A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Station
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old April 11th 04, 06:27 PM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground


No, you don't get it. I have asked you multiple times *why* they
should look at the skin as part of the investigation, and you are
utterly unable or unwilling to answer the question.


One possible explnation is a soplar panel reflecting sun onto the skin of a
module. If thatys at all possible it should be investigated.

Part of the trouble uis the station should of never been built without a
outside self propelled camera. This was planned by cut in the cost mess.

If you cant do it right then dont do it at all.
Hey this is my opinion
  #33  
Old April 11th 04, 06:30 PM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground


You know, this is really tiresome. The USA has access to the same voice comms
and would have heard the same conversations between the crew and moscow.
Moscow even provides constant


Russia didnt share the telementary indicating the suit problem....

Bioth partners need to communicate all such issues continiously. Just so
everyone is aware of whats happening and possibly failing at any time
Hey this is my opinion
  #34  
Old April 11th 04, 09:28 PM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground


So, since no other space station (the Salyuts, Skylab, Mir) has had such an
outside self-propelled camera, are you saying that none of those stations
should have been built?


ISS is the largest and most complex. with the low rate of available ot soyuz
and the shuttle grounded this is different from MIR in its prime years. This
makes a camera essential to operations. no need to rush out a airlock when
wierd noises occur.

The need for such a inspectiion capability is now clear.


Hey this is my opinion
  #38  
Old April 12th 04, 12:26 AM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground


In other words, you cannot make a connection between the noise and the
skin.

Noted.


No the noise might be skin buckling as mentioned as one possiblity
Hey this is my opinion
  #39  
Old April 12th 04, 03:05 AM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground

bob haller wrote:
ISS is the largest and most complex. with the low rate of available ot soyuz
and the shuttle grounded this is different from MIR in its prime years. This
makes a camera essential to operations. no need to rush out a airlock when
wierd noises occur.


Actually, the more realistic solution is just to install additional SSRMS
grappling points that would enable the arm to be used on the russian segment.
Particularly, if it could move its end effector all the way around the aft
Progress docking port.

I don't think it would have taken megabucks to install grappling points on
each russian module and string some wires back to Z1 where command/data/power
could be provided. It is called foresight.

Such a scheme would allow for really easy movement of Pirs from nadir to
zenith ports should the russians ever send that commercial module.

And it would allow the arm to greatly help with inspections, and once you have
the grapling hand, even help fix things (such as a recent progress docking
port problem).
  #40  
Old April 12th 04, 05:24 AM
Jorge R. Frank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Monitoring ISS Air-to-Ground

John Doe wrote in :

bob haller wrote:
ISS is the largest and most complex. with the low rate of available
ot soyuz and the shuttle grounded this is different from MIR in its
prime years. This makes a camera essential to operations. no need to
rush out a airlock when wierd noises occur.


Actually, the more realistic solution is just to install additional
SSRMS grappling points that would enable the arm to be used on the
russian segment. Particularly, if it could move its end effector all
the way around the aft Progress docking port.


Actually, under the original assembly sequence, the Russians/Europeans
would have provided the SPP and ERA by now.

I don't think it would have taken megabucks to install grappling
points on each russian module and string some wires back to Z1 where
command/data/power could be provided. It is called foresight.


Having the foresight to say that Russia would fail to provide the SPP would
probably offend the Russians. They'd probably charge extra for the
privilege of installing the grapple fixtures on their hardware.


--
JRF

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




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
System to monitor heat panels could safeguard future spacecraft (Forwarded) Andrew Yee Space Shuttle 0 July 15th 04 06:14 PM
ISS On-Orbit Status, 20-02-2004 Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 February 21st 04 03:59 PM
ISS On-Orbit Status, 11-01-2004 Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 January 12th 04 11:35 AM
Pressure monitoring in station BigSkier Space Station 2 December 1st 03 05:19 PM
WashPost: “Space Station Mission Opposed” James Oberg Space Station 3 October 23rd 03 01:10 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.