Shuttle Questions Q & A (Part 3)

• #620 by STS-500Cmdr on 26 Jul, 2007 02:19
• What is firing chain that George Diller always refers to?? "Firing chain is armed"
• #621 by Endeavour118 on 26 Jul, 2007 02:33
• Quote

  STS-500Cmdr - 25/7/2007  10:19 PM
  
  What is firing chain that George Diller always refers to??

  The hydrogen burn ignitors that ignite at t-10 seconds
• #622 by shuttlelegs on 26 Jul, 2007 13:54
• Why was ET 117 for STS 118 put into HB2 West , which is the storage cell, and not HB2 East which I believe is the normal checkout cell for the External Tank before mating with the Solids ?
• #623 by John2375 on 26 Jul, 2007 20:19
• I noticed watching the launch of STS-1, that the LOX vent arm was retracted during the T-9 min. hold.. was that just the first flight or did that continue for a while??
• #624 by psloss on 26 Jul, 2007 20:28
• Quote

  John2375 - 26/7/2007  4:19 PM
  
  I noticed watching the launch of STS-1, that the LOX vent arm was retracted during the T-9 min. hold.. was that just the first flight or did that continue for a while??

  First flight only.
  
• #625 by Andy_Small on 26 Jul, 2007 20:28
• How does the RMS attach to the payloads in order to hand them off the CA2?
• #626 by John2375 on 26 Jul, 2007 20:30
• so what was the reason for changing the process?
  I can't find video of STS-2 or 3 so wasn't able to see for myself....
• #627 by psloss on 26 Jul, 2007 20:32
• Quote

  John2375 - 26/7/2007  4:30 PM
  
  so what was the reason for changing the process?
  I can't find video of STS-2 or 3 so wasn't able to see for myself....

  The vent wasn't working during parts of the first launch campaign and was fixed prior to the second launch.
  
  STS-2 launch clip is on ShuttleSource:
  http://www.shuttlesource.com/library_clips.html
  
• #628 by Ford Mustang on 26 Jul, 2007 21:15
• Isn't Endeavour's mission supposed to be 14 days?  Just thought I'd ask, because I keep seeing 11 days.
  
  Or, is that if the SSPTS works?  (Station to Shuttle Power Transfer System)
  
  EDIT:  Thanks, DaveS.  I'm not too good with the acronyms
• #629 by Jim on 26 Jul, 2007 21:19
• Quote

  Andy_Small - 26/7/2007  4:28 PM
  
  How does the RMS attach to the payloads in order to hand them off the CA2?

  
  CA2? You mean SSRMS?  The RMS attaches to the payloads the same way as the SSRMS does.
• #630 by DaveS on 26 Jul, 2007 21:20
• Quote

  Ford Mustang - 26/7/2007  11:15 PM
  
  Isn't Endeavour's mission supposed to be 14 days?  Just thought I'd ask, because I keep seeing 11 days.
  
  Or, is that if the STSPS works?  (Shuttle to station power system)

  It's SSPTS(Station to Shuttle Power Transfer System).
• #631 by Andy_Small on 26 Jul, 2007 21:24
• Quote

  Jim - 26/7/2007  4:19 PM
  
  

  Quote

  Andy_Small - 26/7/2007  4:28 PM
  
  How does the RMS attach to the payloads in order to hand them off the CA2?

  
  CA2? You mean SSRMS?  The RMS attaches to the payloads the same way as the SSRMS does.

  
  Candada Arm 2. Yeah I'm not real good with the Lingo yet. But the robtic arms on both station and the orbiter how do they attach to structures in order to move them around?
• #632 by Jim on 26 Jul, 2007 21:33
• Quote

  Andy_Small - 26/7/2007  5:24 PM
  
  

  Quote

  Jim - 26/7/2007  4:19 PM
  
  

  Quote

  Andy_Small - 26/7/2007  4:28 PM
  
  How does the RMS attach to the payloads in order to hand them off the CA2?

  
  CA2? You mean SSRMS?  The RMS attaches to the payloads the same way as the SSRMS does.

  
  Candada Arm 2. Yeah I'm not real good with the Lingo yet. But the robtic arms on both station and the orbiter how do they attach to structures in order to move them around?

  
  See attached

  ---

  Pages from NSTS REFERENCE part 1.pdf
• #633 by Andy_Small on 26 Jul, 2007 21:36
• Cool thanks!
• #634 by Endeavour118 on 27 Jul, 2007 08:27
• HAs the shuttle ever launched on any holidays besides the 4th of july and has it launched on friday the 13th
• #635 by SpaceNutz SA on 27 Jul, 2007 09:20
• A few questions on LON procedure:
  
  1.   Is the current procedure to try an unmanned landing of the orbiter from ground control regardless of damage?   If it is obvious that the orbiter will not re-enter (damaged RCC) do they still attempt a landing anyway or do they do a destrutive de-orbit?
  
  2.   I understand that the damaged orbiter is de-orbited a day or 2 after LON call-up.  If the LON vehicle has a launch failure or in flight abort - wouldn't it be wise to keep the damaged orbiter near the ISS as a 'better than nothing' backup if the LON mission fails?  Or are there Soyuz options in addition to the LON?
  
  3.   How does the LON vehicle seat the 7 + 4 crew members?
  
  4.   If the mission orbiter has an ATO abort and cannot reach the ISS - I understand that the ISS can drop down,  collect the orbiter crew and re-boost.   How does this procedure impact on ISS resources during the 'waiting period' for the LON mission?  I understand the ISS can support the orbiter crew and ISS crew for 80 days normally.  If this rescue is done by the ISS is it still 80 days?
• #636 by Endeavour118 on 27 Jul, 2007 10:41

• Quote

  SpaceNutz SA - 27/7/2007 5:20 AM
  
  A few questions on LON procedure:
  
  1. Is the current procedure to try an unmanned landing of the orbiter from ground control regardless of damage? If it is obvious that the orbiter will not re-enter (damaged RCC) do they still attempt a landing anyway or do they do a destrutive de-orbit?
  
  2. I understand that the damaged orbiter is de-orbited a day or 2 after LON call-up. If the LON vehicle has a launch failure or in flight abort - wouldn't it be wise to keep the damaged orbiter near the ISS as a 'better than nothing' backup if the LON mission fails? Or are there Soyuz options in addition to the LON?
  
  3. How does the LON vehicle seat the 7 + 4 crew members?
  
  4. If the mission orbiter has an ATO abort and cannot reach the ISS - I understand that the ISS can drop down, collect the orbiter crew and re-boost. How does this procedure impact on ISS resources during the 'waiting period' for the LON mission? I understand the ISS can support the orbiter crew and ISS crew for 80 days normally. If this rescue is done by the ISS is it still 80 days?

   I can answer# 3

  http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/97/Sts-300.recumbent-seats.png" width="582" border="0" />

• #637 by Jim on 27 Jul, 2007 12:24
• Quote

  SpaceNutz SA - 27/7/2007  5:20 AM
  
  
  4.   If the mission orbiter has an ATO abort and cannot reach the ISS - I understand that the ISS can drop down,  collect the orbiter crew and re-boost.   How does this procedure impact on ISS resources during the 'waiting period' for the LON mission?  I understand the ISS can support the orbiter crew and ISS crew for 80 days normally.  If this rescue is done by the ISS is it still 80 days?

  
  The ISS can't do that
• #638 by SpaceNutz SA on 27 Jul, 2007 13:54

• Quote

  Jim - 27/7/2007 2:24 PM

  Quote

  SpaceNutz SA - 27/7/2007 5:20 AM 4. If the mission orbiter has an ATO abort and cannot reach the ISS - I understand that the ISS can drop down, collect the orbiter crew and re-boost. How does this procedure impact on ISS resources during the 'waiting period' for the LON mission? I understand the ISS can support the orbiter crew and ISS crew for 80 days normally. If this rescue is done by the ISS is it still 80 days?

  The ISS can't do that

   

  The orbiter and four of the crew which were due to fly the next planned mission would be retasked to the rescue mission. The planning and training processes for a rescue flight would allow NASA to launch the mission within a period of 40 days of it being called up. During that time the damaged (or disabled) shuttle's crew would have to take refuge on the International Space Station (ISS). The ISS is able to support both crews for around 80 days, with oxygen supply being the limiting factor^[1]. Within NASA, this plan for maintaining the shuttle crew at the ISS is known as Contingency Shuttle Crew Support (CSCS) operations.^[2] Up to STS-121 all rescue missions were to be designated STS-300.

  In the case of an abort to orbit, where the shuttle doesn't reach the ISS orbit and the thermal protection system inspections suggest the shuttle could not return to earth safely, the ISS could be brought down to meet the shuttle. Such a procedure is known as joint underspeed recovery ^[3].

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STS-3xx

  This is where I read that but the reference article is not available.

• #639 by Thorny on 27 Jul, 2007 14:10
• Quote

  SpaceNutz SA - 27/7/2007  4:20 AM
  
  2.   I understand that the damaged orbiter is de-orbited a day or 2 after LON call-up.  If the LON vehicle has a launch failure or in flight abort - wouldn't it be wise to keep the damaged orbiter near the ISS as a 'better than nothing' backup if the LON mission fails?  Or are there Soyuz options in addition to the LON?
  

  
  The disabled Orbiter would be left at the ISS until close to depletion... a lot longer than 2 days. Probably 2-3 weeks. It would leave with just enough juice for the destructive de-orbit or maybe attempted autoland at White Sands. If they wait until the Orbiter has run dry, then it wouldn't be able to undock and get out of the way of the LON shuttle, and if it died in orbit after undocking, it would eventually come down at random somewhere on Earth, and NASA is obligated to try to avoid that.