Do you think STS-125 will launch on time in October?

[Rick]

Do you think STS-125 will launch on time in October?

[Andrew]

With more damage found yesterday in the LC 39-A flame trench as a result of the STS-124 launch, it's going to be interesting to see if the repairs on this 40 year old concrete mass is going to result in a pushback of the launch date.

Probably not, but still something to keep on the radar.

I'm really rather excited about the fact that we'll have, for about a month, two stacks on two pads for the last time ever. Get out the 'ol cameras for that one! It would be neat for PAO if they have both RSSs pulled back for one afternoon to get plenty of photos.

-Andrew

[kraisee]

The problems are four-fold:-

1) The flame bricks came loose on a large area of the East wall of the SRB-end of the Flame Trench.

2) The mortar between the bricks, the backing to which they are attached and the damaged concrete behind that are all riddled with highly concentrated quantities of asbestos. This is slowing work down considerably because protective gear must be worn by anyone coming in contact with those materials - it is obviously considered hazardous work.

3) The tap tests have detected voids behind what appear to be good bricks on both the East and West sides of the trench at Pad A. Engineers suspect the same will be true of Pad B when they begin to inspect that shortly too, but hopefully not as severe because Pad B was built two years later and has had significantly fewer flights from it.

4) The exposed structure of the Pad underneath the bricks has shown severely corroded steel, and subsurface resonance scanning is indicating that the entire rebar structure inside the concrete may have essentially rotted away already. The Concrete structure has foundations going a few dozen feet into the soil, in an area just 1000 ft or so away from the Ocean, where the water-table is just 6ft below the surface and is highly saline. Concrete is a porous substance and the structure has essentially been soaking up salt water like a giant sponge for 40 years. You can imagine what the steel reinforcement structure inside now looks like...

In short, the subject was raised already - do we really want to trust the current structures for rolling-out a giant Ares-V booster in 10 years time which will weigh twice as much as a Shuttle Stack? The picture of a pad structure collapse during such a roll-out is clearly not for the feint of heart...


I'm guessing, but I suspect Shuttle will end up moving to Pad B for the remainder of the program - assuming Pad B is given a clean bill of health first of course!

Pad A will be fixed with a 'temporary' solution like fondu-fire. Enough so it will be available to support the Launch On Need (LON) flight for a Hubble rescue mission if required, and then Pad A will be used for the Ares-I-X test flight.

Then, starting with Pad A a year or so ahead of Pad B, both pads will be dug out completely and totally replaced with all-new structures during the down-time between Shuttle and the follow-up program. Each of those will be a 10-digit figure in cost, and will take somewhere around 3-4 years ish.

Just my guess.

So no, I don't think STS-125 will go up on time on the 8th October. I think it will go up before the end of the year though.

Ross.

[Rick]

This news blurb came out last night..

It's HERE (http://saturn.netwrx1.com/rfischer/showthread.php?t=395) on another thread.

[Andrew]

I'm guessing, but I suspect Shuttle will end up moving to Pad B for the remainder of the program - assuming Pad B is given a clean bill of health first of course!

Very interesting. Assuming that the MTT is incorrect and a switch needs to be done, I wonder if that logistically would affect the preliminary pad modifications. Aren't they beginning installation of the lightning system at Pad B already? I can't imagine that switching the primary modification point to Pad A would take forever, but I'm just curious if it would affect the Constellation conversion of the pads by switching the primary pad to be converted first.

On a different note, it would totally stink to have Pad B as the primary STS pad for the remainder of the program because you can't see it as well from NASA Causeway West and it's virtually invisible from the KARS facility on Hall Road! Sure, at T+3 seconds its all moot, but these things matter (grin)!

-Andrew

[Rick]

On a different note, it would totally stink to have Pad B as the primary STS pad for the remainder of the program because you can't see it as well from NASA Causeway West and it's virtually invisible from the KARS facility on Hall Road! Sure, at T+3 seconds its all moot, but these things matter (grin)!

-Andrew

No kidding! The best place to watch a launch from Pad B, besides the VIP site next to the Saturn V Center, is on the north side of the VAB. Other than that, not so good.

P.S. I forgot the Press Site.