-
#60
by
backspace
on 15 Jun, 2007 14:48
-
Not to feed into the doom and gloom, but even de-manning the station and abandoninng it would cause a lot of problems. I'm going to guess they'd try to dock a progress or get someone back on there even if Atlantis has to leave before the glitch is fixed. That's a lot of mass to deorbit uncontrolled... I'm guessing a lot of those components would survive. Imagine the hit everyone's program would take if ISS came down over someplace populated... enough of this. Thanks for the package, Norm.
-
#61
by
Chris Bergin
on 15 Jun, 2007 14:52
-
koshk - 15/6/2007 3:47 PM
Nikolai Sevastianov, president of Energia, told that the cause of "secondary power supplies" failure was the static electrical discharge when astronauts were working outside.
--
I'm trying to translate what's in russian media after the press-conference.
Edited minor spelling.
Thanks, and don't worry about the spelling. We're interested to hear what Nikolai had to say, especially as he likes to give some bold comments!
-
#62
by
michelle21
on 15 Jun, 2007 14:55
-
ok, adding even more to this argument.
Is there any option to just change-out , one or more of these systems or are they just that bulky, old, or integrated to do. These things do have logic boards don't they.
How about ground simulations using similar hardware, I hope the Russians are doing that.
new computers, logic boards , power supplies could be sent up on
on a progress, or even an emergency shuttle flight if they are too bulky.
And I can't believe if there was really a risk to losing a multibillion dollar station or a possible hit on populated area that The country wouldn't risk sending a shuttle.
-
#63
by
koshk
on 15 Jun, 2007 14:57
-
Vladimir Solovyov, Energia CEO: "Right now we're working with NASA on possibility to operate station orientation system from american segment."
-
#64
by
Zachstar
on 15 Jun, 2007 14:59
-
-
#65
by
Norm Hartnett
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:03
-
Chandonn - 15/6/2007 7:43 AM
Don't mean to sound like I'm beating a dead horse, but in retrospect, are we sure the CMG saturation during install was simply an error on someone's part (not desaturating before the install, as was reported), or a symptom of a failure in the Russian attitude control system? It just sounds a bit too coincidental to me.
EDIT: JimO's comments got me thinking a bit more about that...
Mike said that the CMG saturation was caused by "the truss being waved around"
In retrospect it seems like it would have been a good idea to insure the status of the CMG's prior to moving the truss (and perhaps they did) but they did have a deadline on getting it mated. So far as I can tell the CMG saturation was not a cause of the attitude control system failure.
-
#66
by
koshk
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:03
-
Sevastianov: "tomorrow we will try to power up secondary power supplies in a new way."
-
#67
by
backspace
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:16
-
koshk - 15/6/2007 10:57 AM
Vladimir Solovyov, Energia CEO: "Right now we're working with NASA on possibility to operate station orientation system from american segment."
Wow, that would be the best idea so far. Anyone know if there's a realistic capability for this?
-
#68
by
Zachstar
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:18
-
View from inside the airlock.
-
#69
by
rdale
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:20
-
michelle21 - 15/6/2007 10:55 AM
Is there any option to just change-out , one or more of these systems or are they just that bulky, old, or integrated to do. These things do have logic boards don't they.
Always good to read the thread before posting - sometimes it's already been answered.
"According to Interfax Energia is pondering launching a Progress on July, 23rd with new power supplies for computers."
-
#70
by
michelle21
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:26
-
I did read it,
I wasn't refering to power supplies.
Power supply is a good guess, but sometimes its one of the logic boards. and if you have the option swap the whole box. But I don't know if that is an option.
Hate to send up a power supply and find out its some other component.
-
#71
by
Chandonn
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:29
-
Norm Hartnett - 15/6/2007 11:03 AM
So far as I can tell the CMG saturation was not a cause of the attitude control system failure.
I was actually saying it might be a symptom, not the cause of the failure. In other words: the problem was already there, and the issue with the CMGs being saturated before install was caused by whatever led to the failure. Admittedly, the CMGs have had their issues too.
-
#72
by
Zachstar
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:29
-
-
#73
by
Gary
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:31
-
michelle21 - 15/6/2007 4:26 PM
I did read it,
I wasn't refering to power supplies.
Power supply is a good guess, but sometimes its one of the logic boards. and if you have the option swap the whole box. But I don't know if that is an option.
Hate to send up a power supply and find out its some other component.
Fair comment. Wouldn't they have these spares already on board?
With the sort of work thats going on with solar arrays and knowing the computers are sensitive to dirty power surely it would have made sense to position spares or even power down a couple of the computers in case one or more were lost due to power spikes/rfi/something else?
-
#74
by
Zachstar
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:32
-
View in the node with spacesuits for EVA-4.
Suni also working there.
-
#75
by
bsegal
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:33
-
koshk - 15/6/2007 10:57 AM
Vladimir Solovyov, Energia CEO: "Right now we're working with NASA on possibility to operate station orientation system from american segment."
Aha! Finally a disclosure of something that must have been in work since shortly after the Russians weren't able to initially recover. If the computers were working before the power hookups were made to the new arrays, and they failed to reboot today after that power was demated internally, it must have lots of people thinking that the initial upset of the computers fried them to the point they're not recoverable.
f that's the case, the only options to maintain attitude control after shuttle leaves would be to devise a new way to command the Progress thrusters absent the Russian computers. Thus, find a way to tie them into U.S. segment computers and QUICKLY write software to have U.S. computers that are unaffected by this to assume minimal command and control functions of the Russian segment until new flight hardware can be brought up on a Progress.
Rather than demanning the station, this would seem to be the worst case scenario analysis they'd be working on while the Russians continue to attempt troubleshooting. The more time that elapses, though, with no joy on the computers has to have them thinking more and more that they're fried.
The other thought that must be in discussion - but we've not heard about so far - would be have EVA4 devoted to de-mating the connections that plugged-in the new array, which seemed to be the jumping off point for the computer issues.
This will be an interesting one to see eveolve over the next few days.
-
#76
by
michelle21
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:34
-
I'm a little weak on my Russian, that links to a Russian page. Anyone ran that through babel or something.
-
#77
by
Zachstar
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:37
-
sts1canada are you around to give Ku status?
-
#78
by
Squid.erau
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:38
-
Not to be a spoil sport, but can we please try and keep this thread on-topic, i.e stuff the crew is doing on station and shuttle. I'm pretty sure there is a seperate thread for discussions about the computer problems. Thanks.
Matt
-
#79
by
TrueBlueWitt
on 15 Jun, 2007 15:38
-
koshk - 15/6/2007 10:57 AM
The other thought that must be in discussion - but we've not heard about so far - would be have EVA4 devoted to de-mating the connections that plugged-in the new array, which seemed to be the jumping off point for the computer issues.
Detatching the new array's power couplings would likely be pointless.. the Russian computers did not come back up correctly even when they were decoupled from the US side of the station's power grid. They may've gotten fried whenthe array was first connected, but disconnecting the array now doesn't look to me like it would do anything to clear up the issue.
