Individual spacecraft differences

[ambrous]

Why was it that during the 1960's crews would spend hundreds of hours in their spacecraft during building, training and simulations so that they became intimately aquainted with any differences in that particular craft. Do astronauts still do this with the various orbiters or are they constructed to be identicle and therefore there are no differences?

 

[docm]

The orbiters are far from identical and each mission requires different equipment and procedures, so training for a particular mission can take many months or even years. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[erioladastra]

<br />The crews - and the flight controllers - still spend many, many hours training in the hardware. That is 1) so emergency responses are second nature and 2) things go smoothly during the mission. You don't have that much time on orbit so you make the best of it. Can someone do a space walk after one time in the pool? Probably. Can you get more done and be better if you do 5 runs? Yes. All training is the same.

 

[billslugg]

Yes there are many differences. I believe some of the latter shuttle orbiters have the ash trays IN the armrests. Also Endeavour has an automatic dimmer system on the headlights. On Columbia (RIP) the outside rear view mirrors were accessible only by airlock. Latter orbiters have the little joystick thingie. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

The early missions did it because:<br />1. Each spacecraft was built, and who better to help check them out<br />2. Simulators weren't the same as now<br />3. And the orbiters are "identical" so that the simulators and trainers just have to be configured for the specific mission<br /><br />The crew only see their "assigned" orbiter during CEIT and TCDT. So only 2 trips to the cape.

 

[rocketwatcher2001]

Robert Crippen, the pilot chosen to fly STS-1 was very involved in the design of the Space Shuttle's computers. I read a book years ago about the roughly year long mission training of a shuttle crew, Rob Crippen was the mission commander but was training for another mission during the first 6 months of the rest of the crew's training. The crew was very happy to be flying with Crippen, and seemed to think of the shuttle as the "Crippen mobile", much the same way that Gemini was thought of as the "Gus mobile", because Gus Grissom had so much to do with Gemini's development. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[rybanis]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Robert Crippen, the pilot chosen to fly STS-1 was very involved in the design of the Space Shuttle's computers. I read a book years ago about the roughly year long mission training of a shuttle crew, Rob Crippen was the mission commander but was training for another mission during the first 6 months of the rest of the crew's training. The crew was very happy to be flying with Crippen, and seemed to think of the shuttle as the "Crippen mobile", much the same way that Gemini was thought of as the "Gus mobile", because Gus Grissom had so much to do with Gemini's development.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Heh, interesting. <br /><br />How about materials differences? I have heard before that Columbia was actually heavier than the later shuttles, being built out of older types of alloys, is that true? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[rocketwatcher2001]

<font color="yellow">How about materials differences? I have heard before that Columbia was actually heavier than the later shuttles, being built out of older types of alloys, is that true?</font><br /><br />From what I understand, COLUMBIA was going to be a test vehicle, like ENTERPRISE, but during construction, was made to be a space vehicle because ENTERPRISE was so successful, and was able to do all of the tests, and not just the drop tests, but a lot more, too. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[qso1]

As I recall, Enterprise was not spaceflight ready and was planned to be made spaceflight ready as the 5th and last orbiter budgeted under the Carter Admin. Enterprise was fit checked at pad 39 in May 1979 at which point it still had dummy main engines and TPS.<br /><br />The upgrade plans were scrapped when funding never materialized. Enterprise was used for captive tests, drop tests, and fit checks and served well despite never becoming operational as a spaceflight certified orbiter. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[rybanis]

I've been looking through astronautix, and I cant seem to find how many shuttles were originally envisioned to have been built (before budget constraints). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[PistolPete]

IIRC, I seem to remember reading that the main reason that Enterprise was not made flight worthy was because a new, lighter thrust structure was developed for Columbia and it would have cost too much to put the lighter thrust structure in Enterprise. Essentially, they learned how to make shuttles by making shuttles. IIRC, each successive shuttle was a bit lighter than the last. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><em>So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.</em></p><p><strong>-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai</strong></p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

"How about materials differences? I have heard before that Columbia was actually heavier than the later shuttles, being built out of older types of alloys, is that true?"<br /><br />No, columbia just had more instrumentation and the structure was designed to more conservative loads models. As the models were refined, the structure was optimized for later orbiters

 

[jimfromnsf]

"Robert Crippen, the pilot chosen to fly STS-1 was very involved in the design of the Space Shuttle's computers. I read a book years ago about the roughly year long mission training of a shuttle crew, Rob Crippen was the mission commander but was training for another mission during the first 6 months of the rest of the crew's training. The crew was very happy to be flying with Crippen, and seemed to think of the shuttle as the "Crippen mobile", much the same way that Gemini was thought of as the "Gus mobile", because Gus Grissom had so much to do with Gemini's development"<br /><br />He wasn't involved with the computers design, just the crew interface with the software. Crippen wasn't as involved with the shuttle cockpit as Gus was with Gemini. Gemini's cockpit was designed around Gus, which in fact, cause problems for taller astronauts. Crippen was just more knowledgeable about the software since he was responsible for systems management and Young was piloting