MSNBC (JimO) on value of 'big door' on ISS

Space station benefits from a wide opening

As Discovery's crew delivers cargo, big doorways make the job easier

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13755857/

By James Oberg, NBC News space analyst // Special to MSNBC

July 7, 2006

HOUSTON - Anybody on Earth who's ever moved into a new apartment and
jammed a sofa into a too-narrow doorway appreciates the value of having a
passageway that's big enough for your stuff. And that goes double in space,
where the option of going outside and looking for another entrance isn't
practical.

Aboard the international space station, astronauts are now unloading
several tons of supplies and equipment from the Leonardo cargo module, which
was brought up on the space shuttle Discovery. They're also transferring a
year's worth of trash and recyclable equipment into the module's vacated
slots.

In the process, they're using a particular element of the space station
that usually gets overlooked amid all the attention to more sexy features
such as solar panels, air locks and oxygen generators. It's called the
"hatch," and it just doesn't get any respect - despite the fact that its
4-foot-plus width gives the international space station capabilities that
are unprecedented in 30 years of orbital operations, going back to NASA's
Skylab and Russia's earliest outposts.

Jim Oberg wrote:

Space station benefits from a wide opening

As Discovery's crew delivers cargo, big doorways make the job easier

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13755857/

By James Oberg, NBC News space analyst // Special to MSNBC

July 7, 2006

HOUSTON - Anybody on Earth who's ever moved into a new apartment and
jammed a sofa into a too-narrow doorway appreciates the value of having a
passageway that's big enough for your stuff. And that goes double in space,
where the option of going outside and looking for another entrance isn't
practical.

Aboard the international space station, astronauts are now unloading
several tons of supplies and equipment from the Leonardo cargo module, which
was brought up on the space shuttle Discovery. They're also transferring a
year's worth of trash and recyclable equipment into the module's vacated
slots.

In the process, they're using a particular element of the space station
that usually gets overlooked amid all the attention to more sexy features
such as solar panels, air locks and oxygen generators. It's called the
"hatch," and it just doesn't get any respect - despite the fact that its
4-foot-plus width gives the international space station capabilities that
are unprecedented in 30 years of orbital operations, going back to NASA's
Skylab and Russia's earliest outposts.

What was the width of the hatch then? Did running into a problem with it
cause them to enlarge it?

Vandar wrote:
Jim Oberg wrote:

Space station benefits from a wide opening

What was the width of the hatch then? Did running into a problem with it
cause them to enlarge it?


Should make it easier when the large, plasma HDTV arrives.

;-)

Rusty

"Vandar" wrote in message
...
Jim Oberg wrote:


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13755857/

In the process, they're using a particular element of the space
station
that usually gets overlooked amid all the attention to more sexy
features
such as solar panels, air locks and oxygen generators. It's called the
"hatch," and it just doesn't get any respect - despite the fact that its
4-foot-plus width gives the international space station capabilities
that
are unprecedented in 30 years of orbital operations, going back to
NASA's
Skylab and Russia's earliest outposts.

What was the width of the hatch then? Did running into a problem with it
cause them to enlarge it?

29 inches on Skylab (the size of the Apollo docking tunnel).

Didn't really give problems back then since Skylab was launched with
everything aboard.

But they knew for ISS they'd need to move bigger things in and out. Note
the above is only an excerpt.

Read the entire URL for details.



Btw, nice little article Jim.

Btw, nice little article Jim.

True.

Although as I understand it, the main reason why the 80 cm and 107 cm
docking tunnels have been so slow to die is that the larger hatches
add to the mass (well, the 130 cm CBM hatch doesn't do docking but
even as for 80 vs 107, the latter has not replaced the former).

Jim Oberg wrote:
such as solar panels, air locks and oxygen generators. It's called the
"hatch," and it just doesn't get any respect - despite the fact that its
4-foot-plus width gives the international space station capabilities that
are unprecedented in 30 years of orbital operations, going back to NASA's
Skylab and Russia's earliest outposts.

That hatch (CBM) is about to get very useless when the shuttle is
retired and the whole concept of MPLM becomes moot, unless the Japanese
actually develop and produce their HTV.

NASA should start its planning for the day when MPLM transfers are no
longer possible and plan all hardware to fit through the smaller soyuz
(or PMA) hatches.

Vandar wrote:
What was the width of the hatch then? Did running into a problem with it
cause them to enlarge it?


The CBM was designed from the experience on MIR where the smaller
russian hatches made it very hard to load and unload large components.
The CBM hatch was designed to be wide enough to allow transfer of whole
racks. This means that when an experiemnt has concluded, they can now
return the whole rack to earth and not clutter the station.

Once shuttle is retired, this will no longer be possible and many items
currently loaded onto the ISS via the CBM hatches will have no way to be
unloaded from the station without some serious disassenbly/breaking up
into smaller parts. So I guess they will have to send some acétylene
torches to the ISS so they can break up components so they can fit
through the smaller russian hatches.

John Doe wrote in :

Jim Oberg wrote:
such as solar panels, air locks and oxygen generators. It's called
the "hatch," and it just doesn't get any respect - despite the fact
that its 4-foot-plus width gives the international space station
capabilities that are unprecedented in 30 years of orbital
operations, going back to NASA's Skylab and Russia's earliest
outposts.

That hatch (CBM) is about to get very useless when the shuttle is
retired and the whole concept of MPLM becomes moot, unless the
Japanese actually develop and produce their HTV.

HTV isn't the only alternative. Out of the six finalists for NASA's
Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program, four have
released at least some details on how their spacecraft will attach to ISS -
and all four (Rocketplane Kistler K-1, SpaceX Dragon, Spacehab Apex, and
t/Space CxV) have chosen the CBM.

NASA should start its planning for the day when MPLM transfers are no
longer possible and plan all hardware to fit through the smaller soyuz
(or PMA) hatches.

Or they should simply follow through with the COTS program until at least
one of the contestants actually produces a working vehicle.


--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

On Fri, 07 Jul 2006 22:19:15 -0400, John Doe wrote:


Once shuttle is retired, this will no longer be possible and many items
currently loaded onto the ISS via the CBM hatches will have no way to be
unloaded from the station without some serious disassenbly/breaking up
into smaller parts. So I guess they will have to send some acétylene
torches to the ISS so they can break up components so they can fit
through the smaller russian hatches.

Not so.

CxV...

"http://www.transformspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=projects.view&workid=CCD3097A-96B6-175C-97F15F270F2B83AA"

Note the square CBM hatch in the illustration.

Apex...

http://www.spacehab.com/sfs/apex.htm

Note the square CBM hatch in the illustration.


HTV...

http://www.nasda.go.jp/projects/rock...#configuration

Note the square CBM hatch in the illustration.

SpaceX Dragon...

http://images.spaceref.com/news/2006...ISS.Asm6.m.jpg

Note where it's berthed.



Brian

In article , John Doe wrote:
That hatch (CBM) is about to get very useless when the shuttle is
retired and the whole concept of MPLM becomes moot, unless the Japanese
actually develop and produce their HTV.

Or unless either the CEV or one of the COTS commercial vehicles berths to
a CBM instead of docking. Which several of the COTS designs do; I'm not
sure about the Continued Employment Vehicle. (For a while it was going to
use a new lightweight docking interface, if I recall correctly, but that
has since been canceled.) That's what the shuttle *should* have done,
instead of using the CBM interface only for the separate MPLMs.
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |