Category Praxis Manned Spaceflight Log 1961-2006

Flight Crew

HAUCK, Frederick Hamilton “Rick”, 43, USN, commander, 2nd mission Previous mission: STS-7 (1983)

WALKER, David Mathieson, 40, USN, pilot

ALLEN, Joseph Percival, 47, civilian, mission specialist 1, 2nd mission Previous mission: STS-5 (1982)

FISHER, Anna Lee Tingle, 35, civilian, mission specialist 2 GARDNER, Dale Allan, 36, USN, mission specialist 3, 2nd mission Previous mission: STS-8 (1983)

Flight Log

The loss of the Westar and Palapa communications satellites in useless orbits during the Shuttle STS 41-B mission was unkindly blamed on the Shuttle, which had an opportunity to make spectacular amends the following November. Lloyds of London had paid out about $270 million for the loss of the satellites, and in the hope of recouping some of that loss it invested a further $15 million to mount the most ambitious Shuttle mission yet: to retrieve the satellites, return them to Earth, refurbish them, re-sell them and re-launch them into orbit, generating perhaps $90 million and reducing the overall insurance loss.

STS 51-A was to have been just a routine deployment mission for its five crew, including Joe Allen (EV1) and Dale Gardner (EV2), who as the EVA crewmen devised the rescue plan with satellite contractors. Discovery’s take-off was delayed by a day when the count was stopped due to high winds at altitude, but all went well the following day at 07:15 hrs local time when STS 51-A ascended into clear blue skies, treating observers to a fine view of SRB separation. The Anik and Leasat commu­nications satellites were routinely deployed on the second and third days, and even­tually found themselves on station in geostationary orbit.

On 12 November, Discovery made a rendezvous to within 10 m (33 ft) of the first stranded satellite, Palapa, which had been nudged into a lower orbit by remote control to facilitate the rescue. The Shuttle performed a record 16 manoeuvres for the rendezvous in the 28° orbit, which reached a maximum altitude of 312 km (194 miles). Joe Allen, floating inside his spacesuit, propelled himself across to Palapa using an MMU, and with the aid of a docking rod called a “stinger” joined up with the satellite’s apogee motor nozzle. Allen and his catch were themselves then snared by RMS, deftly operated by Anna Fisher. Meanwhile, inside the payload bay, Gardner cut away at the satellite’s antenna to ensure that it could fit inside the payload bay in a special frame. The frame didn’t work, however, and Allen had to hold the 544 kg (1,200 lb) satellite steady over his head for 77 minutes while Gardner fixed a con­tingency adapter. The procedure worked so well that it was decided that when

Gardner rescued Westar the following day, the same method would be used again, with Allen again playing Charles Atlas.

The two EVAs lasted 6 hours 13 minutes and 6 hours 1 minutes, with Allen and Gardner clocking up 2 hours 22 minutes and 1 hour 40 minutes MMU flying time. It had been a brilliant demonstration of human abilities in space and the unique capability of the Shuttle system. Discovery came home to runway 15 at the KSC, at T + 7 days 23 hours 44 minutes 56 seconds and the crew later received the Lloyds Silver Medal for the first salvage in space. After much effort, Lloyds managed to dispose of the refurbished satellites. Westar became Asiasat and was scheduled to be launched by a Chinese Long March 3 in 1990. Palapa was re-sold to Indonesia and was also launched in 1990, by a Delta 2 from Cape Canaveral.

Milestones

102nd manned space flight 45th US manned space flight 14th Shuttle mission 2nd flight of Discovery

1st retrieval of satellites and their return to Earth 20th US and 29th flight with EVA operations

Gardner celebrates his 36th birthday with the launch of STS 51-A (8 November)

Flight Crew

SHAW, Brewster Hopkinson Jr., 44, USAF, commander, 3rd mission Previous missions: STS-9 (1983); STS 61-B (1985)

RICHARDS, Richard Noel, 42, USN, pilot ADAMSON, James C., 43, US Army, mission specialist 2 LEESTMA, David Cornell, 40, USN, mission specialist 1, 2nd mission Previous mission: STS 41-G (1984)

BROWN, Mark Neil, 38, USAF, mission specialist 3

Flight Log

In 1985, NASA announced the crew of a Department of Defense mission, STS 61-N, the last crew to be named before the Challenger disaster, which of course cancelled the mission. It eventually became known as STS-28, with one crew replacement. STS-28, by rights, should have taken off in late 1988 or early 1989, but the main reason for the delay to August 1989 was that the refurbishment of the oldest orbiter, Columbia, was taking much longer than anticipated. Columbia was being brought up to the standard of the later orbiters and even in early 1989 was short of 2,400 heatshield tiles. Other processing difficulties and parts shortages meant that the launch schedule had to be changed, with STS-33 moving to November to accommodate STS-28.

Columbia eventually reached the pad on 14 July and was ready to go at 07: 57 hrs local time on 8 August. Fog on the Shuttle runway at KSC took time to lift, so Columbia remained Earthbound for 40 minutes, leaving the pad at 08: 37 hrs, heading up the eastern seaboard of the USA into its 57° inclination orbit. On its fifth orbit, the crew deployed the advanced reconnaissance satellite KH-12 (USA-40). A smaller satellite was deployed the next day and the crew conducted classified experiments and one unclassified experiment on radiation monitoring before coming home to Edwards Air Force Base runway 17 at T + 5 days 1 hour 0 minutes 9 seconds, just after sunrise.

Later, it was reported that the KH-12 was spinning out of control in orbit and was inoperable. Apparently, however, the satellite was brought under control. The classified nature of the mission was lifted later, when a photo of the crew in orbit was released. This was the final re-qualification mission of the Shuttle fleet as part of the Return-to-Flight programme.

Milestones

126th manned space flight 60th US manned space flight 30th Shuttle mission 8th flight of Columbia 4th Shuttle DoD mission

Flight Crew

VIKTORENKO, Aleksandr Stepanovich, 42, Soviet Air Force, commander, 2nd mission

Previous mission: Soyuz TM3 (1981)

SEREBROV, Aleksandr Aleksandrovich, 45, civilian, flight engineer,

3rd mission

Previous missions: Soyuz T1 (1982); Soyuz T8 (1983)

Flight Log

The Soviet Union’s premier space station, Mir, which was to have been permanently manned from February 1981 when the TM2 crew boarded her, remained empty for four months during 1989 as engineers readied the much-delayed add-on modules for launch so that future crews would have something more to do than use the Kvant telescopes and operate within the relatively cramped quarters of the Mir core module and Kvant. On 23 August 1989, there was a sure sign that Mir was being readied for another crew when a Progress was launched to dock with the station two days later. This was the first of a new series, called Progress M, a basic uprated version that would, according to the Soviets, carry a small re-entry vehicle to return 15O kg (331 lb) of samples in the future.

Soyuz TM8, which should have been launched the previous April, was readied on Pad 1, daubed for the first time with advertisements, and launched at 03: 38 hrs local time at Baikonur on 6 September, docking manually after a minor malfunction two days later. The commander was, as expected, Aleksandr Viktorenko, but his flight engineer was not Aleksandr Balandin of the TM8 that should have launched in April, but Aleksandr Serebrov, in space at last and sure that his new modules would be launched.

The first of these modules was to carry the first Soviet manned manoeuvring unit which Serebrov helped to develop. The launch of the first module, designated “D”, was due in October and the second, designated “T’’ later in the year. The first got off

the ground much later than planned in 1989, but the second was delayed again, first to January then to Spring 1990, by which time another crew were scheduled to replace the TM8 crew, who were due to return to Earth on 19 February 1990. The delay to the “D” module from October to November was due to problems with checking it out for launch when several faults were found, a fact that was announced self-critically by Soviet officials.

The 19,565 kg (43,141 lb) module was finally launched on 26 November and was called Kvant 2. It gave a performance in space rather reminiscent of its predecessor in 1987. First, one of its two solar panels failed to deploy and there were suggestions that an EVA would be required to pull it out when the module arrived at Mir. Then the first docking attempt was called off at a distance of 20 km (12 miles) from the station because Kvant 2 was not in the right orbit. A subsequent attempt on 6 December was successful. The docking took place at the front port, replacing Progress M which had made the first front port unmanned tanker docking while TM8 was at the rear.

Kvant 2 was then ingeniously moved to a side port at the front by a simple crane­like device. TM8 moved back to the front after a crewed 20 minute fly around and was replaced at the rear by Progress M2 on 20 December, which for the first time carried a commercial US experiment to be operated by Soviet cosmonauts. Kvant 2 was fitted

with a wide EVA airlock, the MMU, scientific equipment, a remote-sensing camera and life support systems, including a shower.

On 9 January, Viktorenko and Serebrov made an EVA lasting 2 hours 56 minutes, using the Mir core module airlock, and moving as far as the rear of Kvant to install two 80 kg (176 lb) star sensors. A second EVA on 11 January, lasting 2 hours 54 minutes, made alterations to the docking port on Mir to receive the “T” module which was due in March. They also retrieved some materials left outside by the TM7 EVA cosmonauts. A third walk was completed on 26 January, and was the first to use the new wider airlock on Kvant 2. During the 3 hour 2 minute EVA, Viktorenko and Serebrov assembled a magnetic device on the outside of Kvant 2 on which the Icarus MMU could be placed during later planned spacewalks. The first of these came on 1 February, when Serebrov became the first Soviet to operate an MMU – which was tethered to Mir – moving as far as 33 m (108 ft) from the station. This 4 hour 59 minute EVA was followed on 5 February by a 3 hour 45 minute effort, during which Viktorenko also had a go on the MMU, extending the distance from Mir to 45 m (147 ft). Icarus weighed 220 kg (485 lb) and was powered by 32 compressed air thrusters, 16 of which were primary thrusters. Maximum speed available was 30m/sec (98ft/sec).

After cramming in the five spacewalks, which lasted a total of over 17 hours, the cosmonauts were joined by Anatoly Solovyov and Aleksandr Balandin in Soyuz TM9 on 13 February, and prepared to come home. They landed in biting winds and temperatures of—30° C 55 km (34 miles) northeast of Arkalyk at T + 166 days 6 hours 58 minutes, to a Soviet Union and Soviet bloc that had changed dramatically in such a relatively short time. This was the seventh longest manned space flight.

Milestones

127th manned space flight

67th Soviet manned space flight

60th Soyuz manned space flight

7th Soyuz TM manned space flight

15th Soviet and 38th flight with EVA operations

1st Soviet manned flight to operate commercial US experiments

1st Soviet test of MMU (tethered)

Serebrov celebrates his 46th birthday in space (15 Feb)

Flight Crew

GREGORY, Frederick Drew, 50, USAF, commander, 3rd mission Previous missions: STS 51-B (1985); STS-33 (1989)

HENRICKS, Terence Thomas “Tom”, 39, USAF, pilot VOSS, James Shelton, 42, US Army, mission specialist 1 MUSGRAVE, Franklin Story, civilian, mission specialist 2, 4th mission Previous missions: STS-6 (1983); STS 51-F (1985); STS-33 (1989) RUNCO Jr., Mario, 39, USN, mission specialist 3 HENNEN, Thomas John, 39, US Army, payload specialist 1

Flight Log

STS-44 deployed one of NORAD’s (North American Air Defence Command) Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment System satellites. This series of space-borne detector systems has been used and upgraded since 1970 and provides detection and reports of real time space launches, missile launches and nuclear detonations across the globe using infrared sensors to detect the heat from missile plumes or nuclear explosions. This satellite, codenamed “Liberty”, was deployed six hours after a spectacular night launch. This came after the 19 November launch was scrubbed due to the failure of one of five gyroscopes in the Redundant Inertial Measurement Unit of IUS-14. A replacement was fitted and the launch rescheduled for 24 November.

The day after the deployment of “Liberty”, the crew of Atlantis were awoken by a special message from actor Patrick Stewart, better known as Jean-Luc Picard, Captain of the Star Ship USS Enterprise in Star Trek: The Next Generation. “Picard” reminded the crew of their ten-day mission “to explore new methods of remote sensing and observation of the planet Earth. To seek out new data on radiation in space and

a new understanding on the effects of microgravity on the human body. To boldly go where… 255 men and women have gone before.”

Tom Hennen, the US Army PS, operated the Terra Scout package which was sponsored by the US Army Intelligence Center. This suite of experiments was designed to allow a trained imagery analyser to observe targets of military interest from the vantage point of the Shuttle in orbit. For this mission, there would be thirty such targets. The Military Man-in-Space Experiment was designed to evaluate the ability of a space-borne observer to gather important information about ground troops, equipment and facilities. In addition to Hennen’s Terra Scout package, there was also a range of monitoring and observation experiments, used to record aspects of the flight of a Shuttle in orbiter. The Shuttle Activation Monitor (SAM) measured the radiation environment on board the orbiter and its effect on gamma ray detectors. The Cosmic Radiation Effects and Activation Monitor (CREAM) gathered data on cosmic rays and radioactivity on board the vehicle, while the third-generation Radi­ation Monitoring Equipment (RME) measured ionising radiation aboard the orbiter and the crew’s exposure to it. In addition, the USAF Maui Optical System used an electrical-optical system located on the Hawaiian island to observe Shuttle jet firings, water dumps and encounters with atomic oxygen. The Interim Operations Contam­ination monitor in the cargo bay of Atlantis had already proven successful, measuring contamination in the payload bay during launch. Finally, the Ultraviolet Plume

Instrument (UPI) sensor in a US DoD satellite located in geosynchronous orbit attempted to observe Atlantis as a method of fine-tuning the sensor.

In addition to continuing observations of the Earth and weather phenomena, the crew undertook a range of experiments as part of an on-going programme of medical investigations. These studies were connected to studying the effects of weightlessness on crew members and methods of counteracting such effects. The programme, origin­ally planned for ten days, was designed to provide baseline data for the future extended-duration orbiter medical programme on missions lasting between 12 and 17 days from 1992. The treadmill suffered a bearing failure and exercises had to be modified to include squatting actions, using the back muscles rather than those in the legs. For the first time, Dr. Musgrave was able to perform medical experiments in space – on his previous missions, he had fulfilled the role of flight engineer looking after the orbiter. This time, he could call upon his surgical and medical skills as he was not assigned to either orbiter or EVA duties.

On FD 7, one of three Inertial Measurement Units (IMU) failed. Strict flight rules meant that the orbiter would have to land as soon as possible, and at Edwards rather than the planned landing at the Cape to take advantage of the wide runways. Although the Shuttle will fly perfectly well with just two IMUs operating, if another failure had occurred, it would have posed a serious risk to the navigational systems and would have left the orbiter with no back-up unit. With the mission now designated a Minimum Duration Flight (MDF), the crew were bitterly disappointed at having to come home three days early. Despite the early return of STS-44 and some difficulties with on-orbit equipment, the mission still achieved almost 90 per cent of its pre-mission objectives.

Milestones

146th manned space flight

74th US manned space flight

44th Shuttle mission

10th Atlantis mission

9th DoD Shuttle mission

2nd declassified DoD Shuttle mission

1st NCO to fly in space (Hennen)

. SOYUZ TM17 Posted by admin in Praxis Manned Spaceflight Log 1961-2006 on November 2, 2015 Flight Crew TSIBLIYEV, Vasily Vasilyevich, 39, Russian Air Force, commander SEREBROV, Alexandr Alexandrovich, civilian, flight engineer, 4th mission Previous missions: Soyuz T7 (1982); Soyuz T8 (1983); Soyuz TM8 (1989) HAIGNERE, Jean-Pierre, French Air Force, cosmonaut researcher Flight Log Two days after launch, Soyuz TM17 was station-keeping some 200 metres from Mir. With all docking ports occupied, the Soyuz could not immediately dock, so the crew filmed the departure of Progress M18 from the front port of Mir. TM17 took its place a short time later. Haignere’s previous training as back-up to the last French visiting mission enabled his “Altair” mission to be advanced by six months, but this also meant that there was insufficient time to develop a whole new science programme. Haignere would therefore use some of the experiments left on board by Tognini almost a year before, together with about 100 kg of new science hardware that had been delivered aboard Progress M18. Haignere also completed a programme of medical investigations during his time aboard Mir before returning to Earth with the EO-13 crew aboard TM16 on 22 July. Settling down to their stay on Mir, the EO-14 crew prepared themselves for some of the EVA tasks that had been reassigned to them from the previous residency. Before they could begin their EVA programme, however, the station had to endure an unusually intense Perseid meteor shower, which peaked on the night of 12-13 August. The cosmonauts remained at work, although plans were available for their emergency recovery should the need arise. They also constantly monitored the hits recorded on the station around the clock, including ten window impacts that resulted in craters ranging between 1.5 and 4 mm in diameter. Impact sensors on the station recorded a particle flux of around 2,000 times greater than normal annual showers. The crew also The Soyuz TM17 crew of Serebrov (left), Tsibliyev (centre) and French cosmonaut Haignere recorded about 240 micrometeoroids burning up in the atmosphere. NASA had delayed the STS-51 mission so that it would not fly through the shower and incur damage. The EVA series began with two EVAs to construct the Rapana girder on top of Kvant (16 Sep for 4 hours 18 minutes and 20 Sep for 3 hours 13 minutes). This was a girder technology experiment to analyse new materials that could be incorporated into similar structures for the proposed Mir 2 programme. On their third EVA (28 Sep for 1 hour 52 minutes), the cosmonauts conducted an observation programme on the outside of Mir, finding a 5 mm hole through one of the solar arrays, surrounded by a number of panels that had been cracked several cm across. It was not possible to determine whether this damage had been caused during the recent Perseid shower. This inspection work was completed on their fourth and fifth EVAs (22 Oct for 38 minutes and 29 Oct for 4 hours 12 minutes) and in addition, the crew deployed and retrieved sample cassettes from the exterior of the station. In October, the crew was asked to extend their mission into January, as the Energomash factory in Samara which produced the upgraded engines used on the Soyuz U vehicle would not release any more engines until it was paid, and there was no money available. This stop-start nature of the Russian programme would become a regular occurrence as the once state-driven economy and space programme gave way to the vagaries of the corporate machine. Progress M19 and M20 included Raduga sample return capsules (as had M18), the latter having launched on a former military R7, the only one available at Baikonur for its mission to keep the station supplied. In December, it was announced that Russia and the US, together with their international partners, had agreed to cooperate in the construction of what was now being called the International Space Station. This evolution of the abandoned design studies and budget reviews of the US-led Freedom space station would include Mir as a key part of its preparations. On 14 January, after the arrival of the next resident crew and the brief hand-over period, Tsibliyev and Serebrov undocked Soyuz TM17 for their trip home. Instead of the normal reverse away from the port, however, it was decided to fly TM17 in proximity to Kristall to take close-up images that would benefit the Shuttle-Mir programme. These images were supposed to enable NASA Shuttle pilots to become familiar with the aerials and other appendages on the module. Unfortunately, Tsibliyev failed to realise that his translation control was in stand-by mode and was unable to prevent TM17 from striking Kristall a glancing blow approximately 1 m from the spherical docking system station. Aboard Mir, the new resident crew felt no impact and a later inspection by TM18 when it was being relocated to another docking port did not reveal any serious damage. Milestones 162nd manned space flight 76th Russian manned space flight 24th Russian and 51st flight with EVA operations 17th manned Soyuz flight to Mir 14th Mir resident crew 69th manned Soyuz flight 16th manned Soyuz TM flight STS-69 Posted by admin in Praxis Manned Spaceflight Log 1961-2006 on November 2, 2015 1995-048A 7 September, 1995 Pad 39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida 18 September 1995 Runway 33, Shuttle Landing Facility, KSC, Florida OV-105 Endeavour/ET-72/SRB BI-074/SSME #1 2035; #2 2109; #3 2029 10 days 20hrs 28 min 56 sec Endeavour Wake Shield Facility-2 operations; SPARTAN 201-03 operations; EVA Development Flight Test Flight Crew WALKER, David Mathiesen, 51, USN, commander, 4th mission Previous missions: STS 51-A (1984); STS-30 (1989); STS-53 (1992) COCKRELL, Kenneth Dale, 45, civilian, pilot, 2nd mission Previous mission: STS-56 (1993) VOSS, James Shelton, US Army, mission specialist 1, payload commander, 3rd mission Previous missions: STS-44 (1991); STS-53 (1992) NEWMAN, James Hansen, 38, civilian, mission specialist 3, 2nd mission Previous mission: STS-51 (1993) GERNHARDT, Michael Landen, 39, civilian, mission specialist 4 Flight Log Set originally for 5 August, the launch of STS-69 was postponed indefinitely pending a full review of the SRM nozzle damage found on the two previous missions. This problem was found to be caused by the Room Temperature Vulcanising (RTV) process when insulation material was applied; small air pockets in the material could later form pathways for the hot gases during motor operation. The joint design was deemed to be sound and non-destructive inspections were developed to examine the insulation material on specific joints. Development, testing and application of the repair procedures was conducted, and these could be performed on STS-69 while it was still on the pad, alleviating the need for a rollback. The nozzles on the motors assigned to STS-73 and 74 were repaired at KSC but these did not impact upon processing schedules. The planned 31 August launch of STS-69 was scrubbed about 5.5 hours prior to lift-off when Fuel Cell 2 indicated higher than allowed temperatures during activation. It was removed and replaced, and the launch was rescheduled for 7 September. The Wake Shield Facility is attached to the RMS during its second of four planned flights on the Shuttle The deployment of the SPARTAN-201 occurred during FD 2 and was the third of a series of four flights of the facility. SPARTAN-201 was designed to study the outer atmosphere of our Sun and its transition into the solar wind that constantly flows past the Earth. At the same time as SPARTAN was being operated, the Ulysses space craft (deployed from STS-41 in October 1990) was flying over the Sun’s northern polar regions, obtaining data that would expand our understanding of solar wind from different regions of the Sun. Concerns about the performance of the two onboard instruments were raised after two days of gathering data, but subsequent analysis revealed that both instruments had operated normally and had gathered the expected amounts of data. The question of why the SPARTAN was rotating and in a different attitude for retrieval than expected would require further analyses. The second flight of the Wake Shield Facility featured another first. Released on FD 5, the WSF manoeuvred away from Endeavour instead of the other way around, as on previous deployments. Seven thin film growths for the next generation of ad­vanced electronics were planned during the mission, but after only three successful growths, the facility placed itself in safe mode. It was decided to extend the facility’s free-flight by 24 hours to allow a 20-hour break in operations while still achieving seven growths of material. However, when controllers commanded the resumption of operations, they could not generate the flow of the thin material, so the facility was shut down again for a six-hour cool-down period. This time it started up correctly and a fourth film was grown, before the facility was finally retrieved on FD 8. The WSF-2 was deployed on the RMS and placed over the side of the cargo bay for an Air Force experiment designed to collect data on the build-up of electrical fields around orbiting spacecraft. In addition to the range of medical and secondary payloads in the payload bay, the crew also completed the second in the series of EVA development tests aimed at providing experience and developing procedures applicable to ISS. On FD 10, Voss (EV1) and Gerhardt (EV2) completed their 6 hour 46 minute EVA, where they evaluated improvements in the thermal protection of the EMUs (as a result of the crew’s experiences during the STS-63 EVA earlier in the year) and reported improved comfort levels. Improvements included finger tip heaters in the gloves, which were powered by 3.7 volt lithium batteries. Sensors on their EMU boots and on the PLSS backpacks also recorded exterior temperatures. In between activities at a tool board, each astronaut was “cold-soaked” 9 metres above the payload bay on the RMS for 45 minutes while they completed repetitive tool-handling exercises. The two astronauts also evaluated a range of new EMU helmet lights, tools restraints and techniques that were being developed for possible use in construction missions at ISS. They took turns in removing micrometeoroid/debris shields from a work board, tested power tools, and manipulated items such as an antenna, an orbital replacement unit box and electrical conduits, both while restrained and “free-floating’’. This mission was also the second flight of a “dog crew’’, a tradition begun on STS-53, which included both Walker and Voss among the crew. Dog crew call signs originated from Walker who, due to his red hair, was called “Red Dog’’. His old station wagon was also known as the “dog mobile’’ and was the impetus for “dog tag’’ names for his crew members. Dog Crew II thus became: Red Dog (Walker), Cujo (Cockrell); Dog Face (Voss); Pluto (Newman) and Under Dog (Gerhardt). Milestones 182nd manned space flight 101st US manned space flight 71st Shuttle mission 9th flight of Endeavour 32nd US and 59th flight with EVA operations 2nd flight of Wake Shield Facility 3rd flight of SPARTAN 201 facility 1st Shuttle mission featuring deployment and retrieval of two different payloads on the same mission 2nd EDFT exercise Flight Crew BOWERSOX, Kenneth Duane, 38, USN, commander, 3rd mission Previous missions: STS-50 (1992); STS-61 (1993) ROMINGER, Kent Vernon, 39, USN, pilot COLEMAN, Catherine Grace “Cady”, 34, USAF, mission specialist 1 LOPEZ-ALEGRIA, Michael Eladio, 37, USN, mission specialist 2 THORNTON, Kathryn Cordell Ryan, 43, civilian, mission specialist 3, payload commander, 4th mission Previous missions: STS-33 (1989); STS-49 (1992); STS-61 (1993) LESLIE, Fred Weldon, 43, civilian, payload specialist 1 SACCO Jr., Albert, 46, civilian, payload specialist 2 Flight Log Getting STS-73 back on the ground after a highly successful USML-2 mission was achieved at the first attempt. Getting the mission off the ground in the first place, however, had proven a littlemore frustrating, equalling STS 61-C (12-18 Jan 1986) for the most launch scrubs. Shortly after tanking began for the 25 September launch, a leak in the SSME # 1 main fuel valve caused the first scrub. The reset 5 October launch was postponed a day due to the effects of Hurricane Opal and the 6 October attempt was scrubbed when hydraulic fluid was inadvertently drained from hydraulic system 1 after the SSME # 1 fuel valve replacement. Reset again to 7 October, the launch was scrubbed once more, this time due to a faulty Main Events Controller that required replacement. The 14 October launch was rescheduled for the following day to allow additional time to inspect the SSME oxidiser ducts on Columbia, as a result of cracks found in a test engine at Stennis. A faulty GPC was also replaced. The 15 October attempt was scrubbed at T — 5 minutes because of low clouds and rain and the launch was reset for 19 October, pending a successful Atlas launch on 18 October. However, the Atlas launch was delayed, forcing the STS-73 launch to be rescheduled once more, Payload commander Thornton and commander Bowersox observe liquid drop activity at the Drop Physics Module in the Spacelab science laboratory aboard Columbia, as part of the USML-2 mission for 20 October. Even that countdown was delayed 3 minutes, due to a range computer glitch. When Columbia finally made it to orbit, the crew built upon the success of USML-1 (on which Bowersox was a crew member) with many of the experiments flying a second time. The astronauts worked in two shifts. The Red Shift consisted of Bowersox, Thornton, Rominger and Sacco. The Blue Shift comprised Lopez-Alegria, Coleman and Leslie. There were five areas of research conducted on the mission: fluid physics; materials science; biotechnology; combustion science; and commercial space processing. Generally the experiments performed well, and many re-confirmed find­ings recorded during USML-1, while the flight also recorded new and unique findings confirming the decision to fly a second USML mission. Flying for the first time was a droplet combustion experiment in which 25 droplets of a variety of fuels were ignited. The studies revealed that larger droplets could be observed in microgravity than on Earth and they burned ten times longer in space. Results from Astroculture experi­ments indicated that edible food could be grown in a plant growth facility, which has enormous potential for future applications on larger space facilities, deep space missions or future bases on the Moon or Mars. A record number of protein crystal growth samples (approximately 1,500) were flown on this mission. Apart from their Spacelab work the crew taped a ceremonial first pitch for game five of the Baseball World Series, which marked the first time in baseball history that the thrower was not actually in the ballpark for the pitch. Milestones 183rd manned space flight 102nd US manned space flight 72nd Shuttle mission 18th flight of Columbia 2nd flight of USML series 12th flight of Spacelab Long Module 6th EDO mission . SOYUZ TM27 Posted by admin in Praxis Manned Spaceflight Log 1961-2006 on November 2, 2015 Flight Crew MUSABAYEV, Talgat Amangeldyevich, 47, Russian Air Force, commander, 2nd mission Previous mission: Soyuz TM19 (1994) BUDARIN, Nikolai Mikhailovich, 44, civilian, flight engineer, 2nd mission Previous mission: Mir EO-19 (STS-71/Soyuz TM21) (1995) EYHARTS, Leopold, 40, French Air Force, cosmonaut researcher Flight Log The original Pegasus mission had been scheduled for August 1997, but the collision of Progress with Mir and the subsequent on-orbit difficulties meant that the flight was delayed. There was also a medical issue, with Jean-Pierre Haignere having injured his leg during a badminton match in July 1997. He was replaced by Eyharts, but as a result, the French mission was moved back to the next Soyuz TM flight. The Pegasus science programme was a repeat of that completed by Claudie Andre-Deshays in 1996 under the Cassiopee programme. Eyharts was kept fully occupied during his three weeks on the station, returning with the EO-24 crew on 19 February. The EO-25 crew now settled down to work with Thomas, the final American resident on Mir, as well as completing the routine maintenance and housekeeping chores all Mir resident crews had to address. The EO-25 crew also completed a programme of six EVAs. The first, on 3 March (1 hour 15 minutes), had to be abandoned when a hatch wrench broke, preventing them from opening the exit. With replacement parts delivered by Progress M38, the two cosmonauts resumed their EVA work in April, delaying their science programme by completing five excursions in the same month (1 Apr for 6 hours 26 minutes; 6 Apr for 4 hours 23 minutes; 11 Apr for 6 hours 25 minutes; 17 Apr for 6 hours 33 minutes; and 22 Apr for 6 hours 21 minutes). Their work included bracing the solar array that had been damaged by the Progress collision. As it was still generating some electricity, the Russians wanted to try to repair the solar array rather than disabling it. They also replaced the VDU engine block and stowed the Rapana Truss next to the Sofora girder (for possible future use). During the EVAs, Thomas assisted the EVA crew from inside the space station. The cosmonauts resumed their science programme after completing their month of EVAs. NASA was pushing for the demise of Mir to allow full concentration on the ISS programme, but Russia was reluctant to do so. With existing contracts to fly one more long French mission and a Slovak visiting mission, there were also reports of selling seats to fare-paying passengers for short missions, generating much needed funds for the programme. This idea of “Soyuz seats for sale” generated interest from wealthy individuals across the world, and led to the prospect of turning Mir into a commercially funded station while ISS was under construction. This did not go down well with the Americans, who basically wanted Mir out of the way so that everyone’s full attention could be devoted to the more complex work on ISS. A shortage of hardware and funds was already a familiar and concerning problem in operations at Mir, and the Americans did not want to see a drain on resources from ISS because the Russians were trying to run two space station programmes. For the Russians, however, it was also a question of national pride. They wanted to keep their Mir station in orbit as long as they could. In June, STS-91 arrived to bring home American astronaut Andy Thomas and so end two years of continuous US occupation of Mir. Among the Shuttle crew was veteran Russian cosmonaut Valery Ryumin, now chief of the Russian side of the Shuttle-Mir programme. His primary role on the mission was to make a thorough inspection of the Mir complex to assess its potential for further use. He concluded that it would take some time to stow everything properly and that a crew of two or three cosmonauts would struggle to keep on top of the tasks. What Mir needed was a crew of six or seven to fully utilise the station. This was not something NASA wanted to hear. After STS-91 had departed, Musabayev commented that the station was far roomier now there were only two on board. The cosmonauts resumed their science work with materials-smelting experiments, Earth observations and remote sensing, and continued the biological and medical experiment programmes. In August 1998 a new crew arrived at Mir, just three months before the start of ISS construction. Milestones 205th manned space flight 86th Russian manned space flight 79th manned Soyuz mission 26th manned Soyuz TM mission 25th Mir resident mission 32nd Russian and 70th flight with EVA operations 5th French long-duration mission (21 days) . SOYUZ TM33 Posted by admin in Praxis Manned Spaceflight Log 1961-2006 on November 2, 2015 Flight Crew AFANASYEV, Viktor Mikhailovich, 52, Russian Air Force, commander, 4th mission Previous missions: Soyuz TM11 (1990); Soyuz TM18 (1994); Soyuz TM29 (1999) HAIGNERE, Claudie, 44, civilian, flight engineer, 2nd mission Previous mission: Soyuz TM24 ( 1996) KOZEEV, Konstantin Mirovich, 33, civilian, flight engineer Flight Log The announcement of French cosmonaut Claudie Haignere (formerly Andre – Deshays) to the crew of the second Soyuz Taxi mission had been made in December 2002. With the back-up cosmonaut crew of the first Taxi mission recycled to this flight, this would be a far less controversial mission than that of Dennis Tito, as Haignere had previously completed a visit to the Mir station in 1996. For her new mission, she would be conducting the ESA “Andromede’’ programme of experiments, sponsored by the French Space Agency CNES. Soyuz TM33 docked to ISS on 23 October. During the week aboard the station, the Derbent cosmonauts assisted their French colleague with her science programme and brought the small cargo of supplies and equipment from the Soyuz to the station. They also exchanged their personal seat liners with those in the TM32 spacecraft, which they would use to return to Earth at the end of their mission. They tested the systems and controls of the returning spacecraft and took air samples from inside the Russian segment of the station for analysis back on Earth, as well as participating in a number of small experiments and research tasks. Haignere’s science programme included two experiments devoted to the observa­tion of Earth and the study of the ionosphere. There were three experiments in life sciences – in the fields of neuroscience, physiology and developmental biology. There The Soyuz ТМЗЗ crew members examine a storage container in Zvezda during the week aboard the station. From left are Victor Afanasyev, Konstantin Kozeev and Claudie Haignere were two physics experiments prepared jointly by ESA and the German Space Agency, and two technology experiments and operational experiments designed to flight-test equipment and develop procedures, initiated by the European Astronaut Corps (EAC). French high schools also devised educational experiments for the mission, a continuation of similar educational experiments flown during the 1999 French mission to Mir. These educational experiments included a wide range of studies to support science teaching in schools. Throughout the mission, a French project team located at the Moscow TsUP Control Centre and another at the Toulouse Space Centre provided daily mission support to the flight crew, with two audio links per day and permanent monitoring between ISS and ground control. Haignere received briefing and debriefing sheets via email from the new CADMOS (Centre for the Development of Microgravity Applications and Space Operations) based at Toulouse. Two CNES specialists mon­itored the docking of Soyuz and activities at TsUP, while at JSC in Houston, French ESA astronaut Michel Tognini provided interface between the support team in France and the one in Moscow, updating them with American activities and monitoring of the mission. The Derbent crew returned in the Soyuz TM32 spacecraft on З1 October 2001 after a ten-day mission, leaving the newer Soyuz TM33 spacecraft for the ISS-4 crew and further highlighting the benefit of including small programmes of experiments on such Taxi missions in the future. Milestones 228th manned space flight 92nd Russian manned space flight 85th manned Soyuz mission 32nd manned Soyuz TM mission 3rd ISS Soyuz mission (3S) 2nd Taxi flight 2nd visiting mission 1st European (French) woman to board ISS . SHENZHOU 6 Posted by admin in Praxis Manned Spaceflight Log 1961-2006 on November 2, 2015 Flight Crew FEI, Junlong, 40, Chinese PLA Air Force, commander NIE, Haisheng, 40, Chinese PLA Air Force, operator Flight Log Five pairs of yuhangyuans trained for the second Chinese manned space flight. One month prior to the flight, three pairs were selected to continue training, one as prime crew and two as back-ups. The prime crew was announced shortly prior to launch, with their back-ups announced as Liu Boming and Jing Haipeng (Team 1), and Zhai Zhigang and Wu Jie (Team 2). Nie and Zhai had backed up Yang two years before. The timing, duration and objectives of the flight were discussed in the western media for months, before an official release indicated an October flight of about five days. Improvements had been made to the launch vehicle, whose assembly was completed on 26 September. The spacecraft was joined to the launch vehicle on 4 October. There had been over 110 upgrades to Shenzhou 6 over its predecessor, in four specific areas: upgrading the spacecraft to support the flight of two crewmembers; upgrading the internal configuration of the crew compartment; improvements to the safety systems; and improvements to the system components. In all, over 40 new items of equipment and six pieces of software were incorporated into the Shenzhou 6. There had also been over 75 upgrades to the launch vehicle since Shenzhou 5. The crew had arrived at the launch site 2 hours 45 minutes prior to launch and were sealed inside their spacecraft about 30 minutes later. The launch was nominal, with powered flight lasting 583 seconds. Twenty-one minutes into the mission, the Shenzhou propulsion system was used to adjust the initial 200 km orbit to one of 211 x 345 km. Shortly after launch, search teams were dispatched to recover the telemetry “black box” ejected from the launcher during the ascent. It was thought The Shenzhou 6 crew of commander Fei Junlong (left) and pilot/operator Nie Haisheng that it included telemetry that had not been downlinked to the ground. It was found 45 minutes after the launch. During the flight, the two crew members conducted regular communication sessions with the ground, reporting on their personal condition and the status of the spacecraft, and speaking with their families. Several changes in orbital parameters were conducted during the five days in space, to test the operational capability of the Shenzhou orbital manoeuvring systems with a crew aboard. During the second orbit, the internal hatch into the OM was opened for the first time, and Fei was the first to enter. Three hours later, Fei swapped places with Nie. Very few details of the orbital activities of the crew were released, but the use of the OM and the extended flight allowed both men to take off their pressure suits for most of the orbital duration. Only one slept at any one time, however, with the second monitoring onboard systems. The crew also shut and pressure-tested the internal hatch integrity, both for when the OM was separated and for the future when the OM would be used as an airlock to perform EVA. They also performed an experiment to test the reactions of the crew within the OM and DM, videotaping their somersaults and movement between the modules. The crew conducted a range of “scientific experiments”, which included Earth observation and monitoring, and research on “biological and material sciences.” Exact details were not forthcoming. The most important “experiment” in relation to future plans for EVA, docking, crew transfer and the creation of a small “space station”, was the habitability studies conducted throughout the five days by both men. As with the previous Shenzhou mission, the OM was separated and left in orbit prior to entry and landing. The “mission” of the OM was officially ended on 15 April 2006 after nearly 3,000 orbits of the Earth, giving mission controllers experience in the extended control of a spacecraft in Earth orbit. Milestones 246th manned space flight 2nd Chinese manned space flight 1st Chinese two-person space flight 1st extended manned test flight of Shenzhou Nie Haisheng celebrates his 41st birthday in space (13 Oct) Emergency escape Posted by admin in Praxis Manned Spaceflight Log 1961-2006 on November 2, 2015 As the early spacecraft were developed from military missiles, they had a very nasty tendency to explode on or shortly after lift-off. Getting these vehicles safe enough to carry a crew – man-rating – was a priority, but to be on the safe side, additional escape methods were developed. All systems are tested many times to ensure their correct operation in the event of an emergency and though no crew would wish to experience launch escape systems in action, it is comforting knowing that there is an option to get out of a bad situation if necessary, assuming you have time to do anything about it, of course. The Soviet Vostok one-man craft employed an ejector seat, which would be used in the event of a launch failure or operationally for pre-landing ejection and parachute descent. In contrast, the Voskhod was the most dangerous of all spacecraft. Adapted from the basic Vostok one-man vehicle, it could carry two cosmonauts with spacesuits, or three without, but it didn’t have any room for ejection seats. The US Mercury and Apollo spacecraft, and the Russian Soyuz spacecraft, utilised a rocket launch escape system during the final stages of the countdown and in the early stages of ascent. The Chinese Shenzhou has a similar rocket escape system to the Russian Soyuz. The Russians have experienced two launch aborts during the forty years of Soyuz operations. During the abort in 1975, the escape tower had been ejected and the crew had to rely on the ballistic abort and return separation sequence, enduring up to 20-G loads for a few seconds. Then in 1983, a Soyuz launch pad abort system was activated when a launch vehicle caught fire on the pad. It exploded seconds after the crew were boosted to safety by the escape tower. The American Gemini spacecraft adopted ejector seats, which could be used prior to launch or during ascent if required. The first four Shuttle orbital test missions also had ejection seats fitted, but these were deactivated after the fourth and final test mission and removed after the fifth flight. The Space Shuttle also has a series of abort modes available during the ascent phase, although, when asked whether they wanted to fly a test mission of these aborts, the astronauts declined, indicating that they would test them when they needed them. In the event of a main engine failure prior to ignition of the twin Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs), there are options to abort the launch and this has occurred on five occasions in the history of the Shuttle programme. The three official abort modes are Return to Launch Site (RTLS), Trans-Atlantic Abort (TAL) and Abort to Orbit (ATO). RTLS occurs early in the flight if one or more engines are lost. This is the most risky, and many astronauts don’t believe it is survivable, as the stack has to turn around and fly back to the Kennedy Space Center. This would be a severe strain on the structural integrity of the vehicle. A TAL abort is a preferred option, with three prime locations in Europe, while an ATO is the only one to have actually occurred thus far. This was in 1985 during mission STS 51-F, when one engine shut down early during launch. The mission continued normally. It is obvious to all who fly the Shuttle, however, that a failure of an SRB (which occurred on the STS 51-L launch in January 1986) is non-survivable. There are other “contingency” aborts which are not “official” but are nonetheless trained for. The orbiter could shed its External Tank (ET) and conceivably land at Bermuda or other east coast sites in the USA, but this, too, would provide a real challenge for the flight crew – and quite a spectacle for the locals. As the Shuttle launch pads were adapted from the older Apollo Saturn V launch pad, some of the facilities are still available to the crew on the pad in the event of an emergency situation. Should an emergency occur before launch, such as fire after a launch pad abort, the crew would evacuate the Shuttle and use “baskets” on slide wires to descend to the ground, then go through tunnels into an underground bunker. There is also the option of using an armoured personnel carrier to vacate the pad as quickly as possible. Any countdown demonstration test during training on the pad ends with this emergency drill, although it does not include the actual slide wire ride. During the Apollo era, and due to the height of the tower, the crew could have used a slide tube system leading to an underground protected bunker, if they had time to get there! For resident crews on the International Space Station (ISS), and previously on the Soviet Salyut and Mir stations, an emergency return vehicle has always been available – the Soyuz. There is always one attached to the station and when crews become larger as more of the station is built, there will be two attached. NASA has been planning and designing its own Crew Rescue Vehicle but it is unlikely that this will ever be built. The Soyuz is perfectly adequate for the job. It is probable, however, that if NASA build a Crew Exploration Vehicle for the Vision for Space Exploration pro­gramme, one or two of these will be docked to the ISS. White Knight and Spaceship One Posted by admin in Praxis Manned Spaceflight Log 1961-2006 on November 2, 2015 The launch aircraft for the Spaceship One vehicle was a manned twin-turbojet research aircraft designed for high-altitude flights. It carried Spaceship One to an altitude of about 50,000 ft (15.24 km) although its ceiling was 53,000 ft (16.15 km) with a payload capacity of 8,000 lbs (3,628 kg). With a crew capacity of three, it could increase its 82ft (25 m) wing to 93 ft (28.3 m) for increased climb capability. Spaceship One featured a three-seat (although for the X-Prize flights, two were ballasted) 60 inch (152 cm) diameter shirt sleeve environment cabin, with space-qualified ECS and dual-pane windows. The unique bullet-shape-with-wings configuration gave aircraft-like qualities for the boost phase, glide and landing. Its “care-free” configuration allowed a hands-off re-entry and reduced aerodynamic and thermal loads by converting to a pneumatic-actuated “feather” configuration, offering a stable, high-drag shape for entry. The motor powering the system was a “new non­toxic liquid nitrous oxide/rubber-fuelled hybrid propulsion system” specifically developed for Spaceship One. « Previous 1 … 14 15 16 17 18 … 20 Next » Tweet Copyright © 2025 Aviation – airports, aircraft, helicopters … - Everything about aviation. Aviation News from around the world. Commercial and General Aviation, airports, airplanes, helicopters and other aircraft.