What are the unused node ports to be used for?

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

willpittenger

Guest
Based on the plans I saw, Node 1 will end up with one unused port. Node 2 will have 2 unused ports. Node 3 will use only two ports, one for Node 1 and the other for the window. Given that the cargo modules won't be able to fly without the shuttle, I don't see those ports being used for that. Will NASA put more PMAs on those ports? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
L

lampblack

Guest
Presumably, at least one of those unused ports would have been used for the habitat module that got scrapped. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>
 
N

nuaetius

Guest
Heck, If ESA or Nasa offers Bigelow enough money they could triple their living space. This is what the BA330 was originally designed to do anyway.
 
T

tadpoletriker

Guest
One was also for the CAM.<br />One port on Node 3 might not be usable.<br />Is the pressure on the Bigalow system not a little lower?<br /><br />
 
S

subzero788

Guest
One of the Harmony ports will be used for berthing visiting resupply spacecraft (HTV, Dragon etc)
 
L

larper

Guest
PMAs are for auto-docking. Resupply ships will not dock with ISS. They will redezvous, and the SSRMS will grapple and mate the ship to a CBM. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong><font color="#ff0000">Vote </font><font color="#3366ff">Libertarian</font></strong></p> </div>
 
K

kurtwagner

Guest
CBM = Common Berthing Mechanism. From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Berthing_Mechanism "The Common Berthing Mechanism (or CBM) is used to connect all non-Russian pressurized modules of the International Space Station." From Boeing http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/spacestation/components/common_berthing_mechanism.html "The two major structures that make up the Mechanism are rings, one of which is termed the "passive half," the other the "active half." The former has capture latch fittings, alignment guides and nuts. The latter, or active half, has capture latches, alignment guides, powered bolts and controller panel assemblies. "
 
H

holmec

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Resupply ships will not dock with ISS<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Except for ATV and Progress which berth on the russian modules. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>
 
M

maxiumque

Guest
"So will Orion be unable to dock autonomously? Ditto for anything else using a PMA port?"<br /><br />Orion is the only thing using the PMA ports and it can do it unmanned. First few Orion missions will attach LIDS interfaces to the APAS<br /><br />
 
W

willpittenger

Guest
LIDS? When I looked that up in Wikipedia, it said that it was a docking system incompatible with the PMAs. So would the PMA that the shuttle docks with be replaced -- or added to? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS