STS-122 (1E) Updates

[billslugg]

Then you go after the firewood supplier. I want it dryer, higher BTU content, my engineer is not moving fast enough.<br />That fails, I start breaking thumbs. The problem IS going to get fixed. It is going to get fixed NOW. Then I take a lesson from Sam Walton (relayed to me by people who knew him). Before waiting for an answer, I pull out a 2x4, beat them up side the head, sit back down, and say "NOW are you getting the flavor of what I want?" NO WAIT WAIT DON'T SAY ANYTHING. HUSH! Then you pull the 2x4 out again and you say "I can just tell when the message is not getting through! And you start swinging again. I have been on the receiving end. I've seen it done. It works! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

BTW, post MMT briefieng NET 5:30 EDT (2230 UT) <br /><br />Edit, Ow <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[bobblebob]

Conference pushed back again!!<br /><br />5:30 now <br /><br />Edit: Damn, you beat me to it <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

 

[bobblebob]

Arent the ECO sensors a redundant system anyway?

 

[MeteorWayne]

Hmmm, I wouldn't call them redundant.<br />Are there other sytems that check the same thing? Yes. But it's a fail-safe (ironic, isn't it) mechanism to tell when the tank close to empty.<br /><br />The system shuts the engine down before fuel runs out.<br /><br />Results are very bad if the engines are still running. (ie the engines are detroyed in a destructive way).<br />In theory there's enough fuel, but you can't take the chance. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[billslugg]

<font color="yellow">the engines are detroyed in a destructive way</font><br />Whoa!! That must REALLY hurt!! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[bobblebob]

NET 6pm now <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br />Im off to bed in an hour so they best hurry

 

[MeteorWayne]

News conference NET 6PM<br />Replay of the morning briefing is available on the NASA-Shuttle section, if you'd like to pass some time. <br /><br />Edit:Ha, this time I stepped on you <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[bobblebob]

Any bets on a further 30 mins delayed conference? <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

 

[MeteorWayne]

Add another 1/2 hour.<br /><br />NET 6:30 EST.... <br /><br />Edit: No way was I takin' that bet <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[bobblebob]

The post Mission Management Team meeting news conference has been pushed back to no earlier than 7 p.m. EST. <br /><br />Well thats it for me, cant stay up that late. Will check before work in the morning to see the situation

 

[MeteorWayne]

Goodnight bbbbb,<br />I'll summarize it so you can get a quick read in the morning, and I'm sure there will be a link to the full video on the Shuttle page after the summary. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[bobblebob]

Thanks <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />Goodnite, hope you finally get to see the conference

 

[erioladastra]

No launch tomorrow.

 

[bobblebob]

Last check before bed, and although i obviously want it launched im glad its not going up tomorrow as i would have been out.<br /><br />Selfish yes, but now i can hopefully see it <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[MeteorWayne]

News Conference now NET 7:30 EST<br />Thanx erioladastra <br /><br />Edit: in progress, Scribblenotes upcoming. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

Scribblenotes Dec 6 2007 post MMT News Conference--<br /><br />ECO System sensors 3 and 4 indicated wet (open) condition<br />Backs up primary system.<br /><br />Scrub- />Evaluate->Scrub Turnaround Meeting ->Determine path forward<br />- /> 24 hour turnaround-> More time needed ->48 Hr turnaround for Saturday launch.<br /><br />In the meantime:<br />Additional info/ additional instrumentation is not in procedures or Mission Rules yet, so additional data has to be considered.<br /><br />OPS team working plan to fly with failures in ECO system.<br />Rule was 3 of 4 had to be working, became 4 of 4, back to 3 of 4.<br />It is possible 2 of 4 might be safe with additional instrumention now available if needed. Could even be a crew or ground decision based on post launch data.<br /><br />Similar, but different than previous ECO failures.<br /><br />Believe problem is between Tank end and PSB (Point Sensor Box, the collector for data from the tank.)<br /><br />Possible plan; Tanking test tomorrow, not to fly, but to test.<br />Pros and Cons being weighed.<br /><br />2 PM MMT tomorrow.<br /><br />They may top off cryos tomorrow to give extra margin for Sat, Sun Mon launch opprtunities.<br /><br />Weather 60% Go Saturday, 70% Sunday and Monday. showers and 5K ceiling.<br /><br />Detanking in progress, both sensors indiactaed dry, one much later than the other.<br /><br />MW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[bobblebob]

Thanks for the notes of the meeting, very helpful <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[montmein69]

It seems to be a hoax ... but who knows ?<br /><br /><font color="yellow"><br /> /> Among the possible solutions is to use the astronaut crew,<br /> /> with assistance from Mission Control in Houston, to react<br /> /> to possible engine cutoff sensor failures in real time and<br /> /> override the automated safety system to prevent potential dangers.<br /><br /><br /> /> NASA teams already had been at work looking at ways to,<br /> /> basically, utilize the crew as the backup system to the<br /> /> engine cutoff sensors. Plans were to try to incorporate<br /> /> such procedures for future flights. That work started after<br /> /> two troubled countdowns in 2005 and 2006, when ECO sensor<br /> /> failures prompted delays and time-consuming engineering<br /> /> detective work that never identified a cause or solution.</font><br /><br />http://www.floridatoday.com/floridatoday/blogs/spaceteam/<br /><br />If the sensor doesn't work .... sweep away the sensor<br />If the flight rules doesn't match .... swap the rules<br /><br />Hope NASA won't test such a <<beta />> practice ?<br /><br />But hopefully I'm sure it's a hoax .... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[bobw]

I thought they tracked that stuff down to a contaminated grounding connector. Somebody posted a picture here of the instrument they used to measure a few milliohms or microohms, can't remember exactly but it was a very small resistance in what should have been a zero ohm connection. <br /><br />Edit: I found the article and the picture. It may not have been the problem, they changed cables too, but the sensors all worked for Discovery on STS-114 in 2005 when they got done.<br /><br />http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts114/050720newdate/<br /><br /><font color="yellow">He said the grounding problem was extremely subtle, adding "we are talking in fractions of a milli-ohm (of resistance).</font><br /><br />Anyway, I don't see anything fundamentally wrong with keeping humans in the loop. If you are blasting off into outer space, have 4 sensors in your tank, and one of them starts going on and off or just says empty while the other three say full then what is wrong with letting the pilot tell the computer to ignore it?<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

It's not a hoax, I commented on that in my scribblenotes above. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[larper]

Plus, it's all about risk management. Do you allow 2 of the 4 sensors to malfunction and still fly, knowing that they are but the 4th level of early cutoff protection, which shouldn't happen anyway if the engines are burning correctly? Or, do you risk an unnecessary early shutoff, requiring the riskiest, and completely untested, manuever of RTLS?<br /><br />Actually, I guess it wouldn't even be a RTLS, since you don't have engines. It would be a glide to ditching altitude, assuming you could get the orbiter into a stable glide attitude. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong><font color="#ff0000">Vote </font><font color="#3366ff">Libertarian</font></strong></p> </div>

 

[jammers]

I think by the time the engines need to be shut down due to low propellant they're well past negative return (unless there's a leak, which would probably present its own set of problems), so RTLS wouldn't be an option. <br />By then it would probably be either Abort Once Around or Abort to Orbit.

 

[larper]

Yes, but you can get a false reading of low propellent at anytime if these sensors aren't working, right?<br /><br />However, it might be that the more dangerous failure is that they read wet when they are in reality dry. In other words, they FAIL to signal an early shutdown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong><font color="#ff0000">Vote </font><font color="#3366ff">Libertarian</font></strong></p> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

That is correct. As I recall (I can't find where I read this) particularly if one of the two propellent parts ( <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> s_g) runs dry, the engine can explode.<br />However I can't recall if it was the LOX or LH2 that caused that. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>