A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

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

Jonathan's Space Report No. 509, 18-09-2003



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 21st 03, 03:11 PM
Jacques van Oene
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Jonathan's Space Report No. 509, 18-09-2003

Jonathan's Space Report
No. 509 2003 Sep 18, Cambridge,
MA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---

Shuttle and Station
--------------------

The Progress 248 (M-48) cargo ship was launched on Aug 29 (not Aug 28)
and docked with Zvezda on Aug 31. Progress 259 (M1-10) undocked from the
Pirs module on Sep 4 and will remain on orbit to carry out
remote sensing of the Earth with its onboard TV camera system.

Here is a summary of recent Progress and Soyuz missions:

ISS Mission Spacecraft Launch Dock Undock
9P 7K-TGM 258 (Progress M1-9) Sep 25 Sep 29, Zvezda Feb 1
5S 7K-STMA 211 (Soyuz TMA-1) Oct 30 Nov 1, Pirs May 3
10P 7K-TGM 247 (Progress M-47) Feb 2 Feb 4, Zvezda Aug 27
6S 7K-STMA 212 (Soyuz TMA-2) Apr 26 Apr 28, Zarya -
11P 7K-TGM 259 (Progress M1-10) Jun 8 Jun 11, Pirs Sep 4
12P 7K-TG 248 (Progress M-48) Aug 29 Aug 31, Zvezda -

Note that NASA Public Affairs regularly commits the appalling solecism
of referring to Mission 12P as "Progress 12", while Russian sources (and
they should know, since it's their spacecraft) always use Progress M-48
(postlaunch name) or Progress 248 (7K-TGM No. 248, factory designation).
"Progress 12" should ONLY be used to refer to Progress 7K-TG No. 113,
launched in January 1981. "Progress 12P" would be (barely) acceptable,
but "Progress flight 12P" would more clearly indicate that you are using
the ISS mission number and not the name of the spacecraft. Similar
considerations apply to the Soyuz missions.

NASA has released its preliminary Return To Flight plan. I give some of
the highlights below. (NB - the items below are hardware related, which
reflects the hardware focus of JSR and does not imply I think they are
as important as the procedures and management changes).

Procedures are being developed for TPS inspection from ISS on approach.
If repair were needed, Atlantis would first dock, then grapple ISS with
the RMS, then undock while still attached by the RMS, rotating to place
the appropriate part of the Orbiter in easy access to spacewalkers using
the Station robot arm.

In September, inspection and testing on Atlantis' RCC panels and
nosecap will be completed and they will be reinstalled on the orbiter.

In November 2003, the External Tank for STS-114 will be delivered with
modifications to the bipod attach ramp and several other areas where
foam could be lost.

Around November, pads 39A and 39B will be refurbished with recoating of
any exposed zinc primer (which was washing off the pad tower and
damaging RCC panels).

In December, NASA will install on the new ET a camera which will
transmit in-flight photos of the bipod and of the underside of Atlantis.
A camera will also be mounted on the nose cone of each SRB. (For
STS-115, cameras will also be installed further down on each SRB for a
better view of the Orbiter).

In December, ground tracking cameras will be refurbished, with new
cameras due for delivery in March.

In January, redesign ET/SRB separation bolt catchers will be installed.

In early 2004, a boom with laser sensor packages will be fabricated for
attachment to the RMS arm; it could be used for Atlantis to inspect
itself while in orbit.

A tile repair kit will be delivered in early 2004. It's still not clear
when an RCC repair method will be ready.

Modifications to the cameras in the Orbiter umbilical well will not be
ready for STS-114, and the astronauts will use handheld cameras to image
the ET, downlinking the images to Earth.

In February, Atlantis should be mated with the ET and SRBs and moved to
the launch pad. Atlantis is currently manifested for launch on 2004
March 11, although this planning date has been criticized by Congress
as much too optimistic and is likely to be revised in the near future.

Review
------

I want to draw readers attention to the excellent book by Abramov and
Skoog (Springer-Praxis, 2003) on "Russian Spacesuits". This is one of
those rare books that almost meets the JSR standard on obsessiveness, with
detailed tables giving the serial number of each suit used on an EVA,
and careful typography giving both Cyrillic and transliterated English
versions of technical terms. (I do wish they'd included a table of
disposal dates for each spacesuit, though).

JAXA
----

Japan is reorganizing its space effort by merging three agencies into
one. The early Japanese sounding rocket and satellite program was
carried out by a group at the University of Tokyo which in 1964 became
ISAS, the Institute of Space and Aeronautical Sciences, separated from
the university and renamed the Institute of Space and Astronautical
Science in 1981. In Japanese ISAS is called Uchu kagaku kenkyujo
(roughly, Space Science Research Institute). ISAS developed the Lambda,
Mu and M-V space launch vehicles and the Japanese scientific satellites
and planetary probes. Japanese applications satellites have been
developed by NASDA, the National Space Development Agency (Uchu kaihatsu
jigyodan, Space Development Agency) which grew out of the STA (Science
and Technology Agency). NASDA was founded in 1964 as NSDC (National
Space Development Center) and renamed in 1969; it developed the N-1,
H-1, H-2 and H-2A launch vehicles as well as satellites like ETS/Kiku,
GMS/Himawari and ADEOS/Midori. A third agency, the National Aerospace
Laboratory (NAL, or Kohkuh uchu gijutsu kenkyujo - roughly, Aviation
Space Engineering Institute) has participated in spaceplane
development. On 2003 Oct 1, the three agencies will be combined into the
new Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), known in Japanese as
Uchu kohkuh kenkyu kaihatsu kikou (roughly, Space-Aviation Research and
Development Organization). [Thanks to Mihoko Yukita for help with
translation.]

Recent Launches
---------------

A USAF/Lockheed Martin Titan 4B/Centaur rocket with a 26-meter fairing
was launched on Sep 9. Titan B-36 took off from Complex 40 at Cape
Canaveral; the two SRMU strapons and the two Titan core stages fired and
then separated on suborbital trajectories. The upper stage, Centaur
TC-20, completed its first burn to enter parking orbit. It was expected
to make two more burns to deliver its National Reconnaissance Office
signals intelligence payload to geostationary orbit. In agreement with
other analysts, I speculate the payload is a successor to the USA-110
and USA-139 satellites launched in May 1995 and May 1998, and referred
to as "Advanced ORION" by those of us who don't know what the real name
is; these satellites are thought to be successors to the RHYOLITE
missions of the 1970s.

Launches in the NRO/CIA RHYOLITE program and its successors
("Codename" is based on open source guesses and leaks, notably
the works of Jeffrey Richelson, as well as official information
released during the Boyce spy trial):

Launch Official Name Codename Launch Date Launch vehicle

1 AFP-720 RHYOLITE 1970 Jun 19 Atlas Agena D 5201A
2 AFP-720 RHYOLITE 1973 Mar 6 Atlas Agena D 5202A
3 AFP-472 AQUACADE 1977 Dec 11 Atlas Agena D 5504A
4 APF-472 AQUACADE 1978 Apr 8 Atlas Agena D 5505A
5 USA 8 MAGNUM 1985 Jan 24 STS-20(51-C)/IUS-11
6 USA 48 ORION 1989 Nov 23 STS-33R/IUS-5
7 USA 110 ? 1995 May 14 Titan Centaur TC-17
8 USA 139 ? 1998 May 9 Titan Centaur TC-18
9 USA 171? ? 2003 Sep 9 Titan Centaur TC-20

This was the last launch of a Titan Centaur. The TC-20 stage used two
RL10A-3-3A engines, like all Titan 4/Centaur missions except for TC-23
in April 2003, which is thought to have used two RL-10A-4-1A engines.
That vehicle was originally intended to be used for an elliptical orbit
signals intelligence satellite but was swapped for a Milstar, with the
classified satellite probably reassigned to an EELV flight. There have
been 23 Titan Centaur missions; TC-1 to TC-7 were civilian missions
using the Titan 3E (23E) and the D-1T model Centaur, while TC-8 to TC-23
were military missions on Titan 4 using a large diameter Centaur
(although TC-21 was used for the NASA/ESA Cassini-Huygens launch).

NASDA's Micro-LabSat satellite, which was launched on 2002 Dec 14, has
released two tiny subsatellites in an experiment to test an onboard
tracking imager for inspector satellites. The RITE (Remote Inspection
Technology Experiment) targets are disks about 0.1m in diameter. They
were released from Micro-LabSat on 2003 Mar 14 at 0140 UTC and 2003 May
14 at 0150 UTC. The targets have not been cataloged by USAF Space
Command.

The Cassini probe to Saturn made a course correction burn at 2000 UTC on
Sep 10, changing its velocity by 0.12m/s. At the time Cassini was 1284
million km from the Sun, in an orbit of 1.4462 AU x 9.2769 AU with an
inclination of 0.81 deg to the ecliptic plane (NB: 1 AU = 149.60 million
km) and the correction altered the orbit by about ten parts per million.
On Sep 14 Cassini was 137 million km from Saturn; Saturn's nominal
gravitational sphere of influence is 55 million km in radius and Cassini
will reach this point on 2004 Mar 10. The probe will make a 2000 km
flyby of the Saturnian moon Phoebe on 2004 Jun 11.

Table of Recent Launches
-----------------------

Date UT Name Launch Vehicle Site Mission
INTL.

DES.
Aug 8 0331 Echostar 9 Zenit-3SL Odyssey, POR Comms
34A
Aug 12 1420 Kosmos-2399 Soyuz-U Baykonur LC31/6 Imaging
35A
Aug 13 0209 Scisat-1 Pegasus XL Vandenberg RW30/12 Science
36A
Aug 19 1050 Kosmos-2400 ) Kosmos-3M Plesetsk LC132/1 Comms
37A
Kosmos-2401 )
37B
Aug 25 0535 SIRTF Delta 7920H Canaveral SLC17B Astronomy
38A
Aug 29 0148 Progress M-48 Soyuz-U Baykonur Cargo
39A
Aug 29 2313 DSCS III B-6 Delta IVM Canaveral SLC37B Comms
40A
Sep 9 0429 USA 171 Titan 4B/Centaur Canaveral SLC40 Sigint
41A

..-------------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Jonathan McDowell | phone : (617) 495-7176 |
| 1 Fitchburg St C-205 | |
| Somerville MA 02143 | |
| and | |
| Center for Astrophysics, | |
| 60 Garden St, MS6 | |
| Cambridge MA 02138 | inter : |
| USA |
|
|
|
| JSR:
http://www.planet4589.org/jsr.html
|
| Back issues: http://www.planet4589.org/space/jsr/back |
| Subscribe/unsub: mail , (un)subscribe jsr


--
-------------------

Jacques :-)

Editor:
www.spacepatches.info


  #2  
Old September 21st 03, 07:14 PM
Bruce Palmer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Jonathan's Space Report No. 509, 18-09-2003

Jacques van Oene spewed out:

Launches in the NRO/CIA RHYOLITE program and its successors
("Codename" is based on open source guesses and leaks, notably
the works of Jeffrey Richelson, as well as official information
released during the Boyce spy trial):

Launch Official Name Codename Launch Date Launch vehicle

1 AFP-720 RHYOLITE 1970 Jun 19 Atlas Agena D 5201A
2 AFP-720 RHYOLITE 1973 Mar 6 Atlas Agena D 5202A
3 AFP-472 AQUACADE 1977 Dec 11 Atlas Agena D 5504A
4 APF-472 AQUACADE 1978 Apr 8 Atlas Agena D 5505A
5 USA 8 MAGNUM 1985 Jan 24 STS-20(51-C)/IUS-11
6 USA 48 ORION 1989 Nov 23 STS-33R/IUS-5
7 USA 110 ? 1995 May 14 Titan Centaur TC-17
8 USA 139 ? 1998 May 9 Titan Centaur TC-18
9 USA 171? ? 2003 Sep 9 Titan Centaur TC-20


The official codename of USA 171 is An *ack* !@# cough *$@# ekk +!)~ ...

NO CARRIER

  #3  
Old September 22nd 03, 06:31 PM
Jim Kingdon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Jonathan's Space Report No. 509, 18-09-2003

Procedures are being developed for TPS inspection from ISS on approach.
If repair were needed, Atlantis would first dock, then grapple ISS with
the RMS, then undock while still attached by the RMS, rotating to place
the appropriate part of the Orbiter in easy access to spacewalkers using
the Station robot arm.


Is the shuttle arm strong enough for this? I gather the station arm
was designed to be (at a time when HTV-style capture was being
considered rather than conventional docking).

Given that this is the plan, I suppose the answer must be "yes" or
"yes, but only in an emergency such as this" or something. But I
wasn't aware that the shuttle arm could do it.

Modifications to the cameras in the Orbiter umbilical well will not be
ready for STS-114, and the astronauts will use handheld cameras to
image the ET, downlinking the images to Earth.


They would roll after ET separation? Or is there naturally a sight
line which gives them a good enough view of the ET?

I'm sure some of this is still being working out, but curious minds
want to know the current thinking.
  #4  
Old September 23rd 03, 06:08 AM
Chris Bennetts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Jonathan's Space Report No. 509, 18-09-2003


"Jim Kingdon" wrote in message
news
Procedures are being developed for TPS inspection from ISS on approach.
If repair were needed, Atlantis would first dock, then grapple ISS with
the RMS, then undock while still attached by the RMS, rotating to place
the appropriate part of the Orbiter in easy access to spacewalkers using
the Station robot arm.


Is the shuttle arm strong enough for this? I gather the station arm
was designed to be (at a time when HTV-style capture was being
considered rather than conventional docking).


Early in the program, the shuttle arm wasn't certified to handle big loads
(there weren't any). The arms have since been recertified to handle higher
loads (right up to the Assembly-Complete ISS).

I'm not sure whether there were any changes made to the RMS hardware to
support the higher load limit.

--Chris


  #5  
Old September 23rd 03, 08:27 AM
Michael R. Grabois ... change $ to \s\
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Jonathan's Space Report No. 509, 18-09-2003

On 22 Sep 2003 13:31:47 -0400, Jim Kingdon wrote:

Procedures are being developed for TPS inspection from ISS on approach.
If repair were needed, Atlantis would first dock, then grapple ISS with
the RMS, then undock while still attached by the RMS, rotating to place
the appropriate part of the Orbiter in easy access to spacewalkers using
the Station robot arm.


Is the shuttle arm strong enough for this? I gather the station arm
was designed to be (at a time when HTV-style capture was being
considered rather than conventional docking).

Given that this is the plan, I suppose the answer must be "yes" or
"yes, but only in an emergency such as this" or something. But I
wasn't aware that the shuttle arm could do it.


Apparently the answer is "yes, and we'll be doing it for the forseeable
future". The loads analysis showed that the arm and its joints are capable of
performing this maneuver. Don't forget that when the shuttle first docked with
the ISS, it was along the same lines - the ISS was more massive than the
shuttle, and the shuttle grabbed onto the ISS and pulled itself in for the
docking. (At least, that's what I think happened, unless my memory is too
faulty.) So you have the arm moving the shuttle instead of the other way
around.

I'm not involved in any of this, so I have no idea what the numbers are like.


Modifications to the cameras in the Orbiter umbilical well will not be
ready for STS-114, and the astronauts will use handheld cameras to
image the ET, downlinking the images to Earth.


They would roll after ET separation? Or is there naturally a sight
line which gives them a good enough view of the ET?


The umbilical well camera operates automatically seconds after ET Sep. The crew
does a +X maneuver with the shuttle so it can traverse more of the tank, as the
camera is completely independent of the crew. Minutes later, they normally do a
pitch maneuver, which allows them to see the tank out the overhead windows.
They take photos of the tank with the cameras and telephoto lenses (specially
stowed on the flight deck for easy access) but the photos aren't developed
until after they land. Now, in addition to film cameras, the crew will use
digital cameras to get a good first-look at the tank, then downlink the
pictures once they get the laptop network set up on orbit.

I'm sure some of this is still being working out, but curious minds
want to know the current thinking.


That's the current thinking on ET photography from the shuttle.

 




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
Clueless pundits (was High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heavy lift launchers) Rand Simberg Space Science Misc 18 February 14th 04 04:28 AM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 September 12th 03 01:37 AM
Jonathan's Space Report #508 Jacques van Oene Space Shuttle 1 September 11th 03 11:44 AM
President of the Canadian Space Agency To Discuss Impact of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board Report Jacques van Oene Space Shuttle 0 August 27th 03 09:43 AM
DEATH DOES NOT EXIST -- Coal Mine Rescue Proves It Ed Conrad Space Shuttle 4 August 2nd 03 01:00 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:33 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.