-
#500 by Avron on 06 Mar, 2006 04:08
-
Mark, do you have any good pics of the TSMs and their connection to the Orbiters? One question on these that the pics may be able to answer, is how do the connections get closed off at liftoff?
-
#501 by psloss on 06 Mar, 2006 11:19
-
Quote
mkirk - 5/3/2006 10:32 PM
Thanks, Mark. I don't know how many others would agree, but I thought that was a clear explanation, albeit of a complicated system.
Okay here is a rundown of the Drain Back Hold Time constraint that you here so much about during a shuttle count, as I warned you most of this is straight from the manual...I don't know how to say it any simpler;)
Philip Sloss
-
#502 by Jim on 06 Mar, 2006 15:15
-
Quote
Avron - 5/3/2006 11:08 PMMark, do you have any good pics of the TSMs and their connection to the Orbiters? One question on these that the pics may be able to answer, is how do the connections get closed off at liftoff?
There is a weight that is dropped at T-0 that pulls the umbilicals off and cover slides over the opening of the TSM.
-
#503 by Jim on 06 Mar, 2006 15:22
-
This is a still useful site. It has the Shuttle Reference manual, operational handbook, etc
http://www.spaceflight1.nasa.gov/shuttle/reference
-
#504 by eeergo on 06 Mar, 2006 16:21
-
I was watching a Shuttle Launch video and for the first time I didn't look at the engines igniting. I realised that there were three "circles" that looked like paper-made, which broke when at more or less at T-4 or T-3 secs. Can anyone tell me what they are, or what are they for?
I have a guess: are they some kind of "physical" acoustic measurers, that break apart only when the sound waves are strong enough to break them? That way, even if the throttle sensors malfunctioned, the fact that they broke or not would tell if the engines were behaving correctly... Well, maybe I'm just inventing, but I'd appreciate someone telling me what those strange circles are! (sorry if this question has been posted before and I haven't read it, but I didn't find it)
I'm attaching some pictures to illustrate what I'm asking...
-
#505 by mkirk on 06 Mar, 2006 16:21
-
Quote
Jim - 6/3/2006 10:15 AM
QuoteAvron - 5/3/2006 11:08 PMMark, do you have any good pics of the TSMs and their connection to the Orbiters? One question on these that the pics may be able to answer, is how do the connections get closed off at liftoff?
There is a weight that is dropped at T-0 that pulls the umbilicals off and cover slides over the opening of the TSM.
Here is a diagram of the TSM that shows what Jim described.
Mark Kirkman
-
#506 by Jim on 06 Mar, 2006 17:17
-
Quote
eeergo - 6/3/2006 11:21 AMI was watching a Shuttle Launch video and for the first time I didn't look at the engines igniting. I realised that there were three "circles" that looked like paper-made, which broke when at more or less at T-4 or T-3 secs. Can anyone tell me what they are, or what are they for?I have a guess: are they some kind of "physical" acoustic measurers, that break apart only when the sound waves are strong enough to break them? That way, even if the throttle sensors malfunctioned, the fact that they broke or not would tell if the engines were behaving correctly... Well, maybe I'm just inventing, but I'd appreciate someone telling me what those strange circles are! (sorry if this question has been posted before and I haven't read it, but I didn't find it)I'm attaching some pictures to illustrate what I'm asking...
Go to page 28, it is all explained there. They are just covers for the aft RCS that burn off at liftoff
post #21732
22/2/2006 12:03 PM (#21732 - in reply to #6595)
-
#507 by Maverick on 14 Mar, 2006 22:04
-
When there is a delay to a launch like there is now, do they keep Discovery in her OPF for longer, or does it not matter?
-
#508 by Flightstar on 14 Mar, 2006 22:05
-
Quote
Maverick - 14/3/2006 5:04 PM
When there is a delay to a launch like there is now, do they keep Discovery in her OPF for longer, or does it not matter?
For this launch it certainly does as the ET will be worked on in the transfer aisle. See story on site. -
#509 by Jim on 15 Mar, 2006 01:09
-
Quote
Maverick - 14/3/2006 5:04 PMWhen there is a delay to a launch like there is now, do they keep Discovery in her OPF for longer, or does it not matter?
there is no where else to go.
-
#510 by Maverick on 15 Mar, 2006 02:30
-
I thought there was two halfs to the VAB? As there's two doors? What am I missing?
-
#511 by Jim on 15 Mar, 2006 11:34
-
Quote
Maverick - 14/3/2006 9:30 PMI thought there was two halfs to the VAB? As there's two doors? What am I missing?
There are 4 high bays (4 doors), a transfer aisle (1 door), a low bay (1 door). Shuttles are stacked in the 2 east high bays and ET's are stored in the two west ones. When there was four orbiters, one was occasionally stored on the ground level of the one of the west ones. But the orbiter is best protected by leaving it in the OPF and they can continue to work on it.
-
#512 by Jonesy STS on 16 Mar, 2006 15:46
-
Quote
Jim - 15/3/2006 6:34 AM
QuoteMaverick - 14/3/2006 9:30 PMI thought there was two halfs to the VAB? As there's two doors? What am I missing?
There are 4 high bays (4 doors), a transfer aisle (1 door), a low bay (1 door). Shuttles are stacked in the 2 east high bays and ET's are stored in the two west ones. When there was four orbiters, one was occasionally stored on the ground level of the one of the west ones. But the orbiter is best protected by leaving it in the OPF and they can continue to work on it.
I find the VAB fascinating. Did it have to undergo a lot of modication for the move from Saturns to Shuttles and will it need the same for the change from Shuttle to CEV and CaLV? -
#513 by Andy L on 16 Mar, 2006 18:21
-
Not a bad question. I'm assuming they'll have to change some of the highbay levels to work on the systems?
-
#514 by Jim on 16 Mar, 2006 20:36
-
Quote
Jonesy STS - 16/3/2006 10:46 AM
QuoteJim - 15/3/2006 6:34 AM
I find the VAB fascinating. Did it have to undergo a lot of modication for the move from Saturns to Shuttles and will it need the same for the change from Shuttle to CEV and CaLV?QuoteMaverick - 14/3/2006 9:30 PMI thought there was two halfs to the VAB? As there's two doors? What am I missing?
There are 4 high bays (4 doors), a transfer aisle (1 door), a low bay (1 door). Shuttles are stacked in the 2 east high bays and ET's are stored in the two west ones. When there was four orbiters, one was occasionally stored on the ground level of the one of the west ones. But the orbiter is best protected by leaving it in the OPF and they can continue to work on it.
Yes, a lot. The platforms were all reconfigured, and will have to be redone for exploration
-
#515 by Super George on 16 Mar, 2006 22:16
-
Can't be cheap, but the VAB is a huge resourse.
-
#516 by Launch Fan on 17 Mar, 2006 01:13
-
There's actually a very interesting and in-depth thread from way back here on the VAB:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=931&start=1 -
#517 by simcosmos on 17 Mar, 2006 12:25
-
Hello,
Can we talk a little more about specific STS (Orbiter >> OMS/RCS) performance numbers (or estimatives)?
I tried to search but was not able to find too much precise info.
I mean, could someone please share what are the expected minimum / maximum values for total OMS/RCS propellant quantity in the following steps of a space shuttle mission?
1. After completing orbital insertion,
2. Before starting the final transfer burn for rendezvous (supposing here ISS),
3. At station keeping distance (before going for dock),
4. After docking,
5. Just before starting the de-orbit burn,
6. After de-orbit burn.
Related with the last point: after(?) de-orbit burn some of the remaining OMS/RCS propellant is dumped, right? How much is the minimum needed for reentry (RCS control)?
Just asking all this because, among other things, I would like to compare a few past flight tests that did with Orbiter Space Flight Simulator. Thanks to that simulator and other additional (STS) packages it is possible to almost fully simulate a shuttle mission - like in real life - with the help of automatic tools such as:
- GPC MFD (to assist, with nice graphics on the ascent, reentry, landing…)
(like seen here: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=625&start=391 )
- STS Guidance MFD: for automatic rendezvous procedures
- Rendezvous MFD: precise approach to rendezvous
- AutoFCS: support for fully automatic deorbit burn, reentry, approach (and even landing!)
(btw: it is also possible to simulate emergency situations, while in the ascent phase)
Despite the wonderful automatic tools, I usually only use the ascent autopilot. For the rest (even for the second part of the ascent), and because in virtual world, I do it all in manual mode; on reentry I just use the DAP to keep the correct AOA; for the roll manoeuvres and everything else it is a lot more fun to do that in manual mode >> the GPC MFD gives all the required info for a precise landing.
The questions about the available OMS/RCS are being done, among other reasons, as a curiosity in order to improve my virtual flight / navigation skills. As example, from a past manual flight made without a precise preparation I arrived at ISS with:
42% on OMS/RCS (after docking),
25000Kg as payload mass,
MET = ~2 hours and 34 minutes from launch to docking
(the simulation was actually quicker >> used time acceleration during the "dead moments")
The launch window / ascent was not perfect (after orbital insertion had to correct a relative inclination of 0.5 degrees) and there were other details that could be improved.
Considering this hypothetical specific mission: would such 42% OMS/RCS quantity, at docking time, be acceptable on a real mission? I know, the payload was a "little" on the heavy side and the quick voyage time is not what is usually done: I was just doing some tests regarding high performance STS missions
So, if someone could please write about OMS/RCS quantities or point to where such precise data is available(?) I would greatly appreciate.
Thanks in advance,
António
-
#518 by Hotol on 18 Mar, 2006 14:26
-
Whoa, that's an interesting post. I think I need to get Orbiter and see if I can pick up some new knowledge on the Shuttle.
-
#519 by Jim on 18 Mar, 2006 14:34
-
Quote
simcosmos - 17/3/2006 7:25 AMHello,Can we talk a little more about specific STS (Orbiter >> OMS/RCS) performance numbers (or estimatives)?I tried to search but was not able to find too much precise info.I mean, could someone please share what are the expected minimum / maximum values for total OMS/RCS propellant quantity in the following steps of a space shuttle mission?1. After completing orbital insertion,2. Before starting the final transfer burn for rendezvous (supposing here ISS),3. At station keeping distance (before going for dock),4. After docking,5. Just before starting the de-orbit burn,6. After de-orbit burn.Related with the last point: after(?) de-orbit burn some of the remaining OMS/RCS propellant is dumped, right? How much is the minimum needed for reentry (RCS control)?Just asking all this because, among other things, I would like to compare a few past flight tests that did with Orbiter Space Flight Simulator. Thanks to that simulator and other additional (STS) packages it is possible to almost fully simulate a shuttle mission - like in real life - with the help of automatic tools such as:- GPC MFD (to assist, with nice graphics on the ascent, reentry, landing…)(like seen here: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=625&start=391 )- STS Guidance MFD: for automatic rendezvous procedures - Rendezvous MFD: precise approach to rendezvous- AutoFCS: support for fully automatic deorbit burn, reentry, approach (and even landing!)(btw: it is also possible to simulate emergency situations, while in the ascent phase)Despite the wonderful automatic tools, I usually only use the ascent autopilot. For the rest (even for the second part of the ascent), and because in virtual world, I do it all in manual mode; on reentry I just use the DAP to keep the correct AOA; for the roll manoeuvres and everything else it is a lot more fun to do that in manual mode >> the GPC MFD gives all the required info for a precise landing.The questions about the available OMS/RCS are being done, among other reasons, as a curiosity in order to improve my virtual flight / navigation skills. As example, from a past manual flight made without a precise preparation I arrived at ISS with:42% on OMS/RCS (after docking),25000Kg as payload mass,MET = ~2 hours and 34 minutes from launch to docking(the simulation was actually quicker >> used time acceleration during the "dead moments")The launch window / ascent was not perfect (after orbital insertion had to correct a relative inclination of 0.5 degrees) and there were other details that could be improved. Considering this hypothetical specific mission: would such 42% OMS/RCS quantity, at docking time, be acceptable on a real mission? I know, the payload was a "little" on the heavy side and the quick voyage time is not what is usually done: I was just doing some tests regarding high performance STS missions :)So, if someone could please write about OMS/RCS quantities or point to where such precise data is available(?) I would greatly appreciate.Thanks in advance,António
The shuttle can barely make 55k lb to 160nmi at 28 degree. It would be a lot less for an ISS orbit.
The OMS/RCS usage would not be in open literature.
