[Space] NASA - STS-127 - ISS-2J/A (Endeavour)

[GioFX]

NASA STS-127 - ISS Assembly Mission 2J/A



Benvenuti nella discussione ufficiale dell'STS-127, missione di costruzione ISS J2/A.

La missione ha come obbiettivo primario l'installazione del modulo logistico Kibo JEM EF (Kibo Japanese Experiment Module Exposed Facility).


Dati Missione

Lancio previsto: 15 luglio 2009, 6:03 PM EDT (00:03 CEST)

Atterraggio previsto: 31 luglio 2009, 10:48 AM EDT (16:48 CEST)

Durata missione prevista: 16 giorni

Missione Programma STS: STS-127 (127° volo Shuttle, 23° volo OV-105)

Missione Programma ISS: J2/A

Orbiter: Endeavour (OV-105)

Launch Pad: 39A

Durata: 16 giorni (SSPT)

Inclinazione/Altitudine: 51.6°/122 miglia nautiche

Payload principale:

• Kibo Japanese Experiment Module Exposed Facility (JEM EF)

Equipaggio

• Commander Mark L. Polansky
• Pilot Douglas G. Hurley
• Mission specialist 1 David A. Wolf
• Mission specialist 2 Christopher J. Cassidy
• Mission specialist 3 Julie Payette
• Mission specialist 4 Thomas H. Marshburn
  
• Launching ISS Expedition 19 Crew Member: Timothy L. Kopra
• Landing ISS Expedition 18 Crew Member: Timothy L. Kopra

Assembly Mission J2/A


(Cliccare sulla foto per vederla in alta risoluzione)



Altre informazioni

SpaceFlightNow.com Mission Coverage homepage: http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts127


Master Flight Plan (SpaceFlightNow.com

http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/st...lightplan.html


Press Kit

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/358018main_sts127_press_kit.pdf


Previsioni Meteo - Lancio (KSC)

http://www.patrick.af.mil/shared/med...070517-025.pdf


NASA TV

Programma

PDF: http://www.nasa.gov/tvschedule/pdf/tvsked_rev0.pdf

URL: http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasat..._Schedule.html


NASA TV - Real Media: http://www.nasa.gov/ram/35037main_portal.ram

NASA TV - Windows Media: http://www.nasa.gov/55644main_NASATV_Windows.asx

NASA TV - Real Audio: http://www.nasa.gov/ram/55643main_NASATV_Audio_Only.ram

[Rand]

La ISS riflessa sui caschi nella foto dell'equipaggio è una novità? Non mi pare di averla mai vista nei ritratti precedenti..

[GioFX]

Credo anch'io sia una novità... non ricordo infatti...

[GioFX]

SFN:

Shuttle Endeavour's launch countdown gets underway



Countdown clocks at the Kennedy Space Center have started ticking toward Saturday morning's scheduled launch of the space shuttle Endeavour and the marathon 16-day mission to the International Space Station.


http://www.spaceflightnow.com/shuttl...7/090610count/

[Rand]

STS-127 scrubbed due to GUCP leak - launch moves to NET June 17

In a similar event to STS-119’s scrub, Endeavour’s launch has been delayed due to a significant leak registered in the region of the Ground Umbilical Carrier Plate (GUCP). Engineers will dismantle the troublesome hardware at the pad, prior to the next potential launch attempt on a current target of NET (No Earlier Than) June 17.

STS-127 Scrub/GUCP Leak:

Tanking had been proceeding normally, with good voltages recorded on the Engine Cut Off (ECO) sensors during their regular checks as the tank was loaded with LH2 and LOX.

However, leak detectors tripped around the GUCP area once tanking had reached a similar stage as observed with STS-119 - with the hydrogen tank nearing the 98 percent filled - when a leak was also detected in the hardware associated with GUCP.

The leak was well above both the Launch Commit Criteria (LCC) of 2 percent concentration, and even much higher than the 4 percent level - which is the point a scrub is the only option available to managers.

At the time of the initial leak detection, engineers called for the GUP vent valve to be cycled four times, in order to see if the hydrogen leak could be reduced to acceptable levels, as they did with STS-119. Following this process, and with no resolution to the leak measurements, the call was made to scrub the launch and detank the ET.

The forward plan is to dismantle the GUCP hardware once the tank is inert - a process that can take nearly a day.

Once the QD (Quick Disconnect) has been demated, engineers will be able to take a close look at both the alignment of the hardware, and the seal - with the latter a likely cause of the leak.

The Mission Management Team (MMT) will meet on Sunday to discuss launch options, which will include discussions over the status of the range - due to be handed over to the Atlas V/Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) launch, currently targeting the same date as the new STS-127 NET.

ET-131 GUCP Installation Issue:

A problem with the GUCP seal and alignment between the Quick Disconnect and the External Tank would still be surprising, following extensive checks - especially on Endeavour’s ET-131 tank - as part of the STS-119 investigation into root cause.

Indeed it was the rollout to Pad 39B as part of Endeavour’s STS-400 Launch On Need (LON) requirement that allowed engineers the opportunity to take a very close look at the GUCP mating process, required due to the lack of a GUCP test fixture at the Kennedy Space Center.

Part of the mitigation process mainly related to measurements, and included tape being added to the hardware to ensure the alignment of the hardware and the ET remained the same over the period the stack remained at the pad.

However, an issue was already noted on the STS-127 Agency Flight Readiness Review (FRR) presentation by Lockheed Martin/ET, relating to the installation of the GUCP hardware on Endeavour’s tank.

“ET-131 Ground Umbilical Carrier Plate (GUCP) Installation, Issue: Interference between GUCA (ground umbilical carrier assembly) and ET-131 right hand hinge support observed during mate GUCP (Ground Umbilical Carrier Plate) installation in VAB (Vehicle Assembly Building),” noted the FRR presentation, available on L2.

“Installation sequence verifies contact with hinge supports and no interference between pivot assembly and hinge bracket. Interference occurred on RH (Right Hand) side of RH pivot assembly to RH inside of bracket.

“Concern: Interference not allowed at hinge location per engineering. Potential to induce un-intended loading on pyro bolt assembly and potentially affect separation mechanism

“Actions Taken / Status: GUCP was removed and different unit installed and interference remained. Both GUCP assemblies measured and within engineering tolerance. Inspection performed at KSC to assist in investigation of root cause.

“Visual inspection indicates slight misalignment of carrier plate with panel cut-out. Laser measurements at KSC confirmed misalignment.”

This issue still shouldn’t be fully related to Friday’s scrub, after a good alignment was confirmed prior to the stack heading out to the pad. However, this tank - as a result of the aforementioned issue - was debuting a modification on the associated GUCP hardware.

c1“Pivot assembly modified (and successfully installed) by locally machining outboard surface (0.1” removed) to create required gap (0.035 gap provided). Stress analysis shows adequate FS for modified configuration (assuming single pivot assembly carries total reaction),” added the FRR presentation.

“Repair configuration does not impact GUCP release mechanism or sealing interface between flight and ground side. Installation sequence verifies proper alignment and rotational capability. Root cause investigation in-work - Most likely attributed to ETCA misalignment within panel cutout.

“Similar condition not observed at MAF (Michoud Assembly Facility) to date (ET-139 and ET-132 visual). Laser measurements being performed on all in-process tanks at MAF. Spare GUCP being used to support fit checks at MAF where possible (i.e. vertical orientation only).”

Interestingly, what appears to be a leak from the right hand pivot area of the assembly was captured on cameras monitoring the associated hardware prior to the scrub being called, although it is too early to know if this was the actual leaking event.

STS-119/ET-127 GUCP Overview:

The scrub related to STS-119’s ET-127 was only the second tanking that suffered a leak over the previous 31 loadings. The STS-127 leak is believed to have been larger than that seen during Discovery’s countdown.

c5“STS-119 / ET-127 Performance Summary: Pre-launch: 1st loading resulted in scrub/LCC (Launch Commit Criteria) violation due to GH2 leakage at GUCA (>40,000 ppm. Flight seal/QD (Quick Disconnect) replaced,” noted a post mission IFA (In Flight Anomaly) review presentation on L2, written by the MAF (Michoud Assembly Facility).

“Leakage occurred during transition from fast fill to topping. Vent valve opened when 98 percent level sensor indicated wet. Detected by leak detectors (LD 23 & 25) located in ground umbilical shroud. Isolates leak to either ground side quick disconnect (QD) or interface with flight seal.

“Contingency plans (vent valve cycling) unsuccessful in controlling leakage within acceptable limits. Launch scrubbed, flight seal/disconnect replaced. No GH2 leakage observed during subsequent loading. No other anomalous performance observed during loading.”

No root cause was confirmed, although the leading candidate has been noted on the recent documentation relating to the incident.

“No first-time hardware changes implemented for STS-119/ET-127 GH2 vent system. 31 previous loadings with only 1 leak observed (13,500 ppm). Previous leaks also observed during fast fill to topping transition,” added the MAF presentation.

c3“Most probable cause identified as momentary breach in flexible flight-seal to bellows probe due to ‘thermal shock’ of GH2/LH2 with vent valve in open position.

“Significant Disassembly Observations: Lower left pad was hard against skin. Other locations were not touching (0.014 - 0.030 gap / 0.001 requirement) indicating a pull downward and to the left. Peripheral seal compressed more on left side and toward bottom of GUCP.”

Interestingly, the pivot assembly - this time on the left hand side, as opposed to the right hand side with the aforementioned installation issues noted on the STS-127 FRR presentation - gains a mention in the STS-119 IFA review.

“Left side pivot assembly in hard contact with pivot pin (pin would not rotate). Stain observed on external surface of bellows guard and peripheral seal at 6 o’clock position. Flight-side seal asymmetrically compressed at 3, 7 and 8 o’clock positions.”

Although a root cause was not found, the leading candidates from the STS-119 event will provide helpful data to managers assessing the forward plan for STS-127’s next launch attempt - even if nothing obvious is found once the GUCP is demated.

Further updates will follow.

Fonte

[GioFX]

Posto anche l'articolo di

SFN:

Space shuttle Endeavour launch postponed by leak

BY WILLIAM HARWOOD
STORY WRITTEN FOR CBS NEWS "SPACE PLACE" & USED WITH PERMISSION
Posted: June 13, 2009

Launch of the shuttle Endeavour, grounded by a gaseous hydrogen leak during fueling Saturday, is off until Wednesday at the earliest, NASA officials say. But because of the already planned launch of NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter satellite Wednesday, the shuttle team could be delayed to June 20, the last day this month Endeavour can be launched.


The file image shows the launch pad's gaseous hydrogen vent arm that connects the pad tower to the shuttle's tank. Credit: NASA TV


http://www.spaceflightnow.com/shuttl...7/090613scrub/

[danny2005]

ho sentito che il lancio è stato rinviato a oggi.

A che ora?

[kbl]

Originariamente inviato da danny2005

ho sentito che il lancio è stato rinviato a oggi.

A che ora?

?
forse mercoledi' se va bene

[GioFX]

Esatto, il lancio è fissato per NET mercoledì 17.

[Rand]

Comunque non ci sono più i lanci annullati di una volta

[GioFX]

eheh è vero...

[Rand]

Trascrizione della conferenza stampa di oggi/ieri (fonte):

Leroy, Pete and Kathy Winters (weather) in attendance.

Leroy: Engineers worked very hard on a schedule for a launch opportunity. Became clear that the earliest opportunity will be June 17. Range conflict with LRO, began discussions on priorities.

Vehicle is in great shape. No other issues being worked bar the GUCP. Team is marching down towards the 17th from a processing standpoint. LRO is still processing to the 17th. The range will have to reconfigure for the LRO tomorrow, so decision point to go with the shuttle on the 17th, which would give LRO on the 19th and 20th. If LRO on the 17th, Shuttle gets only the 20th before (beta angle cutout).

Plan A: STS-127 on the 17th.
Plab B: LRO on the 17th.

They will see how the processing goes, think they can do the 17th if they get good weather and good work on the GUCP.

Pete:

Followed the same path as STS-119 GUCP issue with scrub turnaround. QD and Seal will be replaced. Recaps what we already know.

Vent link leak checks and torque checks aiming to resume at T-11 hours on Tuesday.

Observations of small gaps on right hand pivot assembly - which makes it look like it pulled away slightly. Gaps were only on the right side. (Pivot picture: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2009/...o-net-june-17/)

June 17: 05:35am Eastern, Prefered in window launch at 05:40am Eastern.

TSM has a hydraulic leak - doesn't seem bad.

Kathy:

Weather looks good, but concerned about showers due to a front coming into the area. 30 percent chance of no go weather on the 18th. 40 percent no go for the Atlas/LRO later in the day (if they get the range).

If STS-127 moves to the 20th, 20 percent no go weather.

Q&A:

Decision point for the range tomorrow afternoon for the reconfiguation. But still evaluating the latest time they need an answer.

Gerst will make the call assisted by Doug Cook.

Leroy believes Shuttle has priority over LRO, but is diplomatic by noting more launch opportunities with shuttle attempting 17th, LRO 19th, 20th. Plus if there's another leak on the evening of the 16th, range could reconfig for LRO by the 18th.

Timeline for GUCP QD and Seal R&R by early tomorrow about 6am local. Confidence comes after remate and leak checks - which will be early Tuesday morning.

Pete calls it an interesting dance.

Following STS-119's GUCP R&R by the letter.

Leroy: Sooner is better, but if they move into July it's always harder as the launch time moves into the evening, and moves earlier, into thunderstorm threats.

Notes pressure on manifest relating to 2010, soon they would get to a point where he has no more flexibility.

However, if STS-127 moves to July 11 NET, STS-128 would move to August 20th. That would cause a little bit of a ripple, but not a huge effect on that manifest stretch. At some point, this and some other delay, will start to become a problem for the downstream manifest.

Pete is assuming an alignment issue. Will check the seal they are replacing, but noted R&R solved the STS-119 issue (that had no specific root cause).

Leroy steps in and says they will continue to assess and look for root cause. Launching without root cause is fine as they have LCC in place for leaks.

Some consideration to reducing mission content to launch on the 21st. (Undock one day earlier). That would remove EVA-5 from the schedule and change it to a contingency EVA for any high priority tasks missed during EVA-1 through 4.

Still some work to do on that option if required. For now, assuming only good until the 20th.

Repeat questions.

Then on STS-400 - Leroy says he really wouldn't want to speculate.

And that's over.

[Octane]

Speriamo vada per mercoledì

[Rand]

Gli ingegneri/tecnici ci stanno dando dentro: su nasaspaceflight si vede come abbiano continuato a lavorare* sul GUCP per tutta la notte.

* con opportuni turni: le regole introdotte post-Challenger vietano di lavorare per "troppe" ore.

[GioFX]

SFN:

NASA sets Wednesday launch date for shuttle Endeavour

BY WILLIAM HARWOOD
STORY WRITTEN FOR CBS NEWS "SPACE PLACE" & USED WITH PERMISSION
Posted: June 15, 2009

NASA managers today formally cleared the shuttle Endeavour for a delayed launch Wednesday on a space station assembly mission. Launch of the agency's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter was delayed to June 18 or 19 to make room for the shuttle in an effort to maximize launch opportunities for both missions.


http://www.spaceflightnow.com/shuttl...090615newdate/

[Xile]

Originariamente inviato da Rand

Comunque non ci sono più i lanci annullati di una volta

OMG Ma che gli è successo per fare un abort così pericoloso?!

[Tubo Catodico]

Scusate mi è venuto un dubbio da ignorante e spero di non inquinarvi il thread ponendovi una domanda.

Stavo osservando i filmati dei vari lanci dello shuttle ed ho notato che durante la partenza vengono tenuti accesi anche i motori dello shuttle stesso, oltre ai razzi del vettore. Dato che (immagino) la potenza necessaria a vincere la forza di gravità provenga quasi interamente dal vettore mi chiedevo a che scopo accendere anche i motori dello shuttle. L'unica risposta che sono riuscito a darmi è che servano a bilanciare i pesi di tutto il sistema shuttle-vettore altrimenti sbilanciato verso lo shuttle.

Grazie in anticipo a chiunque abbia la pazienza di rispondermi e scusate l'intromissione!

[Octane]

Originariamente inviato da Tubo Catodico

Scusate mi è venuto un dubbio da ignorante e spero di non inquinarvi il thread ponendovi una domanda.

Stavo osservando i filmati dei vari lanci dello shuttle ed ho notato che durante la partenza vengono tenuti accesi anche i motori dello shuttle stesso, oltre ai razzi del vettore. Dato che (immagino) la potenza necessaria a vincere la forza di gravità provenga quasi interamente dal vettore mi chiedevo a che scopo accendere anche i motori dello shuttle. L'unica risposta che sono riuscito a darmi è che servano a bilanciare i pesi di tutto il sistema shuttle-vettore altrimenti sbilanciato verso lo shuttle.

Grazie in anticipo a chiunque abbia la pazienza di rispondermi e scusate l'intromissione!

Il sistema Shuttle è spinto da:

- i 3 SSME (Space shuttle Main Engines) I motori montati sull'Orbiter
- i 2 SRB (Solid Rocket Boosters) I boosters a comustibile solido montati lateralmente all'ET, il grosso serbatoio centrale.

Gli SRB forniscono all'incirca il 70% della spinta per il primi 2 minuti di ascesa, gli SSME invece si accendono a T-6 sec. e restano accesi fino al MECO (main engines cut-off) ovvero quando l'Orbiter ha raggiunto la quota desiderata.
Tutte le successive manovre in orbita vengono effettuate con gli OMS (Orbital Manouvering Systems)

In questo thread (più generico) puoi trovare ulteriori informazioni sul programma Space Shuttle (STS)
A questa pagina invece puoi trovare una descrizione più ampia del sistema STS

[Rand]

Originariamente inviato da Xile

OMG Ma che gli è successo per fare un abort così pericoloso?!

I sensori hanno rilevato dei valori fuori limite relativi alla turbopompa dell'ossigeno e hanno annullato il lancio:

The automatic abort was initiated by the onboard General Purpose Computers (GPC) when the discharge temperature on MPS SSME Main Engine #3 High Pressure Oxidizer Turbopump (HPOT) exceeded its redline value. The HPOT typically operates at 28,120 rpm and boosts the liquid oxygen pressure from 422 to 4,300 psi (2.91 to 29.6 MPa). There are 2 sensor channels measuring temperature on the HPOT. The B channel indicated a redline condition while the other was near redline conditions. The temperature at shutdown was at 1563 degrees Rankine (868 K), while a normal HPOT discharge temperature is around 1403 °R (779 K). The readline limit to initiate a shutdown is at 1560 °R (867 K). This limit increases to 1760 °R (980 K) at T-1.3 s (5.3 s after Main Engine Start). Main Engine #3 (SN 2032) has been used on 2 previous flights with 2,412 seconds of hot-fire time and a total of 8 starts. This was the first flight for the HPOT on Main Engine (SSME) #3.

Il cedimento di una High Pressure Oxidizer Turbopump è da evitare visto che gli altissimi regimi di rotazione (28000 giri al minuto) la trasformerebbero in una "bomba".

Altri abort "negli ultimi 6 secondi" sono avvenuti per STS-41-D, STS-51-F (dove tra l'altro un SSME si è spento in volo con conseguente ATO), STS-55 e STS-51.

Originariamente inviato da Tubo Catodico

Scusate mi è venuto un dubbio da ignorante e spero di non inquinarvi il thread ponendovi una domanda.

Stavo osservando i filmati dei vari lanci dello shuttle ed ho notato che durante la partenza vengono tenuti accesi anche i motori dello shuttle stesso, oltre ai razzi del vettore. Dato che (immagino) la potenza necessaria a vincere la forza di gravità provenga quasi interamente dal vettore mi chiedevo a che scopo accendere anche i motori dello shuttle. L'unica risposta che sono riuscito a darmi è che servano a bilanciare i pesi di tutto il sistema shuttle-vettore altrimenti sbilanciato verso lo shuttle.

Grazie in anticipo a chiunque abbia la pazienza di rispondermi e scusate l'intromissione!

Gli SSME vengono avviati a terra per diversi motivi*:

- Come avrai notato vengono prima avviati gli SSME e poi solo dopo qualche secondo gli SRB. In questo modo i sistemi di controllo possono annullare il lancio se i sensori rilevano delle anomalie (nel video linkato prima si vede proprio quello).
- Gli SSME sono progettati per essere avviati a terra. Modificarli per farli partire in volo richiederebbe una riprogettazione abbastanza estesa.
- Non ho verificato, ma credo sia più efficiente accendere tutto subito che portarsi i 3 SSME in quota per poi accenderli li.

* sono quelli che conosco. Ci sarà sicuramente qualche altro aspetto (tra cui probabilmente le problematiche di controllo che citavi).

[Octane]

Originariamente inviato da Rand

Gli SSME vengono avviati a terra per diversi motivi*:

Io aggiungerei sicuramente che sono necessari per andar su.
Se non fossero accesi sarebbero necessari SRB più grossi per sopperire a quel 30% di spinta che gli SSME forniscono al decollo.


Pare inoltre che i motori a combustibile fluido (liquido o gassoso) abbiano una spinta molto più "uniforme" che imprime meno vibrazioni al vettore. Il solo uso di stadi a combustibile solido per vettori per uso umano sta creando notevoli grattacapi agli ingegneri dell'Ares I (gli occupanti potrebbero perdere conoscenza o essere addirittura feriti per le vibrazioni e accelerazioni violente che un motore a combustibile solido può avere).