Download complete document
FD4 MMT Crew Summary 2
The MMT met today to discuss mission progress, review the FD 2 inspection and FD 3 RPM photography, and discuss the Port OMS Pod blanket. As expected preflight, the MMT agreed with the recommendation to add two mission extension days and an EVA 4 to accomplish additional ISS tasks. The team appreciates your hard work and enjoyed following your progress today with the S3/S4 truss install and EVA 1.
Imagery/Debris Assessment Team:
The imagery and debris assessment teams have completed their review of the FD2 inspection data and FD3 RPM photography and have concluded that no Focused Inspection with OBSS is required. The team has reviewed all the LDRI data and cleared the RCC (starboard wing, port wing, and Nosecap) for entry.
The FD3 RPM data review has been completed and all TPS is clear for entry except for two protruding gap fillers and one tile area near the outboard edge of the port ET door which will likely be cleared tomorrow. One of these gap fillers is near the arrow head tile directly aft of the nose landing gear door and the other is on an aft tile forward of the bodyflap. Aerothermal analysis including the possible tripped flow downstream of these gap fillers continues. Based on the data obtained through FD 4, the team does not currently believe that any gap filler removal is required. A summary of the gap fillers and minor tile damage are shown in the figures below.
There are two areas where adequate data was not obtained for the TPS inspections including an area around Window 5&6 and the Right Inboard Elevon. These areas had shadows that obscured the areas of interest and additional imagery for these areas may be requested using ISS or SRMS assets.
Port OMS Pod Blanket:
The aero thermal analysis was discussed today and indicates that the entry thermal environment will result in localized temperatures inside the exposed cavity that exceed the OMS pod graphite epoxy structure certification limits. The heating is predicted to be slightly higher in this area than past flights with similar damage because the blanket extends up into the flow resulting in increased heat transfer in this cavity. The flow in this area is very difficult to model, thus certain best estimate engineering assumptions had to be applied in order to accurately model the heating.
Based on this preliminary thermal analysis and the limited test data available for this type of graphite composite structure, the MMT decided that the TPS is suspect for this area and the blanket will require a repair prior to deorbit/entry. This decision was based on the potential for thermal structural concerns only, since the team has concluded that if the blanket dislodged during entry it would not be a debris source for the rudder speedbrake.
Team 4 has been working to develop a simple method for securing the blanket to its original position. The theory is that the blanket has a structural memory and will retain whatever position it is moved to. The preliminary EVA techniques access this area via the SRMS and WIF extension. The detailed EVA techniques and robotics will be provided as soon as the team completes their procedure review. Tomorrow the MMT will discuwill be added to EVA 3 on flight day 8 or EVA 4 on flight day 10.
SRB Quick look - Preliminary data review shows nominal SRB performance and no in-flight anomalies of the hardware have been identified. Visual inspection shows no major areas of concern and post flight hardware inspections are proceeding per the standard timeline. We expect to view the SRB video of the External Tank tomorrow at the MMT. All data obtained so far indicates that ET-124 performed extremely well.
