STS-120/10A Mission thread (post launch)

SpaceKiwi · Oct 30, 2007

Can anyone advise if the Mission Status Briefing has been held for today yet? I've just got to work and hope not to have missed it. Thanks. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Who is this superhero? Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bring Back The Black! </div>

MeteorWayne · Oct 30, 2007

There has been no announcement of a MSB on NASA TV, and I've been watching for at least 6 hours now. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

SpaceKiwi · Oct 30, 2007

Thanks MW, I'll fire up Media Player then and see what's what. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Who is this superhero? Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bring Back The Black! </div>

thereiwas · Oct 30, 2007

MSB at 2:30 EDT, just announced. That matches the published schedule.

MeteorWayne · Oct 30, 2007

ROFL, coming up in 5 minutes...... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

SpaceKiwi · Oct 30, 2007

MSB to start momentarily. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Who is this superhero? Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bring Back The Black! </div>

thereiwas · Oct 30, 2007

From the photo it looks to me like those fraying cables are at fault again. I think I can see some entanglement between the edge cable and the first cable in from that, at least at the point of the tear. Nuclear power looks better and better for space stations, if you really need that many Watts. And much more efficient utilization.

MeteorWayne · Oct 30, 2007

Wow, the return is along that edge, but is not damaged since the array is putting out 97 % of capacity. Pam made a great choice aborting when she did. Had they gone another 6 inches it could have wiped out half of the array!! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

Testing · Oct 30, 2007

Who invited Murphy on this mission? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

mi2again · Oct 30, 2007

"Nuclear power looks better and better for space stations, if you really need that many Watts. And much more efficient utilization" Based on what? A couple of minor glitches. Solar power is easy and cheap. Nuke power is not needed in LEO. Way more problems with nukes. Radiator area would cause similar issues as solar arrays

thereiwas · Oct 30, 2007

I sort of agree nuke power is not needed in LEO today - efficient power use is better, like LED lighting like Bigelow is using. But what about a big orbital hotel? Remember the space station in "2001"? No panels on that. Anything spinning fast enough to create useful gravity is not going to be solar powered.

baktothemoon · Oct 30, 2007

>Based on what? A couple of minor glitches. Solar power is easy and cheap. Nuke power is not needed in LEO. Way more problems with nukes. Radiator area would cause similar issues as solar arrays Still, nuclear power is worth exploring for future station and space craft, solar power may be cheap, but at least it would provide more consistent power, and if we ever build a large station we wouldn't need 15 launches to put up a football field size solar array, we would only need one or two to send up a reactor.

bobblebob · Oct 30, 2007

Just come home and seen the damage. Feel so so gutted and sad <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" />

bobblebob · Oct 30, 2007

"Italian astronaut Paolo Nespoli, assisting Parazynski and Wheelock as they doffed their suits and stowed tools, reported the crew was missing a digital camera and flash. "It's probably outside on the tool box on the airlock," he reported I hope it is!

MeteorWayne · Oct 30, 2007

If not, get out a baseball glove and a pair of binoculars <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

halman · Oct 30, 2007

Just read that one of the cosmonauts has reported noticing a hole in one of his gloves. This issue is probably going to require some changes, as torn gloves have occurred on several space walks now. Micrometeorite pitting can create very small, sharp points on metallic surfaces, it would seem, as there has been no handling of sharp materials. When I used to climb towers, I used two pair of gloves, one heavy, one light. The heavy ones were for climbing, and the light ones were for doing the actual work. (Sometimes I had to use bare hands, but I tried to avoid that.) Of course, changing gloves on a spacewalk is impossible, but using a heavier glove results in hand fatigue very quickly. Perhaps a pair of heavy mittens could be worn over the spacesuit gloves for traversing, and removed for fine work. They would have to be attached to the suit somehow to prevent them from drifting away when not in use, and stowed in a pouch to keep them from interfering with work, but such a solution would minimize torn gloves from moving around the station. This also might help to mitigate the problems that have been experienced with fingers getting cold after a few hours on a spacewalk, which has been reported occasionally. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>

mi2again · Oct 30, 2007

"f we ever build a large station we wouldn't need 15 launches to put up a football field size solar array,we would only need one or two to send up a reactor.." That is only because the shuttle, there will be other options. Also again, the reactor needs large radiators which are as big as solar arrays

scottb50 · Oct 30, 2007

Without knowing the electrical connections and routing from what I saw there is an obvious tear between individual cells and crumpling of others, but nothing wide spread, so far. It is possible one out of many individual cells may be compromised and others may have reduced capability, due to their orientation. That is unless they are wired like the old Christmas tree lights, loose one and the whole string is out. Perhaps the best idea would be putting someone out there watching the deploy of each panel so it can be stopped if it has a problem. As long as it is restricted to one or two panels I would think it would be a minor problem. The other side of that is, I believe they intend to move this array again, maybe it would be better to wait until it's in it's final location before doing anything. Also how feasible would it be to take an array up as cargo and switch it out? I would think it would fit in a Progress or maybe even a Soyus. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

bobblebob · Oct 30, 2007

To take just one or 2 panels up and replace them? i would of thought impossile as the crew wouldnt have anything to grapple onto near the array?

JonClarke · Oct 30, 2007

Also again, the reactor needs large radiators which are as big as solar arrays. Many people forget that. they also forget that a reactor large enough to produce the power that the ISS does would have not either several km away on a long, heavy rigid beam, or you will need tonnes of shielding. Either it is a much heavier solution. Plus reactors are not full reliable. You need backup, either another reactor or solar arrays. if you need back solar power you might as well use them for all the power needs. They are simpler, more easily serviced, and more reliable. How do you service a faulty reactor in Earth orbit? And this is not even starting on the disposal issues. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

bobblebob · Oct 30, 2007

The solar panels seem to have caused a few problems now both with retracting and deloying. All seem to come down to these guidewires. Is their some design issue hear the Nasa need to learn from?

thereiwas · Oct 30, 2007

Here is something they seem not to have thought of. Rotate the bad panel's SARJ so the damaged portion is out in front, where the orbiter is docked. Then have the orbiter use its boom extension to get a camera up really close to the damaged area. Probably get a better view than they have so far.

MeteorWayne · Oct 30, 2007

I think they have a good enough view from the hundreds of pictures they've take to understand what is going on. How to deal with it is a much more difficult issue. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

bobblebob · Oct 30, 2007

I dont see how you can deal with it really. If replacing individual panels is out of the question, its probably just a matter of finding out what the damage will have on power generation of the array. Dont see how you can fix a tear in an array

MeteorWayne · Oct 30, 2007

That seems right to me. I would imagine that even if the panel can't be repaired, it will need to be "fixed" in the sense you can't allow the unequal loads that would exist when you rotated the array to persist, or it might cause a break of the outside power return path. That would kill half the array. Right now it's putting out 97% of the power; they can live with that as long as they can assure it won't get worse. That has to be the priority. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

STS-120/10A Mission thread (post launch)

SpaceKiwi

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

SpaceKiwi

Guest

thereiwas

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

SpaceKiwi

Guest

thereiwas

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

Testing

Guest

mi2again

Guest

thereiwas

Guest

baktothemoon

Guest

bobblebob

Guest

bobblebob

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

halman

Guest

mi2again

Guest

scottb50

Guest

bobblebob

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

bobblebob

Guest

thereiwas

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

bobblebob

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page