Endeavour Butchered

Ooops answered my own question, Endeavour is still going through OMM.

wrote:

Ooops answered my own question, Endeavour is still going through OMM.

Question is: is such a long OMM really standard ? It seems it has been
in there forever. How close is it to being ready to fly ?

Or has work been suspended so they could focus on doing what are
essentially OMMs on Discovery and Atlantis in te aftermath of Columbia ?

Has work resumed at full speed on Endeavour now ?

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...

Anyone know where that photo was taken?

In the Columbia hangar while OPF bay 2 was being worked on. That orbiter is
pretty well gutted right now for major overhaul. The cabins are vacant with
nearly all the insides removed.

On 18 Aug 2005 11:54:06 -0700, wrote:

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

Yes, Endeavour was the last to be upgraded to the glass cockpit, etc.
Atlantis was first in 1998, followed by Columbia in 2000. Discovery
was in the OMM at the time of the Columbia disaster in 2003. Endeavour
began her OMM in late 2003/early 2004.

Endeavour was scheduled to return to flight with STS-117 in late 2006,
but that will certainly be delayed now.

Brian

"Brian Thorn" wrote in message
...
On 18 Aug 2005 11:54:06 -0700, wrote:

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

Yes, Endeavour was the last to be upgraded to the glass cockpit, etc.
Atlantis was first in 1998, followed by Columbia in 2000. Discovery
was in the OMM at the time of the Columbia disaster in 2003. Endeavour
began her OMM in late 2003/early 2004.

Endeavour was scheduled to return to flight with STS-117 in late 2006,
but that will certainly be delayed now.

There is even some talk of not using it again - just talk at this point, but
it's on the table.

Tim K. wrote:
There is even some talk of not using it again - just talk at this point, but
it's on the table.

That seems pretty damn unlikely. Atlantis I think is the most likely
candidate to be the first orbiter "retired" as it has gone the longest
without at OMM. Even with the arguement that a lot of work has been
done during the stand-down.

With the delays for 121, NASA will probably get Endeavour back flying,
and use all three orbiters, retire Atlantis after a few flights,
forgoing an OMM, then close off the program with Discovery and
Endeavour.

-A.L.

Andrew Lotosky wrote:
With the delays for 121, NASA will probably get Endeavour back flying,
and use all three orbiters, retire Atlantis after a few flights,
forgoing an OMM, then close off the program with Discovery and
Endeavour.


If the goal is to complete the station and possibly a flight to Hubble
to outfit it with a de-orbit engine, then NASA will need all shuttles it
can use, especialy when you consider the delays because of foam.

The question then becomes:

With KSC facilities and staffing levels, does having 3 orbiters allow
for greater launch rates than with just 2 orbiters ?

Once one shuttle 1 is rolled to the pad, the shuttle 2 goes from OPF to
VAB, and the shuttle 3 can then begin its turn around processing at OPF
after having landed. With 2 shuttles, there is a window where not all
facilities are used. With 3 shuttles, you fill your facilities.


Can NASA sustain high flight rates for 4 years ? I would hope that
during this stand down until March 2006, NASA would use this time to do
any maintenance to OPF , VAB and MPLs that would allow uninterupted use
between 2006 and 2010.

Also, NASA should now look at transforming at least one MPLM to have
micrometeorite protection so it can be left on station permanently.


Because of the rush betwene 2006 and 2010 to complete the station, NASA
must now use the next 6 months to make damned sure its facilities will
be ready for high flight rates.

"Andrew Lotosky" wrote in message
ups.com...

Tim K. wrote:
There is even some talk of not using it again - just talk at this point,
but
it's on the table.

That seems pretty damn unlikely. Atlantis I think is the most likely
candidate to be the first orbiter "retired" as it has gone the longest
without at OMM. Even with the arguement that a lot of work has been
done during the stand-down.

105 hasn't "had" an OMM, it's in the middle of one and torn all apart.

"John Doe" wrote in message ...
Once one shuttle 1 is rolled to the pad, the shuttle 2 goes from OPF to
VAB,

There is room in the VAB to stack two at once.


Can NASA sustain high flight rates for 4 years ? I would hope that
during this stand down until March 2006, NASA would use this time to do
any maintenance to OPF , VAB and MPLs that would allow uninterupted use
between 2006 and 2010.

The days of high flight rates are over. The plan is for four flights in
2006., probably never much more than that.

"Tim K." wrote:
The days of high flight rates are over. The plan is for four flights in
2006., probably never much more than that.


So, either they won't be able to complete the station to minimum, or
they will have to extend the shuttle's lifetime beyond 2010.

When they set that 2010 deadline, it was with the assumption that the
shuttle would bve resuming flight in 2004 and 2010 was the time when
shuttle major maintenance and upgrades would be needed.

But since the shuttle won't be resuming flight until 2006, could one
argue that the shuttle could fly until 2012 instead of 2010 ?