On Mar 10, 9:32 pm, charliexmur...@yahoo.com wrote:

The work was started in1979 like I said.

Sure. Talk is cheap. SLC-6 work maybe, but not VLS work -- unless you
can provide a description of the shuttle work actually performed, **by
date**.

Landing strip extension
OMRF
pad mount
MST
PCR
PPF
SRB facility
ET storage
SAB

Shuttle work on those was performed after Reagan's inauguration.
That's fact. It was all in vain too. The filament-wound-cases needed
for polar orbit ruptured during testing at MSFC, to mention only one
of the post-Carter design problems.

On Mar 4, 8:36 am, bob haller safety advocate <hall...@aol.com> wrote:

It will still be here to discuss the shuttle, because itsretirement
won't stop people from wanting to discuss it.

i doubt it will be retired on schedule............

Define schedule.  There are no more ET's being built so it will be
retired in 3 years

Why is NASA retiring the Shuttle before it's replacement is ready to

Huh? How late is 'after the fact'? As I saw illustrations of the
Shuttle docked to various things as early as the mid 70's. It doesn't
make sense for it to have been added 'after the fact' as it was
intended to service a space station from day one.

I suppose it's never been clear to me exactly how the commander or pilot
flies the docking operations. I know there is a centerline camera in the
ODS, so does that mean that the commander or pilot in one of the front seats

Docking was something added to the shuttle after the fact. With Apollo, it
was pretty much a requirement from day one.

At the time of the shuttle final design, wasn't there talk of having the
shuttle reboost Skylab ? If so, what sort of a docking system had they
envisaged for this ? One similar to the current one with a vertical tube
sticking "out" of the payload bay ?

I suppose it's never been clear to me exactly how the commander or pilot
flies the docking operations. I know there is a centerline camera in the
ODS, so does that mean that the commander or pilot in one of the front seats
is flying the docking with this camera view and the RPOP software running in
front of him? If so, then he/she has no clear view out of a window to help
guide them during docking, right?

"Jorge R. Frank" <jrfrank@ibm-pc.borg> wrote in message
news:D4qdnQ_FuO0uMUvanZ2dnUVZ_ofinZ2d@giganews.com...
Derek Lyons wrote:
"Jeff Findley" <jeff.findley@ugs.nojunk.com> wrote:

Docking was something added to the shuttle after the fact. With Apollo,
it was pretty much a requirement from day one.
Huh? How late is 'after the fact'?
Actual work on a shuttle docking mechanism did not start until 1992, when
preparations for Shuttle-Mir began.

As I saw illustrations of the
Shuttle docked to various things as early as the mid 70's. It doesn't
make sense for it to have been added 'after the fact' as it was
intended to service a space station from day one.
They were just that, illustrations. No actual work done on any of those
concepts.

Which is why the rendezvous and proximity operations (RPOP) software is
running on a laptop instead of on the shuttle's computers.

I suppose it's never been clear to me exactly how the commander or pilot
flies the docking operations. I know there is a centerline camera in the
ODS, so does that mean that the commander or pilot in one of the front seats
is flying the docking with this camera view and the RPOP software running in
front of him? If so, then he/she has no clear view out of a window to help
guide them during docking, right?

In an Apollo CSM, I thought the guy flying the CSM could look right out the
window and see the docking target on the LM, Skylab, and etc.

"Jorge R. Frank" <jrfrank@ibm-pc.borg> wrote:

Derek Lyons wrote:
"Jeff Findley" <jeff.findley@ugs.nojunk.com> wrote:

Docking was something added to the shuttle after the fact. With Apollo, it
was pretty much a requirement from day one.
Huh? How late is 'after the fact'?
Actual work on a shuttle docking mechanism did not start until 1992,
when preparations for Shuttle-Mir began.

As I saw illustrations of the
Shuttle docked to various things as early as the mid 70's. It doesn't
make sense for it to have been added 'after the fact' as it was
intended to service a space station from day one.
They were just that, illustrations. No actual work done on any of those
concepts.

When the work was done is irrelevant - the capability was intended
from the start is my point. Providing those capabilities way delayed,
not added.

On Mar 4, 7:34 am, behlin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mar 4, 8:36 am, bob haller safety advocate <hall...@aol.com> wrote:

It will still be here to discuss the shuttle, because itsretirement
won't stop people from wanting to discuss it.
i doubt it will be retired on schedule............
Define schedule. There are no more ET's being built so it will be
retired in 3 years

Why is NASA retiring the Shuttle before it's replacement is ready to
fly?

Why is NASA retiring the Shuttle before it's replacement is ready to
fly?

after the columbia accident a arbitary end of program date was
selected, then ISS modules were deleted or scrapped to fit the
remaining number of flights. currently with flight delays there isnt
enough time to get all the flights in safely..... all it will take to
trash the schedule is one more problem.

its sad i think the end program date that was designed to increase
safety ultimately makes things less safe, putting too muchh pressure
on the schedule.

The CDR flies the approach from the aft station. Looking aft, the CDR is
on the left (starboard) and the RMS operator station is on the right
(port). There is a translational hand controller (THC) and a rotational
hand controller (RHC) in the aft station, just like in the CDR's forward
seat. There is a good view of the station through the overhead windows.
Once range < 250 ft, the CDR must remain in the approach corridor defined
by an overlay on the centerline camera monitor. The monitors are on the
port side of the aft station, just to the right (looking aft) of the RMS
operator station, and mounted so that the CDR can see them across the
cockpit.

Placement of the RPOP laptops is crew preference, but there is generally
one on panel L10 (port side of the vehicle, behind the CDR seat) and one
on C3 (center console between the CDR and PLT seats). Some CDRs like to
route the prime RPOP display to a small V10 monitor and stick that right
in front of them on panel A6, while others don't like looking at RPOP and
prefer to have the PLT interpret the display and make verbal calls.

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:07:29 -0400, "Jeff Findley"
jeff.findley@ugs.nojunk.com> wrote:


Docking was something added to the shuttle after the fact. With Apollo,
it
was pretty much a requirement from day one.

No it wasn't. Docking was added for Block II. The original Apollo,
Block I, didn't have it.

"Brian Thorn" <bthorn64@suddenlink.net> wrote in message

This is similar to the empty cylindrical space left in the center of the
current ATV's service module design. That space is reserved for future use
as a transfer tunnel connecting the forward pressurized module to a (female)
Soyuz/Progress type docking port on the rear of the ATV.

bay meant the Shuttle only needed to carry it on missions that needed
it (Station missions) in turn meaning more payload could be carried on
missions that didn't need to dock (Spysat launches.)

Brian