Questions about Tranquility (Node3)

I read that they moved the water recovery rack to node 3.

What else will be in node 3 ?

The photos in the spaceflight seem to show an unfinished node with tons
of cargo and platic wrapping (as opposed to other nodes that were
shipped nice and shiny without loose pipes etc). I take it that more
will be installed in the node with the remaining shuttle flights ?

The US segment gained a toilet and the water recovery system. But does
it have a kitchen/galley ? Will there be sleeping accomodations in node 3 ?

Does node 3 have 6 CBMs like other nodes ? Or is there just the
port/starboard and nadir ports ? If it has the 4 CBMs on the cylinder
(nadir, aft, zenith, forward), are any of the forward/zenith/aft ports
usable for a module ? (clearance with other modules for instance)

At the time the shell was built for node3, was it already known that it
was going to be that specific module in that specific location with that
purpose, or was it built before its eventual purpose was determined ?

On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 02:01:38 -0500, John Doe wrote:

I read that they moved the water recovery rack to node 3.

What else will be in node 3 ?

From ESA...

http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/node3/SEM9TFSJR4G_0.html

For launch, five of the eight rack locations in Node-3 will be taken
up with two avionics racks and three racks containing pallets with
equipment and cargo for the ISS. The three other locations are empty.

In its final on-orbit configuration, Node-3 will look slightly
different. Cupola will be relocated to the Earth-facing port during
the STS-130 mission. The three cargo pallet racks will be removed and
returned on Shuttle flight STS-131 in March 2010. In the place of
these three racks and the three empty rack locations will come six new
racks that are already on the Station. These include the second Air
Revitalisation System rack for air-composition monitoring and carbon
dioxide removal; an Oxygen Generation System rack for oxygen and
water; Water Recovery System Racks 1 and 2 for urine and water
processing; a Waste and Hygiene Compartment Rack for crew waste and
hygiene processing and a second treadmill.

Node-3 will also be outfitted with the Advanced Resistive Exercise
Device for the crew. All these racks and equipment are required since
the ISS crew number was increased from three to six in the spring of
2009.


Does node 3 have 6 CBMs like other nodes ?

One of the CBMs was never outfitted as such and is instead being used
as DEXTRE's base with a PDGF.

In article ,
John Doe wrote:
I read that they moved the water recovery rack to node 3.

This equipment is actually spread across two racks, out of 8 total in
the Node. Overall dimensions and interior volume are the same as
Node 2.

What else will be in node 3 ?

- Life support racks for oxygen generation (water - oxygen
electrolyzer) and "atmospheric revitalization" (carbon dioxide
removal).

- The toilet (Waste / Hygiene Compartment, with its attached booth) was
moved to Node 3, and takes another rack position.

- Exercise equipment, including the ARED (Advanced Resistive Exercise
Device) and T2/Colbert treadmill. It looks like ARED, at least is set
up near the radial hatches, rather than in a rack position. Was the
cycle ergometer from Node 1 moved over as well?

- It was mentioned that Node 3 was launched with two "avionics racks"
(using 2 of the 8 spaces?) I'm not sure what actual capabilities these
provide.

The photos in the spaceflight seem to show an unfinished node with
tons of cargo and platic wrapping (as opposed to other nodes that
were shipped nice and shiny without loose pipes etc). I take it that
more will be installed in the node with the remaining shuttle flights?

Most of what ended up inside Node 3 had already been launched on
earlier flights, in order to accomodate a 6-person crew as soon as
possible. Until STS-130, they had been set up in temporary locations
across the US Lab and Node 2.

The US segment gained a toilet and the water recovery system.

These were on orbit already.

But does it have a kitchen/galley ?

I think there's only a microwave, or something similar for warming
pre-packaged meals (in Node 1? During STS-130 the joint crew was
eating lunch in there, from a fold-down table).

The logistics of trying to cook anything from scratch in microgravity
seem quite challenging, and ISS doesn't really have the space.

Will there be sleeping accomodations in node 3 ?

No, as I understand it, those (two?) sleep-station racks are staying
in Node 2, which should at least be a bit quieter now that the life
support equipment has been moved.

Zvezda sleeps two as well, in tiny compartments near the aft hatch
(each with a small window inside, same as MIR).

I'm not sure where crewmembers #5 and 6 will stay. Columbus and JEM?
That small "attic" logistics module on top of the Japanese lab might
be a cozy place for someone to claim.

Does node 3 have 6 CBMs like other nodes ?

Yes, but I've heard at least two of the radial ports are "disabled,"
and may be permanently sealed (or, at minimum, missing their active
berthing mechanisms-- I wonder if those could be installed on orbit,
if there's ever a need?)

Or is there just the port/starboard and nadir ports ? If it has the 4
CBMs on the cylinder (nadir, aft, zenith, forward), are any of the
forward/zenith/aft ports usable for a module ? (clearance with other
modules for instance)

Take a look at these fly-around photos from STS-130:

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/...ndxpage75.html
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/...ndxpage76.html

Node 3 zenith seems to be obstructed by the Ku-band dish on Z1, and
perhaps the truss and radiators as well. This is probably one of the
sealed ones-- its exterior looks different (no corner "petals"), and I
don't remember seeing any sort of hatch in that spot inside. Even at
the originally-planned Node 3 location (Node 1 nadir), this one would
have been facing the Russian segment, where anything berthed to it
would have blocked Zarya's nadir port.

Node 3 forward may be usable, for some future module to squeeze in
alongside the US Lab.

The folded-up FGB solar panels look like they're in the way of Node 3
Aft. Maybe it could be used if that array was removed completely.

PMA-3 on Node 3's port-facing axial CBM is very close to the
radiators, and would need to be relocated for anything to actually
dock there. For now they intend it use it only for storage, and to
help shield that end of Node 3 from orbital debris.

At the time the shell was built for node3, was it already known that it
was going to be that specific module in that specific location with that
purpose, or was it built before its eventual purpose was determined ?

It was originally intended for Node 1 Nadir, with Cupola facing
forward (or on Node 1 Port, in an earlier sequence) and the
now-cancelled Hab module on its axial CBM, but had to be relocated
because of delays in a Russian module going to Zarya nadir... hence
the need for those extra-long ammonia and power extension lines
installed on the recent EVA.

--
Jordan.

In article ,
Brian Thorn wrote:
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 02:01:38 -0500, John Doe wrote:
...
Does node 3 have 6 CBMs like other nodes ?

One of the CBMs was never outfitted as such and is instead being used
as DEXTRE's base with a PDGF.

Ah, I was wondering what that dark object in the center of Node 3's
strange-looking Zenith "CBM" was.

This photo shows a PDGF a bit clearer than most:

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/...130e012136.jpg

--
Jordan.

What was the reason to move node3 from node1-nadir to node1-port ?

Was it because they were affraid of progress/soyuz traffic docking
nearby ? Seems to me that the value of the cupola is greatly wasted in
its current location since it doesn't have a good view of the station
and can't really see the truss segment well.

Since one of the main purpose is to control the arm, wouldn't have been
better to put node 2 zenit on top of node2, and put coppola on the aft
facing CBM of node3 ? From such a position, they could have seen all of
the truss from above and see all the way down to the aft end of the
russian segment.


Also, since most of the volume of the USA segment is now forward of
Destiny, wouldn't it have made sense to have the additional ECLSS
equipment either at node2 or connected to node2 so it would be closer to
columbus and JEM ?


Could they build some adaptor that would allow PMA3 to be put nadir of
node1 and rotated 90° so that the shuttle could dock sideways (tail
facing starboard) ? OK, since Suhuttle is retired, I guess that doesn't
make sense to do anymore.

From a mass point of view, is node-3 in the same ballpark as the quest
airlock ? If so, then I guess putting it port side would give the
station a bit more symetry in terms of centre of mass.

On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 20:06:27 -0500, John Doe wrote:

What was the reason to move node3 from node1-nadir to node1-port ?

The decision to add the PMM (formerly MPLM Leonardo) to the Station.
Leonardo won't have as good MMOD protection as Node 3, so they moved
Node 3 to Unity port and gave Unity nadir to Leonardo, which will
benefit from being "under" the station and protected from more MMOD
than Node 3.

Was it because they were affraid of progress/soyuz traffic docking
nearby

That was also a concern until MLM arrives on 132. Then Leonardo goes
on Node 1 nadir on 133.

Seems to me that the value of the cupola is greatly wasted in
its current location since it doesn't have a good view of the station
and can't really see the truss segment well.

Cupola's main purpose in life is to give views for arm operators to
capture HTV, Dragon, and Cygnus. EVA observation was always gonna be
iffy no matter where Cupola was situated... too many obstructions.

From a mass point of view, is node-3 in the same ballpark as the quest
airlock ?

Launch weight of Node 3 was about twice that of Quest, although I
think Quest gained some weight with lots of EVA add-ons and O2 and N2
tanks and the like.

Brian

Brian Thorn wrote:
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 20:06:27 -0500, John Doe wrote:

What was the reason to move node3 from node1-nadir to node1-port ?

The decision to add the PMM (formerly MPLM Leonardo) to the Station.
Leonardo won't have as good MMOD protection as Node 3, so they moved
Node 3 to Unity port and gave Unity nadir to Leonardo, which will
benefit from being "under" the station and protected from more MMOD
than Node 3.

Was it because they were affraid of progress/soyuz traffic docking
nearby

That was also a concern until MLM arrives on 132. Then Leonardo goes
on Node 1 nadir on 133.

Slight correction: MLM will replace Pirs on Zvezda nadir; MRM-1 will be
delivered to Zarya nadir on 132.

Seems to me that the value of the cupola is greatly wasted in
its current location since it doesn't have a good view of the station
and can't really see the truss segment well.

Cupola's main purpose in life is to give views for arm operators to
capture HTV, Dragon, and Cygnus. EVA observation was always gonna be
iffy no matter where Cupola was situated... too many obstructions.

That's right. And Cupola's current location is excellent for SSRMS
captures below Node 2.

From a mass point of view, is node-3 in the same ballpark as the quest
airlock ?

Launch weight of Node 3 was about twice that of Quest, although I
think Quest gained some weight with lots of EVA add-ons and O2 and N2
tanks and the like.

Right. Node 2 and Node 3 were identical, both were far larger than Quest.

On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 21:42:43 -0600, "Jorge R. Frank"
wrote:

Brian Thorn wrote:
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 20:06:27 -0500, John Doe wrote:

What was the reason to move node3 from node1-nadir to node1-port ?

The decision to add the PMM (formerly MPLM Leonardo) to the Station.
Leonardo won't have as good MMOD protection as Node 3, so they moved
Node 3 to Unity port and gave Unity nadir to Leonardo, which will
benefit from being "under" the station and protected from more MMOD
than Node 3.

Was it because they were affraid of progress/soyuz traffic docking
nearby

That was also a concern until MLM arrives on 132. Then Leonardo goes
on Node 1 nadir on 133.

Slight correction: MLM will replace Pirs on Zvezda nadir; MRM-1 will be
delivered to Zarya nadir on 132.

Darn those M abbreviations! MRM, MLM, MPLM... :-)

Brian