Endeavour Butchered

found this taken in May 05:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zcasper...in/set-338055/

Anybody have insight into what is going on here? It appears the
forward rcs module as detailed he

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/.../sodb/213a.pdf

has removed.

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:26:12 -0500, alicat5 wrote
(in article .com):

found this taken in May 05:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zcasper...in/set-338055/

Anybody have insight into what is going on here? It appears the
forward rcs module as detailed he

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/.../sodb/213a.pdf

has removed.


The RCS modules are removed for service after every flight. You'll
note that the rear pods have been removed as well.

--
"Fame may be fleeting but obscurity is forever." ~Anonymous
"I believe as little as possible and know as much as I can."
~Todd Stuart Phillips
www.angryherb.net

"alicat5" wrote:

found this taken in May 05:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zcasper...in/set-338055/

Anybody have insight into what is going on here? It appears the
forward rcs module as detailed he

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/.../sodb/213a.pdf

has removed.

Parts are removed from the Shuttle all the time for maintenance -
AIUI, the pre-Challenger practice of cannibalization has been halted.

Anyone know where that photo was taken?

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

On 2005-08-17, Derek Lyons wrote:

Parts are removed from the Shuttle all the time for maintenance -
AIUI, the pre-Challenger practice of cannibalization has been halted.

Anyone know where that photo was taken?

Part of a set taken for the first STS-114 rollout, showing Discovery
being brought into the VAB, stacked, and rolled out, so presumably in
one of the hangers adjacent to the VAB.

Last status update I could find - Jul 4 - said Endeavour was still in
her OMM period; is this still the case, and if so would this location
make sense? It'd certainly explain why she looks so dismantled...

--
-Andrew Gray

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 22:13:51 GMT, (Derek Lyons)
wrote:


http://www.flickr.com/photos/zcasper...in/set-338055/

Anyone know where that photo was taken?

The RLV hangar near the Shuttle Landing Facility. Atlantis and
Discovery were in two OPFs while the third OPF was down for overhaul.

Brian

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zcasper...in/set-338055/

Yes, the RCS pods (aft) and forward RCS come off between flights.
Also, perhaps the rudder/speedbrake is missing because of the
speedbrake actuator problem identified a few months ago. Remember
that the gears seemed to be in danger of jamming?

"Herb Schaltegger" wrote in
message .com...
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:26:12 -0500, alicat5 wrote
(in article .com):

found this taken in May 05:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zcasper...in/set-338055/

Anybody have insight into what is going on here? It appears the
forward rcs module as detailed he

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/.../sodb/213a.pdf

has removed.


The RCS modules are removed for service after every flight. You'll
note that the rear pods have been removed as well.

Getting rid of the nasty hypergolic propellants is something NASA has wanted
to do for a long, long time. Unfortunately, it's one of the many shuttle
upgrades that never happened. :-(

For a new vehicle, it would be nice to get rid of the hypergolics and go
with something a lot more friendly, so hopefully you don't have to pull the
RCS systems after every flight anymore.

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

In message , Jeff Findley
writes

"Herb Schaltegger" wrote in
message .com...

Getting rid of the nasty hypergolic propellants is something NASA has wanted
to do for a long, long time. Unfortunately, it's one of the many shuttle
upgrades that never happened. :-(

For a new vehicle, it would be nice to get rid of the hypergolics and go
with something a lot more friendly, so hopefully you don't have to pull the
RCS systems after every flight anymore.

What could they use that isn't nasty, and _is_ reliable?
--
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 12:41:08 -0500, Jonathan Silverlight wrote
(in article ):

What could they use that isn't nasty, and _is_ reliable?

AND has a reasonable ISP AND has a reasonable thrust? Aye, we've
listed all the rubs haven't we?

I've heard people bandy about ideas involving peroxide over a platinum
catalyst - nasty enough, I guess, but nowhere near as nasty as
hydrazine or nitrogen tetroxide. Or as powerful, I don't believe.
I've also heard people discussing alcohol and LOX but that adds it's
own problems - reliability and the weight involved to store sufficient
cryogenic oxidizer among them.

Well, all engineering is trade-offs. Just depends on how you
prioritize the various design factors.

--
"Fame may be fleeting but obscurity is forever." ~Anonymous
"I believe as little as possible and know as much as I can."
~Todd Stuart Phillips
www.angryherb.net

Waht does anyone make of this excerpt from a Florida Today article
dated 18 August ( entitled No More Shuttle Flights in 2005):

"Bill Gerstenmaier, the newly-appointed head of space operations at
NASA, says the proposed changes have the side benefit of providing
smoother turn-arounds between station construction missions further
down the road. Under earlier plans, Atlantis would have flown
back-to-back flights on a super-tight schedule.

The new shuttle plan, which is yet to be formally approved by shuttle
management, puts Atlantis in line to carry an especially heavy piece of
the space station. It also sets a sequence of Discovery, Atlantis,
Discovery rather than one in which vehicles might have had to fly
back-to-back, a sequence that could have led to delays.

"By being able to do this vehicle switch, that is going to make a
more efficient schedule; that makes the impact not a very big
impact," Gerstenmaier said."


Where does Endeavour play into this? Is Endeavour undergoing the same
upgrade and refit that Columbia did?

Gene DiGennaro
Baltimore, Md.