Payload Interface

[Urwumpe]

Lets assume, we use a system based on a fixed number of attachments, which can partially get moved. Lets assume also, that the payload attachments will be at the end of the parent->child attachment list. The order of the attachments shall stay constant over a long time.

So, which P->C attachments do we need? my proposal:

Fixed:
0. RMS End-effector
1. OBSS
2. MMU1 (historic, do we need them?)
3. MMU2
4. Docking port Aux (allow us simulating soft docking)

dynamic centerline payloads, controlled by the payload 1-3 interfaces

5. Payload 1
6. Payload 2
7. Payload 3.

Static centerline Payloads:

8. Static C/L payload 1
9. Static C/L payload 2
10. Static C/L payload 3.

Pseudo static Port sill payloads (Are static inside the Shuttle, but can later get separated by EVA)

11. Port static 1
12. Port Static 2
13. Port Static 3

The same starboard

14. Starboard Static 1
15. Starboard Static 2
16. Starboard Static 3

EDIT: Moved it out from the SSU thread, so we can work on it better here.

 

[DaveS]

Looks like a good solid plan, nothing big missing.

 

[Urwumpe]

DaveS: I am not sure on the side sill payloads, I think we sometimes need 4 on a side, but for being sure, I would need some more information on the flown payloads.

I think, we should exclude Spacelab and Spacehab (pressurized module) from the normal list of payloads, and make these part of the Shuttle Orbiter. This will take some of the most complex payload bay configurations away.

 

[DaveS]

DaveS: I am not sure on the side sill payloads, I think we sometimes need 4 on a side, but for being sure, I would need some more information on the flown payloads.

I think, we should exclude Spacelab and Spacehab (pressurized module) from the normal list of payloads, and make these part of the Shuttle Orbiter. This will take some of the most complex payload bay configurations away.

Yes. If you need to test this, I still have my old STS-107 payloads pack left with updated meshes and textures available. All of the 107 payloads were non-deployable.

However, we could need some way to make the payloads active so that they can support animations as some of the GAS cans of FREESTAR had moveable lids.

Also, the SpaceHAB RDM was equipped with a CCTV camera on it's aft left bulkhead, just like the orbiter payload bay cameras, this too has been modelled on the SpaceHAB mesh.

 

[Urwumpe]

Well, we could make each GAS container a vessel and attach it to a structure. How are the GAS containers handled by the crew?

 

[DaveS]

Well, we could make each GAS container a vessel and attach it to a structure. How are the GAS containers handled by the crew?

Standard switch panel actions. I'll ask on NSF if anyone has any photos or drawings of the IUS, GAS and HST FSS switch panels.

 

[Urwumpe]

I know that at least some of the IUS switch panels are installed at the place of the ODS panels. But I don't know the exact layout.

 

[DaveS]

Found the IUS deploy checklist for STS-93 here: http://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson/pdf/125852main_ius93f2.pdf

Got some drawings of the IUS panels. Will see if I can dig up any other payload panel schematics.

 

[Urwumpe]

Found the IUS deploy checklist for STS-93 here: http://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson/pdf/125852main_ius93f2.pdf

Got some drawings of the IUS panels. Will see if I can dig up any other payload panel schematics.

Nice reading.

 

[Donamy]

I noticed the IUS panel says L10. Is that at our Port station view ? The other panels just say standard switch panels, we would have to find more info on their placement.

There is no way, we can do all the missions, to the detail we want, so we will have to agree on which to do. I can do the panels, we will have to call them as individual "mission VC addons I think.

 

[Urwumpe]

I noticed the IUS panel says L10. Is that at our Port station view ? The other panels just say standard switch panels, we would have to find more info on their placement.

It is Port side, but standard switch panels are also payload panels, which can get swapped. They just follow a standard layout.

I know that a IUS mission also had special stuff in the A7A3 region, but I can't tell what kind of panel it is.

There is no way, we can do all the missions, to the detail we want, so we will have to agree on which to do. I can do the panels, we will have to call them as individual "mission VC addons I think.

Not instantly. But if the ODS panel code stays as simple, adding more optional panels will be possible. I still need to find a robust way to connect the cable connections of the payload to a Orbiter, but at least two possible ways are already in my head.

My personal long term goal would be being capable of flying a whole cycle of a Orbiter:
Prelaunch -> Launch -> Orbit -> Reentry -> Landing -> Turnaround -> Assembly -> Prelaunch -> Launch -> Orbit...

But that is really long term.

 

[Donamy]

And there are always fictitious ones also.

 

[SiameseCat]

The attachment point plan looks good, although I'm not sure if 3 attachment points in each set will be enough.

 

[DaveS]

The attachment point plan looks good, although I'm not sure if 3 attachment points in each set will be enough.

Isn't it good enough for now, to just test out the system? If it works well and good, we could expand it to let's say 6 side wall attachments per side.

 

[Urwumpe]

I think 3-4 moveable (around Z) connections at each side can do it, maybe we can also need two attachments for the special bays at the RMS Shoulder joint.

There are also these complex shaped EVA tool boxes, i don't know, are they attached to the side or are they installed into the External Airlock Truss?

 

[DaveS]

I think 3-4 moveable (around Z) connections at each side can do it, maybe we can also need two attachments for the special bays at the RMS Shoulder joint.

There are also these complex shaped EVA tool boxes, i don't know, are they attached to the side or are they installed into the External Airlock Truss?

Are you talking about the Tool Box Assemblies on eother side of the airlock? In that case, they're attached directly to the truss.

 

[Urwumpe]

Ok, so if the truss is part of the Orbiter in our case, we should also make the attachments for the tool box assemblies part of the Orbiter. What about making them additional side wall attachment points when the ODS or external Airlock is not flown?

 

[DaveS]

Ok, so if the truss is part of the Orbiter in our case, we should also make the attachments for the tool box assemblies part of the Orbiter. What about making them additional side wall attachment points when the ODS or external Airlock is not flown?

Not sure if a side wall payload has ever flown in those bays that the airlock now occupies.

They're usually areas that NASA doesn't want to fill up due to EVA requirements.

 

[Urwumpe]

Not sure if a side wall payload has ever flown in those bays that the airlock now occupies.

They're usually areas that NASA doesn't want to fill up due to EVA requirements.

Well, I don't know the requirements, but we can make it possible to move the additional side attachments to any location, unless the ODS is installed.

 

[SiameseCat]

Isn't it good enough for now, to just test out the system? If it works well and good, we could expand it to let's say 6 side wall attachments per side.

The problem is that, when we add new attachment points, the scenario files will get messed up. This will be fine for testing, but after we release a new version I think we should try to avoid changing the attachment point numbers.