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

NASA seeking ideas for use of space station docking port



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 28th 16, 10:26 PM posted to sci.space.station
Jeff Findley[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,307
Default NASA seeking ideas for use of space station docking port


NASA seeking ideas for use of space station docking port
by Jeff Foust ? July 15, 2016
http://spacenews.com/nasa-seeking-id...space-station-
docking-port/

Interesting. You'd think this would be the ideal spot for a "full
size" Bigelow expandable module, but some new startup (Axiom Space) is
proposing a conventional (aluminum) module.

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
  #2  
Old July 29th 16, 04:35 PM posted to sci.space.station
Brian Gaff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,312
Default NASA seeking ideas for use of space station docking port


Perhaps with the Americans love for guns it could become a zero g firing
range?

grin.
Brian
--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

NASA seeking ideas for use of space station docking port
by Jeff Foust ? July 15, 2016
http://spacenews.com/nasa-seeking-id...space-station-
docking-port/

Interesting. You'd think this would be the ideal spot for a "full
size" Bigelow expandable module, but some new startup (Axiom Space) is
proposing a conventional (aluminum) module.

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.



  #3  
Old July 29th 16, 09:08 PM posted to sci.space.station
Greg \(Strider\) Moore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default NASA seeking ideas for use of space station docking port

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...


NASA seeking ideas for use of space station docking port
by Jeff Foust ? July 15, 2016
http://spacenews.com/nasa-seeking-id...space-station-
docking-port/

Interesting. You'd think this would be the ideal spot for a "full
size" Bigelow expandable module, but some new startup (Axiom Space) is
proposing a conventional (aluminum) module.

Jeff



Interesting. My guess is Axiom is being a bit risk adverse. I can sort of
see that.

This got me looking at the current config of the US side of the space
station.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...April_2016.svg

So if I have this right, Leonardo is basically parallel to Destiny? Didn't
realize that.

Looking at Node-2, it looks like PMA-3 will be relocated to that along wig
with IDA-3 (to be launched).
So that in theory frees up another slot.

But what confused me, is that nodes (Unity, Harmony, Tranquility) each have
6 ports.

Unity has 5 in use (PMA-1 aft, Leonardo port, Destiny forward, Quest
starboard and Z1 Trust Sement Zenith, nothing on the Nadir port)
Harmony has 5 in use (Quest on Aft, Kibo on Port, PMA-2 Forward, Columbus
starboard and eventually PMA-3/IDA3 Zenith, again nothing on Nadir)
Tranquility has 3 in use (BEAM currently Aft (port in question for this
one), PMA-3 (Currently) Port, Leonardo Forward, Unity Port and Cupola Nadir,
nothing Zenith).

It seems to me, a number of ports are free. I believe Tranquility doesn't
have all ports set to necessarily provide power/etc. But it seems to me
there's additional ports NASA could be looking at to make available. Any
idea why they're only offering the BEAM port?

And there is of course if they want to fly it, Node 4.





--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

  #4  
Old July 30th 16, 12:28 AM posted to sci.space.station
Jeff Findley[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,307
Default NASA seeking ideas for use of space station docking port

In article ,
says...

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...


NASA seeking ideas for use of space station docking port
by Jeff Foust ? July 15, 2016
http://spacenews.com/nasa-seeking-id...space-station-
docking-port/

Interesting. You'd think this would be the ideal spot for a "full
size" Bigelow expandable module, but some new startup (Axiom Space) is
proposing a conventional (aluminum) module.

Jeff



Interesting. My guess is Axiom is being a bit risk adverse. I can sort of
see that.

This got me looking at the current config of the US side of the space
station.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...April_2016.svg

So if I have this right, Leonardo is basically parallel to Destiny? Didn't
realize that.

Looking at Node-2, it looks like PMA-3 will be relocated to that along wig
with IDA-3 (to be launched).
So that in theory frees up another slot.

But what confused me, is that nodes (Unity, Harmony, Tranquility) each have
6 ports.

Unity has 5 in use (PMA-1 aft, Leonardo port, Destiny forward, Quest
starboard and Z1 Trust Sement Zenith, nothing on the Nadir port)
Harmony has 5 in use (Quest on Aft, Kibo on Port, PMA-2 Forward, Columbus
starboard and eventually PMA-3/IDA3 Zenith, again nothing on Nadir)
Tranquility has 3 in use (BEAM currently Aft (port in question for this
one), PMA-3 (Currently) Port, Leonardo Forward, Unity Port and Cupola Nadir,
nothing Zenith).

It seems to me, a number of ports are free. I believe Tranquility doesn't
have all ports set to necessarily provide power/etc. But it seems to me
there's additional ports NASA could be looking at to make available. Any
idea why they're only offering the BEAM port?

And there is of course if they want to fly it, Node 4.


Have you taken into account the CBM port(s) used for Commercial Cargo
vehicles? I'd think there would be at least two of these (one primary
and one backup).

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
  #5  
Old July 30th 16, 01:37 AM posted to sci.space.station
Greg \(Strider\) Moore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default NASA seeking ideas for use of space station docking port

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...


NASA seeking ideas for use of space station docking port
by Jeff Foust ? July 15, 2016
http://spacenews.com/nasa-seeking-id...space-station-
docking-port/

Interesting. You'd think this would be the ideal spot for a "full
size" Bigelow expandable module, but some new startup (Axiom Space) is
proposing a conventional (aluminum) module.

Jeff



Interesting. My guess is Axiom is being a bit risk adverse. I can sort of
see that.

This got me looking at the current config of the US side of the space
station.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...April_2016.svg

So if I have this right, Leonardo is basically parallel to Destiny?
Didn't
realize that.

Looking at Node-2, it looks like PMA-3 will be relocated to that along
wig
with IDA-3 (to be launched).
So that in theory frees up another slot.

But what confused me, is that nodes (Unity, Harmony, Tranquility) each
have
6 ports.

Unity has 5 in use (PMA-1 aft, Leonardo port, Destiny forward, Quest
starboard and Z1 Trust Sement Zenith, nothing on the Nadir port)
Harmony has 5 in use (Quest on Aft, Kibo on Port, PMA-2 Forward, Columbus
starboard and eventually PMA-3/IDA3 Zenith, again nothing on Nadir)
Tranquility has 3 in use (BEAM currently Aft (port in question for this
one), PMA-3 (Currently) Port, Leonardo Forward, Unity Port and Cupola
Nadir,
nothing Zenith).

It seems to me, a number of ports are free. I believe Tranquility doesn't
have all ports set to necessarily provide power/etc. But it seems to me
there's additional ports NASA could be looking at to make available. Any
idea why they're only offering the BEAM port?

And there is of course if they want to fly it, Node 4.


Have you taken into account the CBM port(s) used for Commercial Cargo
vehicles? I'd think there would be at least two of these (one primary
and one backup).


Hmm, good point. Looking at Wikipedia, it appears that nadir and zenith
ports of Harmony (node 2) are currently used for this purpose.
So that really only eaves the nadir port on Unit (Zenith on Tranquility
probably is blocked by the Truss.)


Jeff


--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

  #6  
Old July 30th 16, 07:16 AM posted to sci.space.station
Brian Gaff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,312
Default NASA seeking ideas for use of space station docking port

Could this be a mass issue of some kind, ie it has to be balanced to keep
any twisting or other unfortunate problems from occuring when its moved for
avoidiing action or reboosting?
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...


NASA seeking ideas for use of space station docking port
by Jeff Foust ? July 15, 2016
http://spacenews.com/nasa-seeking-id...space-station-
docking-port/

Interesting. You'd think this would be the ideal spot for a "full
size" Bigelow expandable module, but some new startup (Axiom Space) is
proposing a conventional (aluminum) module.

Jeff



Interesting. My guess is Axiom is being a bit risk adverse. I can sort of
see that.

This got me looking at the current config of the US side of the space
station.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...April_2016.svg

So if I have this right, Leonardo is basically parallel to Destiny?
Didn't
realize that.

Looking at Node-2, it looks like PMA-3 will be relocated to that along
wig
with IDA-3 (to be launched).
So that in theory frees up another slot.

But what confused me, is that nodes (Unity, Harmony, Tranquility) each
have
6 ports.

Unity has 5 in use (PMA-1 aft, Leonardo port, Destiny forward, Quest
starboard and Z1 Trust Sement Zenith, nothing on the Nadir port)
Harmony has 5 in use (Quest on Aft, Kibo on Port, PMA-2 Forward, Columbus
starboard and eventually PMA-3/IDA3 Zenith, again nothing on Nadir)
Tranquility has 3 in use (BEAM currently Aft (port in question for this
one), PMA-3 (Currently) Port, Leonardo Forward, Unity Port and Cupola
Nadir,
nothing Zenith).

It seems to me, a number of ports are free. I believe Tranquility doesn't
have all ports set to necessarily provide power/etc. But it seems to me
there's additional ports NASA could be looking at to make available. Any
idea why they're only offering the BEAM port?

And there is of course if they want to fly it, Node 4.


Have you taken into account the CBM port(s) used for Commercial Cargo
vehicles? I'd think there would be at least two of these (one primary
and one backup).

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.



 




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
Can and if so, will, Orion use Soyuz docking port on ISS? David Spain Technology 14 May 16th 09 03:00 AM
Progress M-55 docking to the International Space Station Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 December 31st 05 11:00 AM
NASA announces live coverage of space station docking Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 January 26th 04 11:03 PM
Docking of Progress M-48 to the International Space Station Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 September 2nd 03 03:11 PM
NASA Plans TV Coverage Of Progress Docking With Space Station Ron Baalke Space Station 4 August 22nd 03 01:12 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:51 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.