STS-35
STS-52
Int. Designation |
1992-071A |
Launched |
22 October 1992 |
Launch Site |
Pad 39B, Kennedy Space Center, Florida |
Landed |
1 November 1992 |
Landing Site |
Runway 33, Shuttle Landing Facility, Kennedy Space Center, Florida |
Launch Vehicle |
OV-102 Columbia/ET-55/SRB BI-054/SSME #1 2030; #2 2015; #3 2034 |
Duration |
9 days 20hrs 56 min 13 sec |
Call sign |
Columbia |
Objective |
Deployment of Laser Geodynamic Satellite II (LAGEOS II) and operation of US Microgravity Payload 1 (USMP-1) |
Flight Crew
WETHERBEE, James D., 39, USN, commander, 2nd mission Previous mission: STS-32 (1990)
BAKER, Michael A., 38, USN, pilot, 2nd mission Previous mission: STS-43 (1991)
VEACH, Lacy, 49, civilian, mission specialist 1, 2nd mission Previous mission: STS-39 (1991)
SHEPHERD, William Michael, 43, USN, mission specialist 2, 3rd mission Previous missions: STS-27 (1988); STS-41 (1990)
JERNIGAN, Tamara E., 32, civilian, mission specialist 3, 2nd mission Previous mission: STS-40 (1991)
MACLEAN, Steven Glenwood, 37, civilian, Canadian payload specialist 1
Flight Log
The original mid-October launch date for STS-52 slipped when it was decided to exchange No. 3 SSME over concerns about possible cracks in the LH coolant manifold on the engine nozzle. The revised launch on 22 October was delayed by two hours due to crosswinds at the Shuttle Landing Facility, violating the Return-To – Launch-Site criteria. There were also heavy clouds at the Banjul trans-oceanic abort landing site. Despite concerns about the weather, the decision was made to proceed with the launch, in spite of higher than permitted wind speeds at launch. This caused some controversy at the time, but NASA stated that they felt the launch was safe and was performed within the intent of the rule.
Once in orbit, the crew activated the USMP-1 payload, which contained three experiments mounted on two MPESS structures in the payload bay. The Lambda Point Experiment studied the properties of liquid helium in microgravity, while the
|
The Space Vision System (SVS) experiment is seen in the grasp of the RMS above the payload bay. Target spots placed on the Canadian Target Assembly (CTA) satellite were photographed and monitored as the arm moved around the payload bay holding the satellite. Computers measured the changing position of the dot pattern and provided real-time TV display of location and orientation of the CTA. This was an evaluation to aide future RMS operations in guiding the RMS more precisely during berthing and deployment activities
French Space Agency (CNES) and French Atomic Energy Commission (CEA)- sponsored Material pour L’Etude des Phenomenes Interessant la Solidification sur Terre et en Orbite (MEPHISTO) included crystal growth experiments. The Space Acceleration Measurement System (SAMS) had flown on previous Shuttle missions to measure and record accelerations which could affect onboard experiments. Located in the payload bay of the orbiter and operated by ground-based science teams independently of the flight crew, these experiments were a “dress rehearsal” for telescience operations on space station and other free-flying satellites.
The LAGEOS II satellite was successfully deployed at the end of FD 1 by spin stabilisation. Two subsequent firings of the solid rocket stages placed the geodynamics satellite in its 5,900 km orbit inclined at 52° to the equator. The previous satellite, LAGEOS I, which had been launched on a Delta expendable launch vehicle in 1976, was located at 110° inclination. The 426 laser reflectors on LAGEOS II provided accurate mapping of the Earth’s surface by using ground-based laser ranging systems and ground-based tracking stations worldwide. The possible applications for data collected by LAGEOS included calculations of the shifting of crustal plates, as well as rotation rates, tides and polar motion of the Earth. This data was also beneficial for global monitoring of regional fault movements in earthquake-prone areas of the Earth. By having two satellites in orbit, the data could be cross-referenced for confirmation and greater accuracy. The satellite was a joint project between NASA and the Agenzia Spaziale Italiana (ASI), the Italian Space Agency. The upper stage used for deployment of the satellite was the Italian Research Interim Stage (IRIS), also built by ASI and being evaluated on this flight for the first time for potential use on future Shuttle missions as an operational upper stage.
Canadian PS MacLean was responsible for the Canadian Experiments-2 (CANEX-2) programme of seven experiments, located both in the cargo bay and on the mid-deck of Columbia. His programme continued and expanded upon the work begun by Canadian astronauts aboard STS 41-G (Garneau) and STS-42 (Bondar), as part of Canadian involvement in Shuttle and Space Station operations. The primary experiment in the CANEX-2 package was the Space Vision System (SVS), in which a computerised “eye’’ would assist an astronaut in operating the RMS in situations where light or field of vision was restricted. The remaining CANEX-2 experiments included research into materials exposure (sample plates attached to the Canadian-built RMS), liquid-metal diffusion, phase partitioning in liquids, measurements of the Sun, photo-spectrometer in the atmosphere, the orbiter glow phenomena and space adaptation tests and observations.
The crew also worked with a number of mid-deck and payload bay secondary experiments, including the ESA-supplied ASP, a three-independent-sensor package that was designed to determine spacecraft orientation. There was also an experiment to control pressure in cryogenic fuel tanks in low gravity (which would have application to Space Station and long-duration space systems operations), protein crystal growth experiments, fluid mixing in microgravity, heat pipe performance in space, an experiment to study the proprietary protein molecule on twelve rodents, and an investigation into Shuttle RCS plume burn contamination.
One of the more challenging aspects of this mission regarding the payload was whether the capability of the Shuttle was being fully utilised on this flight. Commander Wetherbee commented from space that the experiment package his crew were dealing with was imposing time and power constraints on the mission, and that the crew were having a tough time staying out of each other’s way while performing the mid-deck experiments. That the mission was so successful was made possible by very good pre-flight planning of both crew and experiment time.
Milestones
155th manned space flight
81st US manned space flight
51st Shuttle mission
13th flight of Columbia
1st flight of USMP payload
1st flight of Italian IRIS upper stage on Shuttle
Baker celebrates his 39th birthday in space (27 Oct)
STS-68 |
Int. Designation |
1994-062A |
Launched |
30 September 1994 |
Launch Site |
Pad 39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida |
Landed |
11 October 1994 |
Landing Site |
Runway 22, Edwards AFB, California |
Launch Vehicle |
OV-105 Endeavour/ET-65/SRB BI-067; SSME #1 2028; #2 2033; #3 2026 |
Duration |
11 days 5 hrs 46 min 8 sec |
Call sign |
Endeavour |
Objective |
Operation of the Space Radar Laboratory (SRL)-2 in the payload bay |
Flight Crew
BAKER, Michael Allen, 40, USN, commander, 3rd mission Previous missions: STS-43 (1991); STS-52 (1992)
WILCUTT, Terrence Wade, 44, USMC, pilot SMITH, Steven Lee, 35, civilian, mission specialist 1 BURSCH, Daniel Wheeler, 37, USN, mission specialist 2, 2nd mission Previous mission: STS-51 (1993)
WISOFF, Peter Jeffrey Karl, 36, civilian, mission specialist 3, 2nd mission Previous mission: STS-57 (1993)
JONES, Thomas David, 39, civilian, mission specialist 4, payload commander, 2nd mission
Previous mission: STS-59 (1994)
Flight Log
After the success of SRL-1, it was hoped that the second mission in the series would be equally rewarding. In order to ensure a smooth (and shorter) flow between the missions, it was decided to place the payload in the same orbiter (Endeavour) and to assign MS Tom Jones from the STS-59 crew as payload commander for STS-68. Endeavour returned from Edwards on 2 May and the SRL payload was removed from the vehicle in the Orbiter Processing Facility on 8 May for inspection, cleaning and maintenance. It was returned to the payload bay on 21 June and by 27 July, Endeavour was back on the pad, ready to support a planned 18 August launch. That attempt was scrubbed at T — 1.9 seconds, when the orbiter’s computers shut down the three SSMEs after they had detected unacceptably high discharge temperatures in the high-pressure oxidiser turbine for SSME #3. This required a return to the VAB to replace all three engines. The launch was rescheduled for 30 September.
|
Following the format of SRL-1, the crew of STS-68, working a single-shift system, soon settled down to operate their main payload and host of other mid-deck and secondary experiments once on orbit. The same 400 sites and 19 “super-sites” were targeted as on SRL-1 to provide comparison data during a different season. Unfortunately, there would be no SRL-3 mission to provide a third set of data from a different time of the year (December or January). In addition to the programme’s scheduled activities, the crew took the opportunity to record other images and impressions of Earth’s weather and environmental conditions, including the eruption of the Kliuchevskoi volcano in Kamchatka. They also studied fires in British Columbia, Canada (which had been set for forest management purposes) and used the MAPS equipment to take readings to better understand the carbon monoxide emissions from burning fires.
As well as flying over the same places as on the STS-59 mission (at one point flying the Endeavour just nine metres from where it had flown the previous April), by making small changes to their orbit, the STS-68 crew could take images of areas they had flown over just 24 or 48 hours previously. These interferometric passes were made over central North America, the Amazonian rain forests of Brazil in South America, and the volcanoes in the Kamchatka peninsula in Russia. Images like these taken over long periods of time could provide important data on the movements of the Earth’s surface – of even a few centimetres – that could be invaluable in detecting the preemptive changes in volcanoes or movements in major fault lines prior to earthquakes.
One of the radar observations was of a man-made phenomenon, a deliberate and controlled spillage of oil in the North Sea. This was designed to see if the radar could determine the difference between oil spills and naturally produced fish and plankton oils. Four hundred litres of diesel oil and 100 litres of algae-produced natural oil were dumped into the water for comparison. After the data was collected, it took just two hours for the stand-by recovery vessels to clean up the spillages.
After a one-day extension to the mission, STS-68 was diverted to Edwards from KSC because of bad weather in the vicinity of the Cape. Post-flight evaluation of the mission revealed that there had been 923 attempted data sweeps, of which 910 were successful (98.59%). Of the 292 “super-site” data-gathering attempts, the crew achieved 289 takes (98.97%) and from the 724 X-SAR attempts, 719 were acquired (99.31%). The volume of data collected equated to approximately 25,000 encyclopaedic volumes worth. STS-68 had gathered data from 83 million km2, or about nine per cent of the total Earth surface. Though SRL-3 was not flown, the data from the first two missions would help in planning the SRTM mission flown in 2000.
Milestones
173rd manned space flight
95th US manned space flight
65th Shuttle mission
7th flight of Endeavour
2nd flight of SRL payload combination