|
Author
|
Topic: Shuttle orbiter with the most original parts
|
moorouge
Member Posts: 2454
From: U.K.
Registered: Jul 2009
|
posted 06-20-2011 11:25 AM
   
A rather obtuse question this. Bearing in mind that many components were replaced/swapped in the course of their careers, which shuttle made its last flight in as near as possible configuration to its first? That is to say with most of its original bits. |
Jay Chladek
Member Posts: 2272
From: Bellevue, NE, USA
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 06-20-2011 11:41 AM
Probably Endeavour, simply because it was the youngest orbiter and the other ones (even Atlantis) underwent quite a bit of parts swapping during the mad scramble to ramp up to a 12 flight per year capacity in that period before STS-51L. |
Hart Sastrowardoyo
Member Posts: 3445
From: Toms River, NJ
Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 06-21-2011 10:01 AM
Believe it or not, I'm thinking Columbia, since she still retained, among other things, some of her OFT equipment (or am I wrong?)Wasn't Endeavour delivered with two sets of EDO tanks and AFSRI were were later removed to save weight? I guess the answer will be when they take apart the orbiters, and someone documents what they find. I'm waiting for someone to say, "Hey! Here's Atlantis' plumbing for Centaur, which was never used and just capped off," for example. |
Jay Chladek
Member Posts: 2272
From: Bellevue, NE, USA
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 06-23-2011 10:58 PM
Columbia did retain her OFT equipment, but she underwent A LOT of changes in that first OMDP refit at Palmdale after STS-9. While the wing TPS and nose tiles were kept, the tail had a few changes done to it and the sides of the fuselage had a lot of the FRSI and LRSI tiles (the "stair step" pattern tiles) replaced with AFRSI.The other orbiters all had a fair amount of their AFRSI removed in spots when they were refitted for use in ISS docking missions, not just Endeavor. Columbia was also retrofitted to fly with an EDO kit as well, but I am not sure if they used the same EDO kit delivered with Endeavour or if they built a second one for Columbia. A look at when the orbiters had their OMDP refits after Endeavour's delivery might provide clues as if both orbiters were scheduled to fly extended duration missions back to back, that implies EDO kits for both vehicles. Concerning Atlantis and the Centaur fueling system, most of that was likely removed a long time ago during an OMDP to save weight (and Atlantis is a little lighter weight than Discovery it seems). But there are likely still some attachment brackets or holes left for the plumbing. Actually, if one opens this list up to Enterprise, then it by default has the most original equipment as its basic airframe is the same as it was back in 1986. Some stuff has been removed, but it still has essentially the same fake TPS tiles on it, the same glass while other orbiters have window panes removed for damage, the same landing gear struts and the same dummy SSMEs in the rear (the OMS pods were removed probably for ferry flight work on the operational orbiters, so who knows if the current ones on it are the same ones or not). But since Enterprise didn't fly in space, that probably is splitting a hair as it were.  The one thing I find pretty interesting though is that when you look at one (space flown) orbiter on display in a museum, there is a good chance you will likely be looking at parts from all of them (Atlantis especially if it really has Challenger's original body flap). |
Hart Sastrowardoyo
Member Posts: 3445
From: Toms River, NJ
Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 06-24-2011 06:12 AM
Were Columbia's ejection seat rails ever removed? Probably a stupid question, I know, but I'm wondering if to do so involved a major disassembly of the cockpit and it was decided to leave them. |
OV-105
Member Posts: 816
From: Ridgecrest, CA
Registered: Sep 2000
|
posted 06-24-2011 07:51 AM
The EDO kit was a small pallet that was put in the rear of the payload bay that had the extra taks on it. So Columbia and Endeavour could have flown back to back EDO flights with just a swap out of the pallet. I think the ejection seats were fully removed after STS-9 when Coulmbia went back to Palmdale. |
Jay Chladek
Member Posts: 2272
From: Bellevue, NE, USA
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 06-25-2011 01:04 AM
The ejection seats were totally removed as well as their associated hardware. For the one mission where they were deactivated, yet still present (STS-5), only one seat could be placed behind the pilot seats on the flight deck. After that, they were gone. A seven person crew flew on STS-9, so that implies the seats were totally gone if they put two Mission Specialists on the flight deck as is common practice since STS-5 (which had a four person crew with one on the mid-deck).There was a lot of reconfiguration done to the flight deck of the orbiter when the switch was made as it wasn't just the ejection seat rails and the seats, but also a rearrangement of the switch panels on the overhead consoles (since part of the switch panels would have been blown away with the covers in the event of an ejection). If you have a copy of the Space Shuttle Handbook, the overhead panel guide is the original configuration from STS-1 thru 5. The one thing I don't quite know is how they covered up the holes for the jettisonable panels in the crew module. Did they weld the panels into place or did they plate over them? I know the tile configuration on Columbia's cockpit area changed for STS-9 as I can find no signs of the panel splits after the change was made in the pre-launch photos of STS-9 I have. |
OV-105
Member Posts: 816
From: Ridgecrest, CA
Registered: Sep 2000
|
posted 06-25-2011 08:17 AM
Jay, STS-9 flew with a crew of 6. For launch and landing there were 3 on the flight deck and 3 on the mid-deck. |
Jay Chladek
Member Posts: 2272
From: Bellevue, NE, USA
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 06-28-2011 04:03 AM
Ahh, you are correct (Doh!). That tells me while the ejection seats themselves may no longer have been there, parts of the seat rails probably still were, hence only one flight deck seat could be stuck behind the pilot seats. Probably the only way to tell for sure would be if there are any images from STS-9s TCDT as if the pilots were going to be in deactivated ejection seats, they would be likely wearing the same modified suit harness worn on STS-5. |
APG85
Member Posts: 306
From:
Registered: Jan 2008
|
posted 06-28-2011 06:12 AM
Does anyone know why Challenger's body flap was removed and put on Atlantis for delivery? Why was the body flap for Atlantis not ready when the vehicle was delivered? |
psloss
Member Posts: 32
From:
Registered: Jun 2011
|
posted 07-14-2011 03:13 PM
quote:
Originally posted by APG85:
Does anyone know why Challenger's body flap was removed and put on Atlantis for delivery? Why was the body flap for Atlantis not ready when the vehicle was delivered?
It seemed like kind of the other way around. NASA decided in December, 1984, to take the body flap for Atlantis from Palmdale and install it on Challenger (reported in Aviation Week and Space Technology magazine at the time); that probably happened either that month or in January, 1985. A tile was lost during re-entry on STS-41G in October, 1984. One of the waterproofing agents used at the time was interacting with some of the adhesives used to bond tiles. This was noted in the IFA list for the flight.More historical information here (Search for "screed" or "RTV-577"). During post-flight processing, it was determined that several thousand tiles on Challenger would have to be removed and rebonded, many on the orbiter belly. By the time of the decision, that included several hundred tiles on the body flap; swapping body flaps saved some work getting Challenger back to flight status. |
advertisement