|
|
|
|
|
Posted by John Doe on September 30, 2005, 3:28 am
Please log in for more thread options
Shuttle spends time in the OPF getting ready/maintained. Then it goes to
VAB where the stack is assembled, then moved to the pad where it spends
about a month for further outfitting and loading of cargo bay.
In an original scenario of high frequency launches, I could see a point
in this since it would allow some pipelining of work to be done. (one
orbiter on pad while one in VAB and one entering OPF). But in reality,
it seems rather onerous and time consuming at the real life launch rates.
Soyuz on the other hand is assembled just days befoer launch, moved to
pad a day or two before launch, and voila.
Has NASA given any indication of what sort of processing flow it expects
for its Apollo-on-Steroids CEV ? Will it be closer to the shuttle or to
Soyuz ?
Did NASA really need the RSS on the pad ?
If all RSS work had been done in the VAB, how much time would have bene
required between the time the shuttle arrives on the pad and Shuttle
launch ? 6 days ? 2 days ? 1 day ?
|
|
Posted by ed kyle on September 30, 2005, 8:37 am
Please log in for more thread options
John Doe wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> Shuttle spends time in the OPF getting ready/maintained. Then it goes to
> VAB where the stack is assembled, then moved to the pad where it spends
> about a month for further outfitting and loading of cargo bay.
> In an original scenario of high frequency launches, I could see a point
> in this since it would allow some pipelining of work to be done. (one
> orbiter on pad while one in VAB and one entering OPF). But in reality,
> it seems rather onerous and time consuming at the real life launch rates.
> Soyuz on the other hand is assembled just days befoer launch, moved to
> pad a day or two before launch, and voila.
> Has NASA given any indication of what sort of processing flow it expects
> for its Apollo-on-Steroids CEV ? Will it be closer to the shuttle or to
> Soyuz ?
> Did NASA really need the RSS on the pad ?
One of the reasons for integrating payloads on
the pad was that hazardous SRB stacking operations
in the adjacent high bay would interrupt payload
integration work. Another reason may have been that
secret DoD payloads were going to be integrated.
show/hide quoted text
> If all RSS work had been done in the VAB, how much time would have bene
> required between the time the shuttle arrives on the pad and Shuttle
> launch ? 6 days ? 2 days ? 1 day ?
The fastest rollout to launch times for Spacelab
type missions (Spacelab payloads were integrated
in the OPF prior to rollout) were two weeks. I
suspect that it could be done in a few days less
time than that in a crunch.
- Ed Kyle
|
|
Posted by ed kyle on September 30, 2005, 1:14 pm
Please log in for more thread options John Doe wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> Soyuz on the other hand is assembled just days befoer launch, moved to
> pad a day or two before launch, and voila.
The quick final Soyuz/R-7 processing is unquestionably
impressive, but that final integration is only the
tip of the iceberg. The vehicle stages and payload
are checked out over a period of weeks prior to this
final integration. The Russians minimize checkout
of the fully integrated vehicle, and with over
1,700 launches they have a sound basis for doing
things the way they do.
But the Soyuz launch vehicle checkout will be
lengthened at Kourou, where plans call for the launch
vehicle to be erected, for the first time, without a
payload. A separate mobile tower is being built
there to allow on-pad payload integration.
- Ed Kyle
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Shuttle or Soyuz? | August 27, 2006, 9:24 pm |
| could soyuz dock with shuttle? | August 13, 2005, 1:58 pm |
| Shuttle and Soyuz orbits: lap each other ? | September 19, 2006, 12:02 am |
| Space Shuttle Processing Status Report, 24-06-2005 | June 27, 2005, 10:54 pm |
| Space Shuttle Processing Status Report, 07-07-2005 | July 8, 2005, 6:03 pm |
| Space Shuttle Processing Status Report, 08-07-2005 | July 9, 2005, 10:35 am |
| Space Shuttle Processing Status Report, 09-07-2005 | July 10, 2005, 1:25 pm |
| Space Shuttle Processing Status Report, 10-07-2005 | July 11, 2005, 5:11 am |
| Space Shuttle Processing Status Report, 12-07-2005 | July 13, 2005, 5:09 am |
| Space Shuttle Processing Status Report, 14-07-2005 | July 15, 2005, 12:39 am |
|
|
|
XML Sitemap
> VAB where the stack is assembled, then moved to the pad where it spends
> about a month for further outfitting and loading of cargo bay.
> In an original scenario of high frequency launches, I could see a point
> in this since it would allow some pipelining of work to be done. (one
> orbiter on pad while one in VAB and one entering OPF). But in reality,
> it seems rather onerous and time consuming at the real life launch rates.
> Soyuz on the other hand is assembled just days befoer launch, moved to
> pad a day or two before launch, and voila.
> Has NASA given any indication of what sort of processing flow it expects
> for its Apollo-on-Steroids CEV ? Will it be closer to the shuttle or to
> Soyuz ?
> Did NASA really need the RSS on the pad ?