Author Topic: LIVE: STS-116 - Flight Day 12 - Late Inspections (Read 39635 times)

JimO · « **Reply #20 on:** 12/20/2006 05:18 pm »

"Noticed a few MMOD impacts on the HRSI tiles on the upper surface of the wing"

Do we have any before-after images?

gordo · « **Reply #21 on:** 12/20/2006 05:18 pm »

what wing were they worried about shortly after docking, that they had a look at with the SSRMS?

DaveS · « **Reply #22 on:** 12/20/2006 05:21 pm »

Quote

gordo - 20/12/2006 7:01 PM

what wing were they worried about shortly after docking, that they had a look at with the SSRMS?

Left wing, wing leading edge sensors between RCC panels 19-21 detected a very weak impact. No damaged was observed at it was about 100x weaker than required to even scratch the panels.

DaveS · « **Reply #23 on:** 12/20/2006 05:25 pm »

Quote

JimO - 20/12/2006 7:01 PM

"Noticed a few MMOD impacts on the HRSI tiles on the upper surface of the wing"

Do we have any before-after images?

No. But I'm quite certain that it was MMOD impacts. They had a 3D structure and was very white in color on a surface that is supposed to be black in color. They also had an appearance of a crater.

Most of them was about half the size of the waterproofing holes on the tiles.

gordo · « **Reply #24 on:** 12/20/2006 05:29 pm »

Quote

DaveS - 20/12/2006 6:04 PM

Quote
gordo - 20/12/2006 7:01 PM

what wing were they worried about shortly after docking, that they had a look at with the SSRMS?
Left wing, wing leading edge sensors between RCC panels 19-21 detected a very weak impact. No damaged was observed at it was about 100x weaker than required to even scratch the panels.

Thought it was weaker than they expceted from foam, but in range of what an MMOD hit could be? They said the size that could have been caused would not have been seen on the SSRMS cam, so we had to wait the the boom came back out today.

Not in anyway saying this is an potential problem, just can't recall where the MMT left the issue

jacqmans · « **Reply #25 on:** 12/20/2006 05:35 pm »

DaveS · « **Reply #26 on:** 12/20/2006 05:38 pm »

Quote

gordo - 20/12/2006 7:12 PM
Thought it was weaker than they expceted from foam, but in range of what an MMOD hit could be? They said the size that could have been caused would not have been seen on the SSRMS cam, so we had to wait the the boom came back out today.

Not in anyway saying this is an potential problem, just can't recall where the MMT left the issue

No matter if it's foam or anything else, it has to have a certain force to damage the RCC panels. If the force isn't high enough, the RCC panels will be alright.

I believe that 10 Grms is what is needed to scratch the panels, while 20 Grms is needed to damage them.
Take those values with a grain of salt, as I don't remember the exact values.

The impact noted was around 0.2 Grms, not nearly enough force to even scratch the panels, let alone damage them.

gordo · « **Reply #27 on:** 12/20/2006 05:49 pm »

Quote

DaveS - 20/12/2006 6:21 PM

No matter if it's foam or anything else, it has to have a certain force to damage the RCC panels. If the force isn't high enough, the RCC panels will be alright.

Going all the way back to Newton it Depends on the size of the object as to what force it would cause and therefore the reading on the accelerometers

Fire a bullet at a man and he might only know he's been shot when he sees the blood, but fire a larger object at him at the same velocity and he'll know whats hit him....as he picks himslef up of the ground

Jim · « **Reply #28 on:** 12/20/2006 05:52 pm »

Quote

DaveS - 20/12/2006 12:56 PM

Starboard wing survey complete at 11:52 am CST. Manuevering SRMS/OBSS to the nosecap survey position.

RCC panels looked good. Noticed a few MMOD impacts on the HRSI tiles on the upper surface of the wing. Not deep at all or very large in size.

"who" noticed?

Stardust9906 · « **Reply #29 on:** 12/20/2006 05:57 pm »

nathan.moeller · « **Reply #30 on:** 12/20/2006 05:57 pm »

"The managers had faced a tough decision as to which was the bigger risk: skipping the late inspection to see if Discovery was damaged by a micrometeorite while it was docked with the International Space Station during the past week? Or running out of time to land Discovery safely when the shuttle's fuel reserves are close to empty? "

Kinda made it sound like damned if you do, damned if you don't haha. But I thought this quote balanced it out:

"The spacewalk demonstrated that the Apollo 13 "failure is not an option" spirit continues to thrive at NASA."

Nice one I think! Houston taking a close, hard look at the nose cap it seems. Who's that on CAPCOM?

nathan.moeller · « **Reply #31 on:** 12/20/2006 06:09 pm »

I noticed they've changed attitude. Any specific reasons behind the attitudes for the inspections? Of course...other than shielding the heat shield.

Stardust9906 · « **Reply #32 on:** 12/20/2006 06:13 pm »

dutch courage · « **Reply #33 on:** 12/20/2006 06:20 pm »

Quote

nathan.moeller - 20/12/2006 7:40 PM

Who's that on CAPCOM?

It's Kevin Ford.

Stardust9906 · « **Reply #34 on:** 12/20/2006 06:24 pm »

DarthVader · « **Reply #35 on:** 12/20/2006 06:39 pm »

what are these marks on 116_11??

nathan.moeller · « **Reply #36 on:** 12/20/2006 06:40 pm »

Quote

DarthVader - 20/12/2006 1:22 PM

what are these marks on 116_11??

Probably residue from RCS propellant. Crew positioning the arm for port wing inspections before taking a break for lunch.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #37 on:** 12/20/2006 06:42 pm »

Nothing of interest is coming in from sources, so that's all looking fine so far.

nathan.moeller · « **Reply #38 on:** 12/20/2006 06:44 pm »

Quote

Chris Bergin - 20/12/2006 1:25 PM

Nothing of interest is coming in from sources, so that's all looking fine so far.

Aye. And speaking of lunch I believe I'll join them

Hey Chris any idea what's up with all the attitude changes? My guess is so they can gain the most optimal lighting conditions on the area they need to survey but of course that's a guess.

jacqmans · « **Reply #39 on:** 12/20/2006 07:13 pm »