Apr 17 1985
From The Space Library
RobertG (Talk | contribs)
(New page: NASA announced it had scheduled the Spacelab 3 mission, a European-developed and NASA-operated space laboratory, for launch on STS 51-B no earlier than April 29, 1985. [[Sp...)
Newer edit →
Revision as of 00:31, 17 February 2010
NASA announced it had scheduled the Spacelab 3 mission, a European-developed and NASA-operated space laboratory, for launch on STS 51-B no earlier than April 29, 1985. Spacelab 3 was a microgravity mission with 15 investigations in five scientific disciplines: materials science, life sciences, fluid mechanics, atmospheric science, and astronomy. Two of the investigations-one in materials science, mercury iodide crystal growth [France], and one in astronomy, very wide field camera [France]-had flown aboard Spacelab 1. Scientists in the U.S. sponsored 12 of the investigations, and an ionization measurements investigation was from India.
Important new hardware developments in materials science, fluid dynamics, and life sciences would be on the flight, and researchers had designed the experimental hardware for multiple flight use. NASA had selected two payload specialists with expertise in crystal growth and fluid mechanics for the flight.
The Spacelab 3 configuration consisted of a long tunnel, a long module, and a mission peculiar equipment support structure (MPESS). The module and tunnel would provide a pressurized shirtsleeve environment within which the crew could operate. The MPESS also supported experiments that did not require a habitable crew environment. Common payload support equipment used on Spacelab 3 was the scientific airlock that could extend from the module into space for experiments requiring exposure to the space environment and flight crew hands-on activities.
There were three experiments on materials science: the fluid experiment system (FES), the vapor crystal growth system (VCGS), and the French materials science experiment.
In fluid mechanics, the crew would perform fundamental experiments in the drop dynamics module (DDM) to test theoretical predictions of drop behavior in a near-zero gravity environment. The geophysical fluid flow cell (GFFC) experiment would study fluid motion in a microgravity environment.
The six investigations in life sciences included four in the Ames Research Center's (ARC) life sciences payload system to verify a new facility for housing and studying animals in the space environment, observing the animals' reactions to that environment, and evaluating operations and procedures relative to in-flight animal care; the urine monitoring investigation to monitor crew water intake and to prepare urine samples for postflight analysis; and the autogenic feedback training experiment to test a technique to control space adaptation syndrome.
The four investigations in atmospheric science and astronomy were the ionization states of solar and galactic cosmic ray heavy nuclei that would use a new detector system to determine the composition and intensity of ions emitted toward the earth from the sun and other galactic sources; the French astronomy investigation to make an ultraviolet survey of the celestial sphere in a study of large-scale phenomena such as clouds within our galaxy; the auroral observations experiment to observe and record the visual characteristics of pulsating and flickering auroras; and atmospheric trace molecules spectroscopy to examine on a global scale the composition and variability of the upper atmosphere.
In addition to the Spacelab 3 experiments, NASA had scheduled two Get-Away Specials for the flight-a Northern Utah University satellite (NUSAT) and a global low-orbit message relay satellite (GLOMR). NASA would enclose each in a canister mounted in the orbiter payload bay for deployment near the end of the mission following completion of Spacelab operations. (NASA MOR E-977-51-B-02 [prelaunch] April 17/85)
Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) announced its researchers completed at KSC a series of three intensive tests that verified the compatibility of Spacelab 2 experiments in space. Known collectively as the "mission sequence test," the tests determined for the first time that actual experiment flight hardware for the mission operated in tandem with the Spacelab flight systems. MSFC's Spacelab 2 mission manager Roy Lester said they learned they "could operate this complex system with high efficiency within acceptable Spacelab resource allocations." MSFC had responsibility for managing the first three Spacelab missions in a series of Spacelab flights that extended over several years. The first mission flew in 1983; the next would fly later in April. "This third and fast test was a simulated six-hour slice of the actual on-orbit timeline," Lester said. "It simulated the commanding of experiments as if they were being done both from the payload operations control center (at Johnson Space Center) and from the flight deck of the orbiter." The period chosen was one that would put maximum stress on the computer, "a worst-case scenario," Lester explained. "Without a situation like that, we wouldn't have gotten the confidence we have now that we're ready to go." The 13 Spacelab 2 experiments, covering seven scientific disciplines, would rest on three pallets and a special support structure. Unlike the other two Spacelab missions managed by MSFC, there was no habitable laboratory. Spacelab 2 crew would operate the experiments from the aft deck of the orbiter interior. (MSFC Release 85-19)
NASA terminated today efforts by the crew of the Discovery 51-D mission to revive the U.S. Navy's Syncom IV-3 (Hughes Corp.'s Leasat 3) satellite, the Washington Post reported. Troubles with the satellite became apparent the morning of April 13 after astronauts M. Rhea Seddon and Jeffrey Hoffman completed commands that deployed the satellite from the Space Shuttle's cargo bay. The satellite's engine, which would lift it into a permanent geostationary orbit 22,300 miles above earth, failed to fire. A fault in the satellite's timing mechanism (which would direct the satellite through a series of steps to put the satellite into permanent orbit) apparently caused the failure.
Johnson Space Center flight director John Cox said that NASA's best guess was that the "post-deploy sequencer (timer) never was activated. The reason we think so is that the antenna should have popped out about a minute and 20 seconds after deployment, and the satellite should have been put into a 15-rpm spin to stabilize it. Neither of those things happened." Engineers at Hughes Aircraft Corp., satellite manufacturer, tried to simulate the conditions of the satellite failure in hopes of duplicating what had happened. "One of the astronauts might be able to get close enough to the satellite to move the lever to start the timing mechanism, then get out of there and inside in enough time to be far away from the satellite when the engine fires," said Marvin Mixon, Hughes vice president.
Astronauts maneuvered the Space Shuttle about 45 miles ahead of the satellite in order to take pictures of it; however, they could not draw too close because the satellite's main engine contained 7,370 lb. of solid rocket fuel, its second-stage engine had 4,092 lb. of nitrogen tetroxide and dimethyl hydrazine fuel. The satellite also carried 352 lb. of hydrazine for controlling its position in orbit.
NASA made the decision to extend the flight from five to seven days, and on April 15 the Discovery crew cannibalized plastic covers from flight manuals, parts of a window screen, nylon straps, and other paraphernalia in the spacecraft to fashion flyswatters to attach to Discovery's robot arm for an attempt to fire the satellite's engine. Seddon sewed the plastic covers together to form cones that the astronauts would attach to the arm in order to flip the arming lever.
On April 16 astronauts Jeffrey Hoffman and S. David Griggs went on history's first unrehearsed spacewalk to rig Discovery's mechanical arm with the flyswatter devices. The two spent more than three hours in Discovery's open cargo bay putting the extension "hands" on the 50-foot-long arm.
At about 8:00 a.m. April 17, commander Karol Bobko and pilot David Williams maneuvered Discovery to within 30 feet of the satellite. Then Seddon swatted at the four-in.-long power switch. Although she hit it at least twice-once so hard that part of the plastic broke-the lever didn't move.
Following the unsuccessful attempt, ground controllers order the Space Shuttle to move away and abandon the rescue attempt on the off-chance that the contact somehow might have activated the satellite's internal timer, which would cause its rockets to fire.
Underwriters who had insured the satellite said the failure to either recover the satellite or boost it into an operational orbit would be a serious blow to the satellite underwriters business, Defense Daily reported. "If we have another major claim," James Barrett, president of International Technology Underwriters, said, "the market would be very seriously injured by a total loss." Hughes said the satellite was insured for between $80 and $85 million, and the space insurance market had already suffered three losses over the past year. (W Post, Apr 15/85, Al, Apr 16/85, Al, Apr 17/85, A7, Apr 18/85, Al; NYT, Apr 16/85, Al, Apr 18/85, B10; USA Today, Apr 16/85, 3A; W Times, Apr 18/85, 1A; D/D, Apr 16/85, 257)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
