Author Topic: STS-120 Processing Latest (Read 153112 times)

psloss · « **Reply #100 on:** 07/05/2007 06:39 pm »

On shuttle missions, the Flight Engineer is usually MS2. Sits in the seat between and behind the CDR and PLT on the flight deck. FWIW, Scott Parazynski has served as Flight Engineer on his last three flights (86, 95, 100).

anik · « **Reply #101 on:** 07/05/2007 06:40 pm »

Quote

kimmern123 - 5/7/2007 10:27 PM

This doesn't have anything to do with the processing, but does anyone know who's flight engineer on this flight?

Stephanie Wilson is MS2/FE...

Lee Jay · « **Reply #102 on:** 07/05/2007 06:56 pm »

Thanks, Chris. I'm surprised there hasn't been more chatter about this. Your article said, "Lockheed Martin sources note they are confident that any further delays will not breach the 30 day ET mate buffer" which I think ended yesterday. The schedule you just posted is 16 days longer than that (and under review) which seems like a pretty serious impact. As usual, the highest probability is that I'm missing something here.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #103 on:** 07/05/2007 07:11 pm »

That article was a good while ago, and processing is an ever-evolving situation (half the reason for L2, as we'd be writing articles every day for each of the three orbiters, given there's so much going on behind the scenes every day).

Right now, they are targetting ET mate in the VAB for ET-120 on August 14 (Under Review) - that date is as of today's information. ET complete - based on the aforemented info - supports shipping dates etc for that date. CSCS is pretty long, so LON targets are also supported by the aforementioned dates.

Yes it's tight, but until we get documented notes that it's become a problem, it's not a problem:

Lee Jay · « **Reply #104 on:** 07/05/2007 07:30 pm »

Quote

Chris Bergin - 5/7/2007 1:11 PM
Yes it's tight, but until we get documented notes that it's become a problem, it's not a problem:

This is the key...thanks for that. Obviously I hope it doesn't cause a delay to 118, but I was wondering about it because of that 30-day buffer situation as mentioned in your article, and no word that it had shipped.

ChrisGebhardt · « **Reply #105 on:** 07/06/2007 02:12 am »

Given the long amount of time Discovery is scheduled to spend on the launch pad (i.e. September 7 to October 16) couldn't mating operations with the ET and Orbiter be delayed by 1 to 2 weeks and not affect the launch date?

Fabien · « **Reply #106 on:** 07/06/2007 08:31 am »

Thanks a lot Chris for these illustrated information graphics with dates !

psloss · « **Reply #107 on:** 07/06/2007 09:44 am »

Quote

Trekkie07 - 5/7/2007 10:12 PM

Given the long amount of time Discovery is scheduled to spend on the launch pad (i.e. September 7 to October 16) couldn't mating operations with the ET and Orbiter be delayed by 1 to 2 weeks and not affect the launch date?

Possibly, but looking at the schedules on L2, that could delay SRB stacking for the next launch (STS-122), which could eat up a lot of margin in that launch schedule. Not sure this has been confirmed, but part of the reason for the long pad stay may be to clear VAB High Bay 1 for STS-122 stacking.

Rapoc · « **Reply #108 on:** 07/06/2007 10:02 am »

Quote

psloss - 6/7/2007 11:44 AM

Quote
Trekkie07 - 5/7/2007 10:12 PM

Given the long amount of time Discovery is scheduled to spend on the launch pad (i.e. September 7 to October 16) couldn't mating operations with the ET and Orbiter be delayed by 1 to 2 weeks and not affect the launch date?
Possibly, but looking at the schedules on L2, that could delay SRB stacking for the next launch (STS-122), which could eat up a lot of margin in that launch schedule. Not sure this has been confirmed, but part of the reason for the long pad stay may be to clear VAB High Bay 1 for STS-122 stacking.

But they have 3 High Bays. Why they need to clear HB1 and don't use HB2 or 3?

psloss · « **Reply #109 on:** 07/06/2007 10:08 am »

Quote

Rapoc - 6/7/2007 6:02 AM

Quote
psloss - 6/7/2007 11:44 AM

Possibly, but looking at the schedules on L2, that could delay SRB stacking for the next launch (STS-122), which could eat up a lot of margin in that launch schedule. Not sure this has been confirmed, but part of the reason for the long pad stay may be to clear VAB High Bay 1 for STS-122 stacking.

But they have 3 High Bays. Why they need to clear HB1 and don't use HB2 or 3?

Only HB3 and HB1 can be used for stacking and they are doing maintenance on the doors for HB3 right now. (Last year, they did this for HB 1 and it was unavailable.)

HB2 is a storage area that can be used for storing a completed stack (in case of a tropical system, for example), but has no platforms, etc.

ChrisGebhardt · « **Reply #110 on:** 07/07/2007 03:33 am »

Quote

psloss - 6/7/2007 5:44 AM

Quote
Trekkie07 - 5/7/2007 10:12 PM

Given the long amount of time Discovery is scheduled to spend on the launch pad (i.e. September 7 to October 16) couldn't mating operations with the ET and Orbiter be delayed by 1 to 2 weeks and not affect the launch date?
Possibly, but looking at the schedules on L2, that could delay SRB stacking for the next launch (STS-122), which could eat up a lot of margin in that launch schedule. Not sure this has been confirmed, but part of the reason for the long pad stay may be to clear VAB High Bay 1 for STS-122 stacking.

As soon as I posted my comment I thought about the SRB stacking for STS-122. When do they plan to start stacking the 122 stack?

Seattle Dave · « **Reply #111 on:** 07/07/2007 04:24 am »

That'll be on an ATK presentation on L2. It'll be for Chris to move such information into here, although L2 is vast and has much bigger things on there, so I'm sure he will.

James Lowe1 · « **Reply #112 on:** 07/07/2007 04:31 am »

Chris would be fine with that. Sept 17 is the answer for SRB Start Stack STS-122.

jacqmans · « **Reply #113 on:** 07/07/2007 08:32 am »

Mission: STS-120 - 23rd International Space Station Flight (10A) -
U.S. Node 2
Vehicle: Discovery (OV-103)
Location: Orbiter Processing Facility Bay 3
Launch Date: Targeted for Oct. 20, 2007
Launch Pad: 39A
Crew: Melroy, Zamka, Parazynski, Wheelock, Wilson, Nespoli and Tani
Inclination/Orbit Altitude: 51.6 degrees/122 nautical miles

In Orbiter Processing Facility bay No. 3, aft closeout work continues.
The orbiter boom sensor system, which is the 50-foot robotic arm
extension, was delivered to the bay this week and is being installed
today. Floodlight electronic assemblies No. 1 and 2 were installed
and mated this week. These units control the lights in the payload
bay. Testing of the auxiliary power units is complete, along with
testing of the external tank doors for proper closure and fit.

Endeavour118 · « **Reply #114 on:** 07/10/2007 07:31 pm »

do we know who is the personal for this launch is ie. pao NTD

Rocket Guy · « **Reply #115 on:** 07/10/2007 08:08 pm »

Quote

Endeavour118 - 10/7/2007 3:31 PM

do we know who is the personal for this launch is ie. pao NTD

http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/118/118personnel.html

DaveS · « **Reply #116 on:** 07/10/2007 08:13 pm »

Quote

Ben - 10/7/2007 10:08 PM

Quote
Endeavour118 - 10/7/2007 3:31 PM

do we know who is the personal for this launch is ie. pao NTD

http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/118/118personnel.html

I think Endeavour118 wants to know the personnel for STS-120. One thing interesting on that list is that it lists a "fueling PAO". Maybe NASA is planing to air the ET tanking activities like they did for 114 and 121.

Rocket Guy · « **Reply #117 on:** 07/10/2007 08:21 pm »

My mistake. I don't think that will be known till after 118, then.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #118 on:** 07/11/2007 01:38 pm »

Discovery's having a big week with SSME installation and OBSS installation.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #119 on:** 07/13/2007 04:57 pm »

Latest on Discovery's processing:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5166

SSME installation this weekend.