Author Topic: LIVE: STS-116 Landing Weather (Read 60366 times)

rdale · « **on:** 12/18/2006 04:31 pm »

Here's a rough picture for now...

Thursday: Acceptable weather at KSC, small chance of a shower but nothing problematic
Friday: Probably too many rain showers and winds at both KSC & White Sands, Edwards beautiful
Saturday: Still bad at KSC & White Sands, turning a little worse at Edwards (weak system expected to come onshore in the northwest and that may bring in more clouds and a little more wind for CA, but emphasis on "little")

KSC landing is currently scheduled for 3:56pm Friday.

psloss · « **Reply #1 on:** 12/18/2006 04:58 pm »

Quote

rdale - 18/12/2006 12:14 PM

Here's a rough picture for now...

Thursday: Acceptable weather at KSC, small chance of a shower but nothing problematic
Friday: Probably too many rain showers and winds at both KSC & White Sands, Edwards beautiful
Saturday: Still bad at KSC & White Sands, turning a little worse at Edwards but still acceptable

What is/are the concern(s) at Edwards going into the end of the week? Winds, clouds/precip from a front?

It looks like the Thursday considerations are trying to avoid an Edwards ferry, especially if Edwards looks good into Saturday. Southern California isn't a bad place to spend the holidays (I do it all the time), but I'm pretty sure the landing recovery teams would rather be at home for Christmas. They probably also remember the post STS-98 experience (I think it was after 98) where Atlantis got rained on for several days, which increased the amount of post-flight TPS work.

I think the White Sands discussions (the media discussions) were a little premature...I believe we've gotten closer to landing day without it coming up in situations where the KSC and EDW forecasts were marginal. (There have been a couple of occasions where KSC and EDW opportunities were waved off on the same day due to weather, and it those cases, White Sands does often become a higher visibility "what if.")

Paul Adams · « **Reply #2 on:** 12/18/2006 05:21 pm »

What are Fridays landing times?

Paul

DaveS · « **Reply #3 on:** 12/19/2006 04:09 am »

Quote

Paul Adams - 18/12/2006 7:04 PM

What are Fridays landing times?

Paul

Mentioned in the very first post: 3:56 pm EST.

Paul Adams · « **Reply #4 on:** 12/19/2006 12:49 pm »

Opps!

So they were!

Paul

fdasun · « **Reply #5 on:** 12/19/2006 01:21 pm »

Quote

rdale - 19/12/2006 1:14 AM

Here's a rough picture for now...

Thursday: Acceptable weather at KSC, small chance of a shower but nothing problematic
Friday: Probably too many rain showers and winds at both KSC & White Sands, Edwards beautiful
Saturday: Still bad at KSC & White Sands, turning a little worse at Edwards (weak system expected to come onshore in the northwest and that may bring in more clouds and a little more wind for CA, but emphasis on "little")

KSC landing is currently scheduled for 3:56pm Friday.

Discovery is slated for undocking today. Why the crew can not attempt a landing on Thursday without skipping the final TPS inspection ?

In the worse case, if KSC, White Sands and Edwards are all not suitable for landing, will the shuttle try a cross-atlantic glide and land at Zaragoza or ... ?

rdale · « **Reply #6 on:** 12/19/2006 02:07 pm »

All looks great for Edwards AFB and White Sands on Friday with few (if any) clouds and a light breeze. KSC has a 30% chance of showers with southerly winds gusting up to 20kts.

Saturday still looks good out west, and looks much worse at KSC. I see no reason that the shuttle won't come down at one of the two alternates on Friday.

Regarding the question about using other sites in case all are bad both days (which clearly won't happen) it was asked in the FD8(?) thread and the guess was they'd use an alternate in the US but if not one of the three TAL sites would probably be next in line. The MMT is meeting today to discuss reducing or skipping the inspection, but given the good weather forecast out west, and the fact that this orbiter isn't an impact on the schedule, there's no big push to do so.

- Rob

psloss · « **Reply #7 on:** 12/19/2006 02:30 pm »

Quote

fdasun - 19/12/2006 9:04 AM

Discovery is slated for undocking today. Why the crew can not attempt a landing on Thursday without skipping the final TPS inspection ?

Because it forces the crew and the teams on the ground to rush. They can rush if the situation dictates rushing -- an emergency, for example, like losing cooling or a crew module leak -- but rushing increases the likelihood of making mistakes.

psloss · « **Reply #8 on:** 12/19/2006 06:23 pm »

OK, I see how White Sands could be a hot topic from today's SMG forecasts; the Thursday and Friday forecasts are attached. There's a chance of crosswinds at Edwards on Friday that makes it possibly marginal...KSC has ceiling and precip issues on Friday. White Sands forecast for Friday doesn't carry any "concerns" as of now...

Main landing forecast page:
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/smg/SMG_prod.php?pil=OAV&sid=JSC&version=0

Forecast sheets:
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/smg/landfcsts_conus_pg1.html
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/smg/landfcsts_conus_pg2.html

psloss · « **Reply #9 on:** 12/20/2006 01:13 am »

SMG posted their latest forecasts a little while ago; no changes in the Friday forecast...
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/smg/landfcsts_conus_pg1.html

psloss · « **Reply #10 on:** 12/20/2006 12:54 pm »

Latest SMG forecast is out...no significant changes to the Friday forecast.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #11 on:** 12/20/2006 12:57 pm »

Getting White Sands prepared is the basis of nearly all the MER chatter right now.

psloss · « **Reply #12 on:** 12/20/2006 01:11 pm »

Quote

Chris Bergin - 20/12/2006 8:40 AM

Getting White Sands prepared is the basis of nearly all the MER chatter right now.

Not sure if "contingency landing return support" type of documentation has shown up on L2, but it seems that the ferry prep is a bigger programmatic issue. Bill Harwood reported "up to 45 days" to get an orbiter back from there (that could be worst case, though); probably no better anywhere but Edwards (or KSC). The only time they landed at White Sands (STS-3, of course), the decision was made preflight to make it the primary landing site, so the recovery team got a head start on staging and transporting the equipment.

rdale · « **Reply #13 on:** 12/20/2006 01:17 pm »

Interesting variety of wind forecasts for EDW. Biggest problem forecasting out there is that minimal measurements are taken over the Pacific, so we rely more on computers than we'd like. As a result - big variations from forecast to forecast. As you see NWS SMG is saying northwest winds at 12-18kts, however Edwards AFB mets are saying southwest at 16G24. One computer has W 15G20, the other NE20G25!

I'm voting for White Sands now ;>

Gary · « **Reply #14 on:** 12/20/2006 01:20 pm »

My vote is on KSC. I think Edwards is out due to winds. White Sands is an option but was only used at the start of the shuttle programme because the shuttle had no nose-gear steering and white sands has lovely large open space.

psloss · « **Reply #15 on:** 12/20/2006 01:34 pm »

Quote

Gary - 20/12/2006 9:03 AM

My vote is on KSC. I think Edwards is out due to winds. White Sands is an option but was only used at the start of the shuttle programme because the shuttle had no nose-gear steering.

It was probably more used for that one flight because the program wasn't ready to do a concrete runway landing. The Edwards lakebed runways were soaked, but Runway 22 was used for the next three landings (STS-4 through STS-6). In the case of STS-6, if I recall correctly the rains in the 82-83 winter were even more significant than 81-82, which probably presented approximately the same situation as it had a year earlier with STS-3.

DaveS · « **Reply #16 on:** 12/20/2006 01:35 pm »

Quote

Gary - 20/12/2006 3:03 PM

My vote is on KSC. I think Edwards is out due to winds. White Sands is an option but was only used at the start of the shuttle programme because the shuttle had no nose-gear steering.

If they have alot of shower activity within 30 NM of the SLF at KSC, they won't go for it. Because at Mach 5 or more a rain drop can have the impact force of a rifle bullet.

This is why the SCA when it carries the orbiter must avoid bad weather in all cases, as even at those low speeds(Mach 0.7), rain drops carry alot of damage potential.

So shower activity = A solid No-go.

Edit:
I just want to add that it was because of a late popping up shower at the 33 end of the SLF, Discovery had to re-def the runway selection to 15 to avoid it during entry on STS-121 in July.

psloss · « **Reply #17 on:** 12/20/2006 01:41 pm »

Quote

Gary - 20/12/2006 9:03 AM

My vote is on KSC. I think Edwards is out due to winds. White Sands is an option but was only used at the start of the shuttle programme because the shuttle had no nose-gear steering and white sands has lovely large open space.

Also w.r.t, to nose gear steering, they did have main gear brakes and differential braking and that carried into KSC landings.

Gary · « **Reply #18 on:** 12/20/2006 01:59 pm »

Quote

psloss - 20/12/2006 2:24 PM

Quote
Gary - 20/12/2006 9:03 AM

My vote is on KSC. I think Edwards is out due to winds. White Sands is an option but was only used at the start of the shuttle programme because the shuttle had no nose-gear steering and white sands has lovely large open space.
Also w.r.t, to nose gear steering, they did have main gear brakes and differential braking and that carried into KSC landings.

True, But STS-51D landed at KSC and used differential braking thanks to crosswinds and it resulted in a tire blow out and brake damage. All landings used Edwards as primary until the nose gear steering was certified.
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/missions/51-d/mission-51-d.html

DaveS · « **Reply #19 on:** 12/20/2006 02:08 pm »

Taken from FD12 Execute Package, page 23:

FD11 MMT Crew Summary

Weather Forecast - The Spaceflight Meteorology Group presented a weather forecast for
all three CONUS sites, focusing on the EOM-1, EOM, and EOM+1 days. KSC was
characterized as marginal on both EOM and EOM+1 due to low clouds and the chance of
rain showers within the 30 nmi circle. Edwards was characterized as marginal on EOM due
to high crosswinds, but the site returns to solid “GO” conditions on EOM+1. The Northrup
lakebed condition is being watched closely as showers move through the area today. The
Northrup forecast is “GO” on EOM and marginal on EOM+1 due to a slight chance of rain
showers within the 30 nmi circle.

While assessing the weather forecast, the MMT team briefly touched on the option whereby
a modified late inspection could be performed on the same day as FCS checkout in order to
preserve the option of landing on FD13. This option is not feasible from a timeline
perspective and will not be considered further. The intent of the MMT is for the mission
operations team to land the vehicle on EOM unless it is precluded by bad weather at all
three sites or a systems problem.

Northrup Discussion - KSC ground operations personnel summarized the capabilities
available at Northrup. The community is confident that the orbiter can safely land at
Northrup and there are adequate faculties to egress the crew. One of the main concerns
with a landing at Northrup is how it affects the post-processing of the vehicle. During the
extended period where the orbiter would remain at Northrup, the orbiter could be exposed to
low temperatures that would increase the chances of leaking thrusters and freezing
hydrazine/water lines. This concern extrapolates into some additional risk to the ground
personnel that are post-processing the orbiter. After taking a poll, the MMT team
unanimously agreed that crew safety will not be traded at the expense of vehicle turnaround
concerns. With this decision, a full-up late inspection will remain in the FD12 timeline.