 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI SpaceKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Space Forum / Space Station / June 2009Reliability of ECLSS on station
Now that the station is at 6 crewmembers, will anyone here find out if they start to have problems with any O2 generator or CO2 scrubber ? I haven't heard much about Elektron for a few years. Has it been problem free since the last time it was changed ? Have they finally made it reliable ? Has the USA published a order of O2 use should their O2 generator fail ? Would they release O2 from the Quest tanks before borrowing O2 candles from the russians ? Considering the size of the complex now and 6 crewmember status, would O2 released from a progress at aft end of station propagate quickly enough to support 6 or would it result in too high an O2 concentration in the aft side of the station and not enough on the forward section ? I would hope the distribution question has been thought of, but they do have monitors for this. I'd imagine what they might do would be driven by necessity rather than protocol. Electron seems a lot better than in the beginning from what I've heard, though if it has to work in the higher amp modes this may well not be the ase I suppose. I'd be more interested in why that water purifier went wrong myself. Brian  SignatureBrian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email. graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Now that the station is at 6 crewmembers, will anyone here find out if > they start to have problems with any O2 generator or CO2 scrubber ? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > enough to support 6 or would it result in too high an O2 concentration > in the aft side of the station and not enough on the forward section ? Hmm, I hope the water purifier fault is well understood as well. Brian SignatureBrian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email. graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Now that the station is at 6 crewmembers, will anyone here find out if > they start to have problems with any O2 generator or CO2 scrubber ? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > enough to support 6 or would it result in too high an O2 concentration > in the aft side of the station and not enough on the forward section ? > Hmm, I hope the water purifier fault is well understood as well. As long as the shuttle flies, the water purifier is not on the critical list because the shuttle brings plenty of fresh water. Shuttle also has the ability to recharge the QUEST tanks with plenty of O2 and N2. Once shuttle stops, I read that NASA intends to use Progress to ship some tanks that would be physically moved to Quest and plugged into the pumps to load the quest tanks. Not sure how much O2/N2 they can bring on each progress. What is ESA's commitment with regards to ATV ? How many can be expected and at what frequency ? Consider that after Comumbia, the station's crew was reduced to 2 because there weren't sufficiuent progress vehicles to support 3, despite a modest increase in progress flight rates. So a progress-only supply line would require a 3 fold increase in flight rate to support 6 crewmembers. So, having a "loop" that is as close to "closed loop" as possible probably becomes extrememly important to give the station more autonomy, and once you start to rely on those systems, when there will be a failure, it becomes quite important. In that sense however, the loss of shuttle will be good for humankind because it will force NASA/Russia to have truly reliable ECLSS systems and if they do achieve this, it will be a great leap forward for the purposes of a long duration flight to Mars. >Consider that after Comumbia, the station's crew was reduced to 2 >because there weren't sufficiuent progress vehicles to support 3, >despite a modest increase in progress flight rates. So a progress-only >supply line would require a 3 fold increase in flight rate to support 6 >crewmembers. The situation is different now with ATV nearing operational status and HTV, well who knows what the hell is up with HTV. D. SignatureTouch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/ -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL > The situation is different now with ATV nearing operational status and > HTV, well who knows what the hell is up with HTV. what is the committed frequency of ATV post 2010 ? say ATV were the only trasnport to station. How long would 6 crew members last on 1 ATV ? The Japanese seem confident they can launch HTV later this year. (so probably early 2010). Again, what launch frequency have they comitted to ? Is HTV rouhly the same capacity as an MPLM or much less ? >>Consider that after Comumbia, the station's crew was reduced to 2 >>because there weren't sufficiuent progress vehicles to support 3, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >The situation is different now with ATV nearing operational status and >HTV, well who knows what the hell is up with HTV. First flight is scheduled for September, isn't it? Brian > >>Consider that after Columbia, the station's crew was reduced to 2 > >>because there weren't sufficient progress vehicles to support 3, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > First flight is scheduled for September, isn't it? The current manifest is still showing September 1st as the launch date: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/structure/iss_manifest.html Interestingly enough, this is also the first flight of the H-IIB rocket. You'd think they'd want the damn thing to do a couple test launches before launching something as important as the HTV.... -Mike |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.