Space Shuttle Return to Flight - Pt. 3

[ozspace]

"We are on schedule to launch July 13."<br /><br />"This is the most postive I've heard people about a July launch!!!!"<br /><br />Sounds great SG & RTF! OK everyone, now stand up open the window and sing the above lines old loud to the tune of 'On The Road Again'! <br /><br />

 

[ozspace]

Russian Interfax have just put this up:<br />MOSCOW. June 21 (Interfax) - NASA will officially announce the new date for resuming Space Shuttle flights on July 1, and the tentative date of the first launch to the International Space Station (ISS) is July 14, Russian Federal Space Agency chief Anatoly Perminov told a Tuesday news conference at the Interfax main office. <br /><br />"I had a meeting with the NASA leadership and I liked that they gave clear and definite answers. On July 1, NASA will officially set the date of the shuttle launch to the ISS. Tentatively it is July 14," he said. <br /><br />http://www.interfax.ru/e/B/politics/28.html?id_issue=11313444

 

[drwayne]

OK, I may allow myself to start thinking about taking the boy south in July.<br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Another quote from the Russians:<br /><br />"The launch of the Discovery shuttle has been preliminarily scheduled for July 14," said Perminov. "NASA Administrator Michael Griffin will make an official statement about this on July 1."<br /><br />He's also been invited to the launch, where he will have a meeting with Griffin.

 

[grooble]

3 Weeks. How close did it get last time before it was cancelled?

 

[shuttle_rtf]

April 28 was when they called off the May 15-June 3 window.

 

[robot_pilot]

>>"...but I just don't like the fact that these test results<br /> />>may have been (or, rather, WERE) responsible for<br /> />>canceling a third tanking test. ..."<br /> /><br /> />the tests at Stennis verified the analysis. The tests were<br /> />not the only reason for canceling TT3.<br /><br />What analysis are you talking about? The MSFC analysis that claims that the helium says at the top of the ullage, with little or no mixing? This was the analysis that was used as a significant part of the decision, and many people (probably 2/3 of the engineers I've talked to about it) disagree - there's definitely mixing of the ullage gas.<br /><br /> />>"understand that we've got a schedule to maintain, but<br /> />>isn't this the same type of thinking that got us into<br /> />>trouble with Columbia (Re: CAIB report)?"<br /> /><br /> />No it is not the same.<br /><br />Yes, it IS the same. I've been in the program for almost ten years and basically it's obvious to many of us involved that the analysis you're (probably) referring to was tweaked to give managers the results they wanted... if you work on the program and disagree, then all i can say is - it depends on whom you talk to about it...<br /><br /> />If the problem is still there when we do the prepress for<br /> />launch we will just scrub the launch<br /><br />That's our only consolation.<br /><br />There are a lot of rumblings here at NASA and even with the contractor engineers that the same complacency that existed prior to STS-107's disaster still exist within the organization. I've seen it, my co-workers have seen it, lots of people have seen it.<br /><br />As for being TOO careful, all we wanted to see was a third tanking test to confirm that the duplex diffuser screen was indeed the problem - just to have that warm and fuzzy feeling. I (and many others here) feel that was not an unreasonable thing to ask for. However, the tanking test was canceled - why? Schedule, schedule, schedule. We wer

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Do you have a @usa-spaceops.com e-mail address or a @msfc.nasa.gov e-mail address? <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <br /><br />Your post is is something I'd like to see addressed by a number of people (most not on here) so let's see.

 

[drwayne]

robot_pilot<br /><br />A carriage return now and again realy helps readability.<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>

 

[robot_pilot]

Guys -<br /><br />So sorry for the formatting problems in my last post. This system is so difficult to use when trying to quote a previous post, and I was in a hurry and just forgot to do that... my apologies again.<br /><br />shuttle_guy - I take serious issue with your last comment, there's ALWAYS a risk (you need to remember that the Space Shuttle is STILL A TEST VEHICLE, and needs to be treated as such!). The analysis I was referring to - which I have seen, was indeed the analysis produced by John Muratore's team. I'm going to let this go, though, because I think I've made my point.<br /><br />Sorry if I rattled any chains... but I had to interject. Would have been nice if I could have got in here sooner...

 

[najab]

><i>I take serious issue with your last comment, there's ALWAYS a risk (you need to remember that the Space Shuttle is STILL A TEST VEHICLE, and needs to be treated as such!).</i><p>I believe that when shuttle_guy said there was no risk, what he meant was that if the problem reoccurs, it will be obvious <b>before</b> launch, therefore there is no risk of losing the vehicle.</p>

 

[najab]

><i>There we go again najaB; atleast this time we posted a few min. apart !!</i><p>"Great minds think alike...?" (Though the second line of that saying is "Fools seldom differ." <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" />)<br /><br />I also wanted to add, that we should bear in mind the the Tanking Test itself is classed as a hazardous operation. So scheduling an additional test - exposing the vehicle and personell to the risk, wasting thousands of pounds of propellant - when the analysis says it's not needed would be bordering on irresponsible.</p>

 

[robot_pilot]

shuttle_guy - sorry for lecturing you on a point that you apparently already understand... but I didn't particularly like the tone of your response either, so there ya go. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br /> />There is no risk to this approach.<br /><br />Okay, let me re-address this. I believe (as many people in the program do) that there is a risk, if not now then in the future, to the THINKING that went into the decisions that were made.<br /><br />This is the point that I am trying to make here - that the complacency is back. If you don't work in the program then you're not going to see it like we are - but this is PRECISELY what the CAIB report very clearly defined as one of the biggest problems in the Shuttle program today. And, it is still there.<br /><br />That to me is the problem. The fact that we're not going to have a third tanking test is a product of this problem, although as you've (and many of my co-workers have) pointed out, it'll become the third tanking test anyway if we do have another prepress anomaly... don't know if you guys were aware of this or not, but they've tightened LCC ET-04 a bit - for STS-114 ONLY, the max prepress cycle count will be 11 instead of 13. So, I'm happy about that - although I will be biting my nails when ET-120 does get to fly (STS-121) in case the problem was NOT with the diffuser.

 

[najab]

This is the kind of thing I should know, but... what's the largest number of cycles a tank has been through? I know that a few of the ISS launches have had multiple launch attempts, would it be back on STS-35?

 

[SpaceKiwi]

Just to clarify, the diffuser on ET-120 has/is being changed to the older, but certified, design? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em><font size="2" color="#ff0000">Who is this superhero?  Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!</font></em></p><p><em><font size="2">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</font></em></p><p><font size="5">Bring Back The Black!</font></p> </div>

 

[SpaceKiwi]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>That to me is the problem. The fact that we're not going to have a third tanking test is a product of this problem, although as you've (and many of my co-workers have) pointed out, it'll become the third tanking test anyway if we do have another prepress anomaly... don't know if you guys were aware of this or not, but they've tightened LCC ET-04 a bit - for STS-114 ONLY, the max prepress cycle count will be 11 instead of 13. So, I'm happy about that - although I will be biting my nails when ET-120 does get to fly (STS-121) in case the problem was NOT with the diffuser.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />robot, I do have great sympathy for your viewpoint with respect to complacency creeping back into the program, with potentially catastrophic results. However it does appear to me that all the bases have been covered with this issue, in as much as you can be certain of anything when operating Shuttle.<br /><br />As has already been pointed out, a continuation of the prepress anomaly with Discovery's new ET will result in a launch scrub. Vehicle and crew safe. Additionally, the changeout of the diffuser on ET-120 is believed to be the correct remedy for the anomaly it exhibited, if obviously not a unanimous view. Should the anomaly represent with Atlantis there will be vindication for your view. Though, most importantly, a launch scrub will result with vehicle and crew again safe.<br /><br />I'm sure your discenting viewpoint has been noted in coming up with current plan moving forward, and it seems unlikely to me that special attention won't be given to how both tanks prepress over and above the conditions put in place? Especially bearing in mind that there has been discenting viewpoints expressed during the discussions of this anomaly.<br /><br />Ultimately safety is the primary concern, for both crew and vehicle, and I can't see how that hasn't been adequately addressed. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em><font size="2" color="#ff0000">Who is this superhero?  Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!</font></em></p><p><em><font size="2">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</font></em></p><p><font size="5">Bring Back The Black!</font></p> </div>

 

[shuttle_rtf]

And another press conference, this time with the Canadian side of things:<br /><br />http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/June2005/22/c4692.html

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Latest important date run down:<br /><br />Delta DVR: Friday, 24.<br />Stafford-Covey Final: Monday, 27.<br />Flight Readiness Review: Wednesday, 29.<br />Griffin launch date announcement: Thursday, 30.

 

[henryhallam]

How much of that is in the RCS vs. in the OMS?<br /><br />Thanks for the updates, as always.

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Thanks SG. Yep, not something one would want to rush! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />Interest starting to rise over here in the UK. Two TV stations (Sky News and the UK Discovery Channel) asked me about what's been done since Columbia. Very usual types of questions, but nice to see the interest.<br /><br />Used the "Safest Shuttle to date" line <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Cool pictures!

 

[henryhallam]

<font color="yellow"><br /> The SCAPE suit weighs about 100 pounds including the liquid air bottle.<br /></font><br /><br />Wow! That is a lot of weight to carry around for three hours while hard at work on the hypergolic systems. In the hot Florida sun as well... (though I imagine the air flow provides some cooling)

 

[SpaceKiwi]

I swear SG, the more you tell us, the cooler your job seems to be. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em><font size="2" color="#ff0000">Who is this superhero?  Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!</font></em></p><p><em><font size="2">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</font></em></p><p><font size="5">Bring Back The Black!</font></p> </div>

 

[henryhallam]

Gulp! Do the suits have anything like the Apollo Oxygen Purge System, or in case of a problem with the air do you just have to hold your breath as long as possible, then take your chances with the hydrazine?

 

[shuttle_rtf]

How's the feeling ahead of the Delta DVR, SG?