Space Station Gyro Problem Dangerous?
mysterystevenson writes "After bringing more mass than ever before up to the ISS, one of the gyros has failed. Gyros help maintain attitude position in space; the more mass needed to be controlled, the more force that is exerted on the gyros. Now there is the danger that the Shuttle may be bringing yet more mass and starting construction while turning off another gyro, which could cause a need for thrusters to maintain attitude. The assemblies are not all constructed to be able to withstand such force and in a bad situation there could be a collapse which could affect the Shuttle and the ISS as well. Worse case could be total loss; a wise idea might be to alter the construction schedule and address the Gyro and Gyro design problems, before going forward with the introduction of more mass."
STOP MAKING ME HUNGRY!
It's only 11:00, the gyro cart won't be out for another hour!
Okay, who thought it was a good idea to put solar arrays so fragile that they can't withstand small rockets firing on a station that is equipped with those rockets? Ideally, they would just add another gyro to the December mission (which I imagine would cause the mission to be delayed for training at this late date), but apparently they don't currently have a spare. One of these gyros failed previously and the spare was installed. So someone felt that with FOUR of these gyros on the station, it was okay to have only ONE spare? Most of my customers would not accept that sparing ratio, and IANARS! I guess the best case scenario is that perhaps they can change the manner in which they plan to rewire the station to avoid taking 2 out of the 3 working gyros offline at the same time. This brings up training and procedure issues again, of course -- it takes time and practice and well-written, simulation-testing procedures to get people to do complicated jobs like this correctly, the first time. If I reverse the order of two ethernet plugs, or two variables in my code, I might need some time to find the problem later, but no one is going to be electrocuted, and no rockets will fire. :-)
This seems rather alarmist. First off, why would they risk destroying the station to preserve the attitude? It seems that letting it turn somewhat for a limited amount of time would be far better than risking its destruction to preserve its orientation at all costs.
And the time would be limited. Remember, there is conservation of angular momentum. If you are tumbling, you will need to use the thrusters to stop it in any case (gyros don't create or destroy angular momentum--if you want to get rid of some permanently, you'll need to cast off some reaction mass). But for what they do do, which is reorienting a ship by temporarily holding some angular momentum, they can be used as slowly as you want. Heck, if you weren't in a hurry you could turn the ship by hand (actually, foot) by just "walking" around the outer wall without any gyros at all.
--MarkusQ
A while ago popular science ran an article on the ISS. From what I remember (and my memory is far from perfect) the ISS has 3 gyros and originally had 3 spares. Over time the spares have been swapped in for busted originals so now there are no spares left. I'm 90% sure that's why they don't have any spares left, though my numbers may be off, they used em up and never replaced them.
There are two kinds of fool One says 'This is old therefore good' Another says 'This is new therefore better'- Dean Ing
Thank goodness they have such a renowned inertial theoritician to alert them to this problem. It's just lucky for all of us that he took time away from work adapting massage devices for use as space propulsion devices. When will NASA learn to stop relying on those empty pieces of paper that their engineers call PhD's and start listening to people who've been interviewed by their local media at some indeterminate point in the past and now maintain a wiki.
"Don't you know you're going to shock the monkey?"- Peter Gabriel
"Okay, who thought it was a good idea to put solar arrays so fragile that they can't "withstand small rockets firing on a station" that is equipped with those rockets?"
But if the attacking ships use phasers instead of rockets, the solar arrays can take it.
Where were you when the voynix came?
Or mis-quote???
"I canna change the laws of physics!"