- \n
- LIVE STS-129 UPDATES<\/li>\n
- L2 STS-129 Special Section<\/li>\n
- Click here to Join L2<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
This procedure, utilizing the Laser Dynamic Range Imager (LDRI) and sensor suite package on the end of the Orbiter Boom Sensor System (OBSS), will be similar to Flight Day 2\u2019s opening inspections \u2013 which provided a roadmap for engineers to compare data gained later today.<\/p>\n
This is required in case Atlantis suffered a MMOD (Micro-Meteoroid Orbital Debris) hit whilst docked. While serious damage is highly unlikely, due to the protection provided by the ISS when docked, orbiters can still be susceptible to hits, especially on their windows and radiators \u2013 as seen on previous missions.<\/p>\n
The critical area of the RCC (Reinforced Carbon Carbon) Wing Leading Edges (WLE) also have the ability to \u2018feel\u2019 impacts on their panels, via the WLE Impact Detection System (IDS). Presentations on the WLE IDS have noted no \u201ctriggers\u201d of concern during the mission so far.<\/p>\n
The only areas of interest relate to blocked Waste Dump plumbing \u2013 which is not the cause of ice at the nozzle, per inspections. A couple of potential MMOD strikes may have also impacted one of the radiators \u2013 though this has yet to be confirmed at this time. Should that be the case, the lack of an issue with the freon loop cooling lines would suggest any damage would only be cosmetic.<\/p>\n
NASA mission patches
<\/path>Space Shuttle models <\/path>Rocket launch schedules <\/path>\n (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});<\/p>\n
TPS Summary:<\/p>\n
In all, there were only four areas of Atlantis\u2019 TPS that gained mentioned in the TPS DAT summary \u2013 available for download on L2 \u2013 providing confidence Atlantis had suffered no notable damage during the powered ascent phase of her mission.<\/p>\n
![\"B4\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/11\/B4.jpg\" "\\"B4\\"")
Via the Orbiter Boom Sensor System (OBSS) inspection, the Orbital Maneuvering System (OMS) Pod digital camera survey by the Flight Crew, and the R-bar Pitch Maneuver (RPM), all areas of Atlantis were photographed per the pre-mission plan.<\/p>\nAll tile structure margins are within limits and the two External Tank umbilical well doors on Atlantis\u2019 underbelly have been verified closed.<\/p>\n
The first area of TPS damage noted by the TPS DAT presentation relates to damage observed on Atlantis\u2019 starboard chine.<\/p>\n
This damage area is insignificant, as reflected by the lack of comments from the DAT on this damage site. In fact, the DAT presentation only lists the location, dimension, and thickness of the damaged tile.<\/p>\n
The tile in question, tile V070-391034-477, has a \u201c1.94 inch long x 0.9 inch wide\u201d damage site. The tile\u2019s overall thickness is 1.570 inches. No other comments were present on the DAT presentation, less the fact that the chine damage location was cleared for entry by P-DAT.<\/p>\n
The second TPS damage location is near one of the forward windows (Window #4).<\/p>\n
\u201cTwo separate damages on tile V070-391020-215. Damages measure 1.08 inches x 0.73 inch and 0.72 inch x 0.63 inch,\u201d notes the presentation. Both damage locations are \u201cwithin On-Orbit Inspection criteria surface area (< 1 sq in).\u201d<\/p>\n
These damage locations were cleared by the DAT via equivalent area analyses and baselines.<\/p>\n
![\"B6\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/11\/B6.jpg\" "\\"B6\\"")
Third on the DAT list was the Port Inboard Elevon damage site.<\/p>\n\u201cElevon tile damage was assessed with depth provided by photogrammetry,\u201d notes the presentation. \u201cPhotogrammetry determined depth is 0.17 inches +\/- 0.05 inches.\u201d<\/p>\n
The area of damage is located on tile V070-193001-097 and is 5.18 inches long x 1.38 inches wide.<\/p>\n
Based on the location site and size of the Port Elevon TPS damage, a parametric Thermal\/Stress analysis was performed. \u201cResults using bounding depth of 0.3 inches high margins maintained on TPS and Structure,\u201d notes the DAT.<\/p>\n
The results of the analysis show that the maximum structural temperature the area of Atlantis\u2019 skin under this damage site will experience during reentry will be 178 degrees F \u2013well within the structural margins of the Orbiter.<\/p>\n
The final area of TPS damage noted by the DAT was a frayed gap filler on the Starboard OMS Pod.<\/p>\n
\u201cGap filler remains bonded and there is limited outer sleeving damage.\u201d<\/p>\n
As such, all four TPS damage locations have been unanimously cleared for reentry.<\/p>\n
Starboard External Tank Door Closure Verification:<\/p>\n
![\"B3\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/11\/B3.jpg\" "\\"B3\\"")
Since the STS-114 Return To Flight mission, part of the photographic purpose of the R-bar Pitch Maneuver (RPM) has been to obtain evidence that both External Tank (ET) umbilical doors have closed properly to form a protective thermal seal over the fuel line umbilicals.<\/p>\nWhile both ET doors have been verified closed on Atlantis, the normal photographic evidence for the closure of the starboard ET door was not obtained during the RPM Wednesday morning due to poor lighting conditions.<\/p>\n
\u201cIssue: Normal process using 800mm imagery to verify ET door closure using paint stripe indications had unacceptable lighting\/angles on the Starboard Door.\u201d<\/p>\n
All ET door motor run times and latch indications were nominal and some 400mm photography of the starboard ET door had acceptable lighting conditions.<\/p>\n
Through these photographs, DAT members did not detect any visible paint stripe (a paint stripe that, if visible, would show that the ET door was not properly closed). However, the resolution of the 400mm photos is \u201cright at the limit to detect a paint stripe.\u201d<\/p>\n
![\"B2\"](\"https:\/\/www.nasaspaceflight.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/11\/B2.jpg\" "\\"B2\\"")
Further evidence indicating the proper closure of the Starboard ET door is the fact that \u201coblique RPM photos identified no visible step across door interface,\u201d notes a Starboard ET door DAT presentation \u2013 available for download on L2.<\/p>\n\u201c3-D Photogrammetry tools (were) used to bolster confidence\u201d that the ET door is actually closed.<\/p>\n
These measurements, which were generated by using the waterproofing hole marks across the ET Door\/Orbiter underbelly interface, show a maximum door offset of only 0.11 inches, +\/- 0.04 inches.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe high contrast waterproofing marks were used as tie points between images, and tiles were used as effective scale bars. Seven points were measured around the perimeter of the door and fit to a plane to define the local vertical axis,\u201d notes the ET door presentation.<\/p>\n
This step measurement is well within limits. Thus, the DAT considers the Starboard ET door closed for entry. There were no dissenting opinions to this conclusion.<\/p>\n
L2 members<\/em><\/em>: Documentation \u2013 from which the above article has quoted snippets \u2013 is available in full in the related L2 sections, now over 4000 gbs in size.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Atlantis has undocked from the International Space Station (ISS), as she prepares to target a landing on Friday. Late Inspections took place later on Flight Day 10, although this should only be a formality \u2013 following the Damage Assessment Team (DAT) formally clearing the orbiter for entry during her docked phase of STS-129. STS-129: Atlantis\u2019 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[9199,7935],"class_list":["post-40927","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news","tag-sts-129","tag-tps"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40927"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=40927"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40927\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40927"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=40927"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=40927"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}