Posts: 2454
From: U.K.
Registered: Jul 2009

posted 09-22-2010 03:40 AM               

---

According to Wikipedia several rescue missions were designated, i.e. -

• STS-114 / STS-300
  
• STS-121 / STS-300
  
• STS-115 / STS-301
  
• STS-116 / STS-317
  
• STS-118 / STS-322
  
• STS-120 / STS-320
  
• STS-122 / STS-323
  
• STS-123 / STS-324
  
• STS-124 / STS-326
  
• STS-125 / STS-400*
  
• STS-134 / STS-335

* Hubble repair flight requiring a different orbit from ISS flights.

I have queries regarding this list. Can anyone explain the logic behind the numbering, e.g. why the jump from 301 to 317?

Were there crews selected for these missions and if so who were they? If there weren't crews nominated, how did NASA propose to crew them if needed at short notice?

Would a nominated rescue crew be allowed their own mission patch?

Posts: 2896
From: Titusville, FL USA
Registered: Feb 2005

posted 09-22-2010 04:48 AM               

---

I can't speak for the numbering system but I can confirm that the crew would have been allowed to have their own patch. It would have not been released or adopted unless they were committed to fly.

As I recall the CDR, PLT and two EVA MS astronauts of the most recently flown crew would be assigned to be the four member LON crew for a rescue. I assume it would be because they would be ahead of the training curve having just completed a mission.

Posts: 42988
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 09-22-2010 08:02 AM               

---

Since STS-124 (with the exception of STS-125), the Launch On Need (LON) crew has been the four flight deck members from the next mission in line to fly. The space station was significantly stocked with supplies such that any shuttle crew taking "safe haven" there could wait until the launch window for the next mission.

Prior to that, as Tim wrote, the flight deck crew of the prior mission stood in as the LON crew for the next flight.

As for the numbering, originally NASA intended for all LON missions to carry the same designation, STS-300 (until presumably, it flew). I believe that changed when it became necessary for planning manifests to distinguish between different orbiters being reserved for different launch on need assignments (e.g. Atlantis was still serving as the STS-300 vehicle for STS-121 when an updated manifest showed Endeavour assigned to STS-301 to support STS-115).

Posts: 3445
From: Toms River, NJ
Registered: Aug 2000

posted 09-22-2010 10:25 AM               

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by moorouge:
According to Wikipedia several rescue missions were designated...

---

It seems to me some of the LON flight numbers were based on the succeeding flight number. Example: STS-117 was scheduled after STS-116, so the 116 LON became STS-317. Same with STS-122 through 124 and 134.

Now if we could only figure out where STS-322 and 320 came from, although it seems to me in the case of 320 that they took the last two numbers of the flight to be rescued and simply added a '3' in front of it. Was STS-122 originally manifested after STS-118?

Posts: 1015
From: Lausanne
Registered: Apr 2012

posted 01-20-2017 02:41 PM            

---

Please can anyone clarify the names of the STS-300 LON crew for STS-114?

Without being facetious, it obviously wasn't "the flight deck crew of the prior mission" since that was STS-107. To my way of thinking it seems unlikely to have been Wetherbee's STS-113 team.

I'm thinking it was perhaps Lindsey, Mark Kelly, Fossum and Sellers since they were next up. Otherwise Jett and Ferguson, plus either Tanner and Stefanyshyn-Piper or Burbank and MacLean since they were already assigned to Atlantis.

Posts: 42988
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

Posts: 1015
From: Lausanne
Registered: Apr 2012