STS-114 Mission Update Thread (Part 2)

[SpaceKiwi]

This sounds like more than a 24 hour problem. <img src="/images/icons/frown.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>

 

[shuttle_rtf]

This is a REAL problem as we all remember the ECO issues and the fact they have NO other avionics boxs spare. Going to ask around to see what this all means.

 

[shuttle_rtf]

I've run with it already and sent it off to the UK news networks, everyone will get this up within the next 10 mins anyway. Sometimes people have to wait for a sub editor to actually publish it, that's what you're seeing.

 

[astrophoto]

Sonova. Had HDNet on my TV up and everything. Was gonna be a beauty to watch on HD tv.

 

[larper]

Scrubbed launched due to bad sensor. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong><font color="#ff0000">Vote </font><font color="#3366ff">Libertarian</font></strong></p> </div>

 

[najab]

><i>My ten bucks is safe.</i><p>Look, I'll <b>GIVE</b> you the damned ten bucks if you promise to stop sneaking into KSC at night and "playing" with the hardware!</p>

 

[backspace]

They're going to miss all the windows on this. It'll be next month or later. GRUMBLE GRUMBLE.<br /><br />Apparently 4X redundancy doesn't matter. Oh, and yeah, there are no spares laying around.

 

[marslauncher]

so how long is it going to take to fix?

 

[grooble]

I had a distant cousin who was once featured in a Documentary starring William Shatner <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />. It was called "Twilight Zone"

 

[lunatic133]

NO! How long can it possibly take to fix?<br /><br />And how come some repairs take months while the one yesterday only took a few minutes?<br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /> ... Of course I understand waiting a few days but I think a few months is a bit extreme <br /><br />edit<br />The guy on NASA TV says there's a chance it could happen next week or even tomorrow, but that's just speculatuon. *crosses fingers*

 

[haywood]

Damn ECO's!...again.<br />After all that hard work too.<br />I've got a bad feeling about this. If past experience is any judge, we'll miss this months' window.<br />But then maybe I'm jumping to conclusions.<br />Just have to wait and see.<br />

 

[backspace]

There is some scattered chatter going on regarding the fact that there are no spare avionics boards for this fault... we may not get discovery this year at all unless it's something a lot more minor than they're acting...<br /><br />But my guess is if they decided to SCRUB, and there's going to be a remove / manufacture / replace, no launch for some time. This may even lead to a rollback and de-mating if it's bad enough.<br /><br />What a bummer. I also give it about 45 minutes before some talking heads show up on TV and start talking about how much a scrub like this costs.

 

[henryhallam]

<font color="yellow"> Of course I understand waiting a few days but I think a few months is a bit extreme<br /></font><br /><br />Trouble is, if it cannot be repaired and the shuttle got back on the pad ready for launch within the next two weeks or so, then we will have to wait until September. A combination of orbital mechanics and lighting/time-of-day constraints give limited launch windows, of which there are none in August.

 

[ve7rkt]

I'm proud of NASA. The failure today was a second backup to a system that should never be used. The only way it would have caused a danger is IF the ET ran out of fuel early AND two of the remaining three sensors failed. They could have pushed it, and it probably would have been fine.<br /><br />But it might not have. Good work, NASA, I'm proud of you. Drain the tank, phone up every engineer in Florida, get them on the pad, get this fixed and let's try again.

 

[spacefire]

NASA's prolly really paranoid!<br /><br /><br />Astrogirl, I don't think you're allowed to have ads in your signature. Unless you're offering something more tempting than a non-free PSP <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[SpaceKiwi]

I think it's going to take more time than the launch window has unfortunately. I wonder if it is vehicle wiring. This seems to be a continuation of the same problem, and they have tested the heck out of everything in the circuit that they could get at before. <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>

 

[grooble]

I feel bad for the astronauts. It must be really gutting.

 

[SpaceKiwi]

If they can't trouble-shoot this issue properly, I wonder if they'll start having a look at flying Atlantis first in the September window. <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>

 

[najab]

If memory serves correctly, they said after the tanking test that they *could* do the work at the pad if they really, really had to, but going back to the VAB was preferred.

 

[Leovinus]

They just didn't want to launch on the 13th. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[najab]

Continuation of the STS-114 previous mission update thread. Not long now (we hope!)

 

[grooble]

If this has happened several times before, how come the problem wasn't solved? Is it something that can't be prevented?

 

[lunatic133]

I don't see why. All they have to do is drain the upper part of the tank and replace some sensors. That should take a few days but the current window, I believe, lasts until the end of the month. They should be able to manage it on time. I'd ask S_G but I'm sure he's busy. Either way we'll find out at the press conference in a couple hours. Unfortunately I'm of the oppinion that if we don't get this thing off the ground in the July launch window then it's doubtful if it will get off the ground at all ... it's always easy to sasy "Let's wait for the next launch window," and then the next and the next.

 

[Leovinus]

<i>It was not the first time these sensors malfunctioned. During a fueling test of Discovery's original tank in April, some of the sensors gave intermittent readings. NASA could not ascertain the exact reason for the failure but replaced the tank for other reasons.<br /><br />Shuttle managers considered conducting a fueling test at the launch pad on the replacement tank, but ruled it out to save time, saying that the actual fueling on launch day would be the ultimate test.<br /><br />"We are disappointed, but we'll fly again on another day," said an astronaut speaking from launch control, David Wolf</i><br /><br />See???? They're already cutting corners for schedules. They've learned nothing. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[lunatic133]

I don't think they're cutting corners. Ive been saying this for the past two and a half years but for good measure I'll say it again: The lesson learned from Columbia is DIFFERENT than the lesson learned from Challenger. With Challenger, they insisted on not delaying, and instead were met with disaster. Columbia, though, was originally supposed to launch in March 2002, and instead flew in January 2003. And yet there was still a disaster. Delays upon delays will NOT guarentee anything.