lvron@earth.lerc.nasa.gov (Ronald E. Graham) (02/06/91)
Any confusion resulting from the posting "Firm Fred Decisions" I will take the blame for. It turns out that I had correct information, but not comprehensive information. Here is the skinny: o The SSF program is being divided into three stand-alone phases, for budget purposes: man-tended capability (MTC), permanently-manned capability (PMC), and EMCC, whatever that stands for. The term "stand- alone" I think means that each phase will be funded separately, with the results of the first being used to determine whether/for how much the subsequent phases will be funded, etc. o Solar Dynamic and FTS have been stopped, as I stated before. o The 18.75 kW power capability at MTC I mentioned previously is a number recommended for five years after beginning-of-life (BOL). At BOL, they think 37.5 kW will be achieved. o The truss is to be pre-integrated (PIT), saving mucho EVA during assembly. o Some component and acceptance testing in the Electrical Power System (EPS) is to be deleted. If anybody cares, I'll get back to you on that. o In the six-year period from fiscal 1991-96, a program cost reduction of ~$6 billion is anticipated. Posted with minimal comment by RG
sheppard@caen.engin.umich.edu (Ken Sheppardson) (02/07/91)
In article <1991Feb5.203323.14738@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov> lvron@earth.lerc.nasa.gov writes: >Any confusion resulting from the posting "Firm Fred Decisions" I will take >the blame for. It turns out that I had correct information, but not >comprehensive information. Let me just point out that the orinal list included... "o the budget is now for man-tended capability (MTC) only" "o a lab module will exist only at MTC" "o there will be no habitation module or nodes" "o no [PMC] equipment or growth planned" >Here is the skinny: > >o The SSF program is being divided into three stand-alone phases, for > budget purposes: man-tended capability (MTC), permanently-manned > capability (PMC), and EMCC, whatever that stands for. The term "stand- > alone" I think means that each phase will be funded separately, with > the results of the first being used to determine whether/for how much > the subsequent phases will be funded, etc. Hopefully this bullet will clear up any confusion resulting from the original list. There are, in fact, plans to go beyond MTC;there will, in fact, be additional lab space beyond MTC;there will be hab space and nodes;PMC is still part of the program. [ EMCC - Eight-Man Crew Capability ] >o Solar Dynamic and FTS have been stopped, as I stated before. I don't believe Solar Dynamic was part of the baseline (post-ISPDR) program to begin with, was it ? We've [almost] always used it in growth configurations beyond the baseline AC 75 kW, but since growth beyond AC hasn't been a requirement (for the last few years) was SD beyond the 'technology development' phase ? Is the $10M for solar dynamic power research set aside in the '91 budget [Source: VA/HUD/IA House-Senate Conference Report HR101-900] an increase or decrease from '90 funding ? Of course the same report lists $106.3M for FTS, so those numberse could be out-the-window by now. >o The 18.75 kW power capability at MTC I mentioned previously is a number > recommended for five years after beginning-of-life (BOL). At BOL, they > think 37.5 kW will be achieved. Is this a change from baseline ? Hasn't BOL power always been greater than the 18.75/37.5/75 kW available at MTC/PMC/AC respectively ? Do you have before/after Restructuring number to compare with? ('available' => power available at DDCU [DC/DC Conversion Unit ?] output, right ?. Actual power off the PVs is significantly greater, isn't it ? Do you happen to have the overall efficiency number ? BTW, do you happen to know how much the PVs were widened/lengthened as a result of Turbo ?) >o The truss is to be pre-integrated (PIT), saving mucho EVA during assembly. Just to avoid confusion, PIT -> Pre-Integrated Truss. Another language change: The 'Transverse Boom' shall from this date forward be refered to as the 'Transverse BEAM'. [Source: presentations given by Bensimon and Moorehead to Lenoir in late January] >o Some component and acceptance testing in the Electrical Power System (EPS) > is to be deleted. If anybody cares, I'll get back to you on that. > >o In the six-year period from fiscal 1991-96, a program cost reduction of > ~$6 billion is anticipated. > >Posted with minimal comment by RG Unsolicited comments added by: -- =============================================================================== Ken Sheppardson Email: kcs@sso.larc.nasa.gov Space Station Freedom Advanced Programs Office Phone: (804) 864-7544 NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton VA FAX: (804) 864-1975 ===============================================================================