mistake I could find...

Goed zo  

Holy cr*p Chris. That's pretty good. You sure ya didn't shamelessly use babelfish?

If not, I definately agree with Jacques' opinion.

[AstroMen]

Hola soy chileno... no se mucho hablar english...
 Pictures :

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e227/AstroMen/atradecerday10.png" />

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e227/AstroMen/dentrodequest.png" />

[Chris Bergin]

Just a note on information we're working on, via a MER note about MMT activities. On L2 and dated 30 mins ago.

MMT is considering landing Thursday now, which would mean a shortened late inspection. This is related to weather for Friday (Saturday is only an option for a techical issue with Discovery).

[rdale]

Gary - 18/12/2006  11:53 AM

I notice that the execute package has Edwards flagged as RED so I assume that only leaves KSC and possibly white sands as viable landing sites?

That would be the case if the shuttle was coming down today and tomorrow, but barring an emergency that won't be an issue.

[rdale]

Chris Bergin - 18/12/2006  11:48 AM

MMT is considering landing Thursday now, which would mean a shortened late inspection.

Phil mentioned in the post-conference Q&A Saturday night that the Thursday option was on the table - are you saying it's "higher up" on the table or just being formally discussed now...

[psloss]

Gary - 18/12/2006  11:53 AM

I notice that the execute package has Edwards flagged as RED so I assume that only leaves KSC and possibly white sands as viable landing sites?

Are you talking about in the NOTAMS section?  As it says, only the lakebed runways are unusable; Runway 04/22 is a concrete runway.

[Chris Bergin]

rdale - 18/12/2006  5:06 PM

Chris Bergin - 18/12/2006  11:48 AM

MMT is considering landing Thursday now, which would mean a shortened late inspection.

Phil mentioned in the post-conference Q&A Saturday night that the Thursday option was on the table - are you saying it's "higher up" on the table or just being formally discussed now...

At the Saturday presser Phil E actually said that Thursday was NOT an option if they wanted to do late inspections. He was pressed by Bill Harwood, but I'm going off Phil E's opening statements, as that is representative of MMT decision.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=4961

The MMT is discussing (right now) if they can now do Thursday with a very different type of late inspection, much shorter and omitting elements out of the inspection, if Friday is looking poor for weather.