Space Shuttle Return to Flight - Pt. 3

[najab]

<i>Caps Lock on and Caps Lock off</i><br /><br />And ALT+013 to get Enter. Needless to say, a new keyboard is a priority.

 

[teije]

And so I become a wee bit less ignorant once again. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br />Thanks guys!<br />NajaB: FOD?<br />Falling off debris or something?<br />Teije

 

[najab]

FOD = foreign objects and debris.

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Thanks for the update on the Tanking Test status, SG. You are the single source of info on this - MSFC don't even seem to have a PA or PR department!

 

[shuttle_rtf]

>It appears the target launch day may move to July 14th if there is no additional TT.<br /><br />There are groups and individuals that do not agree with not performing a third tanking test. The "discussions" will continue for a few days.<br /><br />If there is a third TT the launch date analysis gives a attempt on launch July 16th<<br /><br />So all in all, the July window appears on - all eyes on the debris evaluations now I'd guess.<br /><br />Stafford-Covey may shed (no pun intended) some light on some debris buzz words that keep croping up, like "Slush." <---Ice, Foam, Frost - but now slush.<br /><br />Stafford-Covey meeting and press conference is later today.

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Thanks SG - there was no media advisory in my inbox of it being moved to Wednesday. I've got June 6 here. Thanks for this as I've missed this!<br /><br />I'm tempted to go on this media call - and ask some tough questions (these press conferences do tend to have some very soft questions...like "Are you confident the Shuttle is now safe?" - like they're going to say anything but "as safe as we can possibily make it")

 

[najab]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>KSC Chief Engineer is concerned that we should complete demonstration of our working hypothesis of pressurization anomaly by full scale tanking demonstration ...<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />So, if I read this right, your office is in favour of a third test -question mark-

 

[najab]

Ahh...interesting to see a NASA manager saying wait when the contractor says go.

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"...50/50 chance..."</font><br /><br />I would have guessed a 33/33/33 chance. I figure there's just as much chance that USA CE told NASA some form of: 'No Comment', 'Maybe', or 'Let me consult the Magic 8-Ball...'.

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Quick one for clarification:<br /><br />SE&I are Systems Engineering and Integration? Department of USA?

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Thanks again. <br /><br />This seems to be coming right down to the clearance of any debris concerns............then when that's clear, looks like there's gonna be a launch!! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[earth_bound_misfit]

"So, if I read this right, your office is in favour of a third test -question mark-"<br /><br />Hey najaB, did you break your keyboard while installing the ban button <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />Sorry for the *off topic*, couldn't hep myself. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p><p>----------------------------------------------------------------- </p><p>Wanna see this site looking like the old SDC uplink?</p><p>Go here to see how: <strong>SDC Eye saver </strong>  </p> </div>

 

[henryhallam]

najaB, it's not brilliant but you might find this useful until you get a new keyboard: http://www.microsoft.com/enable/training/windowsxp/oskturnonuse.aspx<br />(on-screen keyboard for windows xp)

 

[scottb50]

Won't the tanking for launch accomplish the same thing? If there is a problem it delays the launch anyway, if no problem occures you launch on time. Why delay it intentionally? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[najab]

Well my keyboard has now totally died, so I'm using Dragon NaturallySpeaking in order to "type" my posts. Ironically, using speech recognition software gives me better typing than the keyboard.

 

[henryhallam]

<font color="yellow"><br />Well my keyboard has now totally died, so I'm using Dragon NaturallySpeaking in order to "type" my posts. <br /></font><br /><br />Dedication!

 

[shuttle_rtf]

I'm only going off memory here, but STS-31 (Discovery and Hubble) had a T-31 hold when the Ground Launch Sequencer failed to hand over to Orbiters on-board Sequencer because of a LOX valve (not sure exactly what value that was and my PC is playing up so I can't google search it).<br /><br />Anyway - I remember the video showing a number of guys gathered around a console - I believe NTS was mentioned - and they managed to sort it within a few minutes holding on APU runtime and re-started with a "mark" and the call for Auto Sequence Start.<br /><br />Is there anything that can be done on a countdown hold at T-31 in an instance that we've been talking about over the last number of posts - or is it an out-and-out launch scub?

 

[najab]

Working totally off intuition here, since like you I don't have any information on the details of the systems, I would say that if there was an extra liquid hydrogen vent valve cycling it would be a hard scrub. The pressurisation-repressurisation system is almost certain to be a criticality one item. This would mean that there is no way they would launch if there was any doubt about its operation. Given the very small launch window (10 minutes), and even smaller preferred launch time (+/- 2.5 min) I would be very surprised if they could resolve the issue in time.

 

[najab]

Oh I see, I thought it was the same actual physical valve, but that was used in two different systems.

 

[scottb50]

So what is the cost if it gets reset? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[najab]

I suppose I didn't make myself quite clear in a previous post, I was actually trying to say the same thing that you just said. The launch window is ten minutes wide, the preferred launch window is +/- 2.5 min either side of the centre of that window.<br /><br />(I suppose this post when the award for the least useful post of the year)

 

[scottb50]

I was referring to not doing a propellant loading test, which you have said would cause a two week delay, as opposed to finding a problem when the propellant is loaded during the launch sequence and having to scrub the mission. It's sort of a bet the loading will go alright and launch will procede, or it will be halted and rescheduled. Which might be less of a delay than a tanking test to begin with. Just a thought. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[bpcooper]

The tanking test has been ruled out:<br /><br />http://www.spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts114/050606thirdtanking/<br /><br />Najab, slight correction on the target planar for launch windows to the ISS. They target the centerline (not 2.5 mins before) and allow for the second five minutes of the 10 minute possibility. This was implemented with STS-106. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-Ben</p> </div>

 

[shuttle_rtf]

Yep and June 24 (in case they didn't mention it, can't get on that site) is the Debris Review. Again getting mentions that Ice and Frost is not the only concern. Going to go heavy on the issue of the heaters causing slush - apparently also bad.<br /><br />Looks like it was that Diffuser that's been pinpointed as the cause of the extra cycling.<br /><br />One by one the issues are being ticked off! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[haywood]

This a beautiful picture of the Discovery Orbiter waiting to be hoisted and attached to the new ET-121.<br />Couple of questions...<br />What do they cover the crane pivot points on the Orbiter with for launch.<br /><br />What is that access door open just about mid-body?<br /><br />I found the picture here...<br /><br />http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/search.cfm<br /><br />Thanks.<br /><br />