!

\
...

JSC-19448

I’

bAMGLCY RESEARCH CENTER

LIBR,RRY, NASA ,
W J P I O & YIRGfNlA
 JSC-19448
.
STS-9

IOW. SPACE TR~~POR?ATIOWSYST

MISSION REPORT

nager, Shuttle Rata

and Evaluatlon Office

4--

/-

D 0JOHNSON
~ V ~ Be ~ ~ SPACE CENTER
MOUSTOM, TEXAS 77058
January 1984
 TA8lE OF CONTENTS

i
 ..

I ~ ~ MISSION OBJECTIVES
I ~ T R O D U E TAND

The STS-9 National Space T r ~ n s p o r t a t i o nSystems Program Mission Report contains a summary
j o r a c t i v i t i e s and ace ents o f t h i s f i r s t Spacelab mission using Orbiter
02. The vehicle on t h e STS-5 missfon. The s i g n i f i c a n t configura-
t i o n differences incorpora r i o r t o STS-9 dnclude t h e f i r s t use o f the 3 substack f u e l
. ce)11s, t h e use o f 5 cry0 tanks sets and t h e addition o f d galley and crew sleep stations.
These differences cmbfned w i t h t h e Spacelab payload resulted i n the heavl'ast landing
fght y e t flown. This report also summarizes the problems t h a t occurred, as well as
providing a problem tracking l i s t o f a l l s i g n i f i c a n t anomalfes t h a t occurred during the
m i ssi on.
The primary objective o f t h i s f l i g h t successfully conduct v e r i f i c a t i o n f l i g h t t e s t s
(VFT's) o f Spacetab as an operatfanal n t o f t h e Space Transportation System and w i t h i n
remaining t i m e l i n e constrajnts t o con ormal s c i e n t i f i c Spacelab operations.

The as-flwn time1 e f o r t h e STS-9 Spacelab f l i g h t i s shown i n gure 1 a t the back of

the report. The s uence o f events f o r t h i s STS-9 f l i g h t i s sh i n t a b l e I. The
problem track 1 ng 1 t s f o r t h e launch vehicle, Orbiter, and Spa ab are contained i n
table 11, also a t t h e back of the report.
This report w i l l contain only a b r i e f summary o f t h e s c i e n t i f i c r e s u l t s with t h e George
r s h a l l Space F l i g h t Center publishing a more detailed evaluation o f each experiment.

f 1 i g h t o f the E u r ~ ~ @ ~ ~ ~b d~I tpSpace1 ~ ~ ab,

~ - ~ ~ @ ~ ~ y
3, a t ~ ~ : 5 G.m.tc ~ ~ ' 91~ a.mu
~ : (l(O:59:59 ~ ec5.t.)
~ from
a, and landed a t Edwards Mr Force sc?, Califarfiia, on
m. P.s*t. This F1Jqht ws l a n the most northern
U. S. m m e d flight, The 6- ew Cor this Spacelab
oaauts and two non-
foreign person t

t ~ h ~ R PRd.,
.
oung, ~
ParkerB Phd.,
~ e r a~d ~U l f ~ ~ r b o ~Phd.
~ ~
d , Payload Specialists.
~ n

wided i n t o two teams, red and blue, @ n a b i i ~two g 12-hour work

maximizing the s c i e n t i f l c data gathering from t h e 73 experi-
n t s on board Spacelab. This m d e o f operation was very successful as indicated by the
vast amount o f s c i e n t i f l c data collected and the successful c p l e t i o n o f a l l 94 planned
f l i g h t t e s t objectives.
#o 1aunch c m f t c r i t e r l a r e violated and only t ~ minor
o prablms occurred durfng t h e
; ~ ~ e v netther
@ r ~ had any act on leunch operations. %e ascent phase was
n m i n a l w i t h the vehfcle heilng fnser i n t o 3 135 mb. c i r c u l a r o r b i t , as planned.
Spacelab ~ c t i w ~ was ~ i fa~~i t i a on t ~time
~ and a l l xpeplm@~tsystems operate
thus causing no $ ~ ~ t t o~backup ~ ~ r On a ppnrently teaperat ure-re1 ated problem
h ~ systems.
occurred i n the ~ e ~ Q at c@ q u i s i t i o n u n i t (RWU) 21. Th s u n i t 5ewes a l l NA
on t h e p a l l e t and the h o r i ~ o nsensor. Analysis d u r i n t h e mission suggest
en the fresn f l u f d t ~ ~ ~ r and ~ tth eu MU
~ e1 pPoblerPi, ~ U ~ S ~ ~ t l ~
h t ~ ~ @ r n t uaboutr ~ s 22" E resulted i n problem-free ~ ~ ~ a t i ~ n .

1
 LE 1.- STS-9 SEQUENCE OF EWENTS
Actual
Event

332:15:55:09
332:15:59:32.6
332: 15: 59: 53.4
332:15:59:59.991
332: 16:OO: 28.2
332: 16 :00:51 e 4
&percent thrust (engine 3) 332: 16:OI :OL. 3
332: 16: 02: 06.99
322: 16~07 :27,2
332:16:08:29.195
332: 16 :08:47
332:16:10:29.4
332: 16:11:33.2
332: 16:13: 12
332:16:40:37.4
OMS-2 cutoff 3 3 m ~ ~ : i a . g
332:20:31
334:Oa :11
335 :02: 30
339:H8:25

342: 22:46:5%1
342:22: 52: 00.2
342:22 :54:36.5

~42:23:~a:3$
842:23: 59: 18.7
/

2
 r r~~uir~@ durlnq
n t s experiment operations were about 1.0 t o 1.5 kW below
preflight predicted levels. Because of this lower usage, adequate consmables P
extend the mission f o r one day and still have the necessai-y contingency reserves.
Consequently, the Spacelab mission was extended frm 9 to 10 days. During the 10-day
f l i g h t , t h e crew performed 206 attltude maneuvers and 2 orbital trim maneuvers i n support
of Sprcelab and i t s experiments.

Y
Scientifically, the Spacelab 1 mission was a grand success. Investigators i n each disci-
p l i n e have reported a h i g h percentage achievement of their objectives. The preliminary
a indicates that significant new r e s u l t s were obtained from many of the
ng the h i g h l i g h t s of the mission were t h e successful on-orbit repair
of several malfunctionfng instruments, the excel lent television coverage and voice com-
munfcations, and the many opportunities f o r repeated o r modified experiment operations.
The following summary l i s t s some of the major s c i e n t i f i c results of the mission.
Significant f i n d i n g s i n the astronomy and solar physics discipline included:
a. Keasurment of ion Emission from the Perseus c l u s t e r of galaxies and from Cygnus
c-3;
b. Measurement of X-ray l i n e emission from the supernova remnant Cassiopeia A;
c. Study of spectral varfability from galactic X-ray sources (binary system/neutron
s t a r and black hole);
d. Absorption of certain spectral ranges of the solar spectrum caused by Shuttle
outgassing: and
e. Uncertainties i n data observations of the f u l l solar spectrum caused by S h u t t l e
contamination.
Significant f i n d i n g s i n the space plasma physics discipline Included:
c
a. Vehicle charge neutralization by ~ ~ g plasma
~ ~discharge
t ~ @PD)
c arcjet cooflrmed;
b.
C.
d. Interaction of neutral gas plume with electron bem;
e. Mave mission and return electron spectra;
f. Signfficant diagnostic data i n support o f beam experiments;
9. Double layer o f ~ ~ ~ n e s lons
~ u r In
n the upper ~ t ~ o s p h detected;
@~e
h. Detai 1ed h i gh-resol tielon auroral electron distribution detected ;
i. Electron distribution due t o a c ~ e ~ e r ~operations
tor obs?rved; and
J. Two supra-them1 electron p o ~ u ? ~ t i orelevant
n~ t o understanding
auroral particle acceleration detected.
Significant findings i n the atmospheric physics and earth observations discipline included:
,/ c
a. Successful dayglow imaging;
be First use i n space of intensiffed charge-coupled devices;
C. First broadband spectrum (300-12, 800 A) of dayglow a t good spectral resolution;
d. Successful nightglow '1 Imb scans;
e. Successful collectfon o f spectral data coincident w i t h electron beam firings and
neutral gas releases;
0. Successful collection of h i g h resolution solar absorptton spectra o f the atmospheric
1imb;
0. First observatlon of carbon dioxide i n the t h e ~ s p ~ @and r ewater vapor and methane
i n the mesosphere;
h. High resolution observations of other gases;
is Discovery o f deuterium i n the upper atmosphere;
J. Determined atomic h ~ ~ d ~ overtical
g ~ n p r o f f l e (80-250 km);
k. Observed proton aurorae on day side;
1. Observed interplanetary Lyman alpha emlssions.

3
 S f g n i f i c a n t 1t f e sciences Findings included:
a
t l o n s o f increased r e l i a n c e upon v i s i o n f o r o r i e n t a t i o n i n space;
provocat~v@ testfng ~ ~ ~ @p a rt sf a l f o r Study o f space adaptation syndrome;
c. E a r l y and s i g n i f i c a n t adaptatJon f o r ss d i s c r i m i n a t ~ o nobserved;
d. Fungus maintained circadian growth cycle i n mfcrogravity;
e, I n t e r e s t i n g c a l o r l c nystagmus results; and
f. Successful performance o f on-orbit phase o f experiments dependent on p o s t f l i g h t
baseline data collectfon.
S i g n i f i c a n t materials science findings included:

a. Successful ver i o n o f material science double rack a c t i v i t i e s ;

b. First silicon m r y s t a l growth i n space;
C. C o n f ~ ~ a t ~oQ n ngoni convection e f f e c t i n space; and
d. Suggestive res n f l u i d physics.
The G m n d a r and P i l o t , who spent t h e i r s h i f t s on t h e f l i g h t deck supporting Spacelab
operations, also exposed about 9000 f r a B o f f i l m i n a u ~ - t ~ ~ - w i n d ophotographic
w act-
t i v i ties.
l e t i o n o f planned and extended Spacelab a c t i v i t i e s , the Spacelab was c
d stowage p r @ p ~ ~ ~wwe n ~ f o r entry.
t ~ obegun
lanned landing time, GBC (general
er, GPC-2 also failed. A t t m p t s t o b r f n g --..-. ..
Bwn for the r e s t o f the mdssfon.
“I

~~~~~

ted t h a t mimy ~ ~ ~ Rad occurred,

~ r ~ ~ i ~;n n

I *!

@ r was
f the deorbit ~ ~ e u v which

s@ a t 342:23:47:24 G.m.t. The r o l l o u t

required 8,456 feet.
out 6 1/2 minutes a f t e r l a ~ $ i n g *NU-X because of an underspeed
u t 11 ~ i ~ a fut e r~ t~~~~ ~ s t u r e t y shut down because o f

.‘

4
 The degr-.e o f achiev n t o f s c i e n t i f i c objectives i s evidence o f a successful payload
integration. The s c i e n t i f i c p o r t i o n o f t h e SL-1 mission shows a hfgh degree! o f objec-
t i v e s accomplished. A “quick-look“ assessment by t h e s c i e n t i s t s indicate t h e following
percent t\ccomplishment; however, the s c i e n t i f i c success car1 only be completely determined
a f t e r a l l collected data are evaluated.
i
I n t h e d i s c i p l f n e o f l i f e scfences, 11 o f 16 experiments were 100-percent successful, I
and the other f i v e achieved 50 t o 90 percent o f t h e f r planned objectives. !
i
The astronomy and solar physics experiments d i s c i p l i n e i n d i c a t e 100-percent success w i t h I
four of s i x experiments and 95 percent with another. The s i x t h experiment, 1NA008, has i
not been assessed a t t h i s tine. 3

The plasma physics d i s c i p l i n e indicates 100-percent success with one experiment and
. 80 t o 90 percent with the other four.

The atmospheric physics and earth observatfon d i s c i p l i n e experienced 75 t o 100-percent

Success with f i v e experiments. The other one indicated l i m i t e d success because o f the
launch s l i p t o November 28, 1983.
Five materials processing experiments, including t h e tribology, had 100-percent successful t
accompli shinent o f objectfves. The remaining r e processed i n 1ES300. Wfthin t h a t ’8

f a c i l i t y (materials science double rack), t h radient heating f a c i l i t y experiments and 9

f l u i d physics module experiments e r e 1 0 0 ~ ~ e r c e nsuccessful
t and the isothermal heating
f a c i l i t y experiments and m i r r o r heating f a c i l i t y experiments achieved 50 percent and 60
E
percent, respectively.
The ESA f a c i l i t y 1ES303 ( ~ ~ ~ @science
~ i a dwble ~ s rack) stapt d Q p ~ r ~ ~ i oonn sday 2 a A
was very successful i n operating t h e f l u i d physics modu?a and the gradient heat’irog f a c i l -
f t y ; howeverp t h e isothermal heating f a c i l i t y and the m l r r o r heatdng facility f a l l e d on
dqy 3 due t o power supply problems. The mlrror ~ ~ a f a ~c i l ii t y ~wasg l a t e r restored t o ‘
operation by crew action.
ESA experiments 1ES020 (passive u n i t ) and 1ES022 (very wide f j e l d camera) were both
successfully i n s t a l l e d and operated from t h e s c i e n t i f i c a i r l o c k on days 2 and 5, respec-
tively.
v ~ sensing) began operations on day 3 and operated
ESA experiment 034 ~ m i c r o ~ aremote
successfully i n a passive mode, but u l d not function i n an a c t i v e mode.
w
INS002 (SEPAC) operations began on day 0 and were successfully conducted throughout the
mission except f o r the f a i l u r e o f t h e EBA (electron beam assembly) t o operate i n a high-
power beam mode.
rn
Even though experfmnt INS003 (AEPI) had t o remain locked i n position, Orbiter a t t i t u d e
pointing enabled 80 percent o f the data c o f l e c t f o n objectives t o be achieved.
,
VEHICLE ASSESSKtdT
SOLID ROCKET BOOSTERS
The SRB ( s o l i d rocket booster) a f t s k i r t shoe shims from a l l four north posts and from
one south post were released during t h e e a r l y phases of l i f t - o f f . ~ m p ~ o i ~n bonding
~ ~ n t
i s being pursued.

5
I :
 .I . . .

The performance of t h e SR ' s ( s o l i d rocket motors) was t h in the specification

lirarftc;. Quick-look e v a ~ u a t i o nsh s t h a t head pressures and propellant burn r a t e s were
t o t h a t p r ~ d ~ c t ef odr both mtors. SI: t h r u s t imbalance bet en the two motors
was w i t h i n t h e a l 1 w e d tolerance. Evaluatlon shwed t h a t t h e a c t i o n times were about 2.1
and 0.3 seconds e a r l i e r than predicted f o r t h e left-hand and right-hand SRM's, respectively.
Available data shws t h a t t SR@ electronics and instrumentation systems functioned
s a t i s f a c t o r i l y . A11 SRB po r from the Orblter WMSwithin specification, the r a t e gyro
performance was as expected, and the I E A ( f nstrwnentation-electronics assembly) / N U
c o n t r o l l e r functioneti properly on both SRB's.
A l l four ' i g n i t i o n PIC'S (pyrotechnics i n i t i a t o r cartridges) charged and f i r e d normally and
a l l 24 P I C ' S associated w i t h separation functfons performed s a t i s f a c t o r i 7y. The left-hand
SRB thermal c u r t a i n k c a m i n e f f e c t i v e a t about 206 seconds, and heat loads were similar.
t o those seen on previous f l i g h t s ( t a b l e KIa). Recovery b a t t e r y voltages, currents, and
tempera tures were normal.
The decelerator subsystems on both SRB's performed normally and a l l parachutes were recov-
ered. One parachute had severe d ge t o two gores. Six o f e i g h t aft-booster-separation-
motor-nozzle aero-heatln -shfeld r e t a i n e r r i n g s Here found mfssing ( f o u r on the l e f t SRB
and two on t h e r i g h t SRB! ( t a b l e IIa). Physical evidence indicates t h a t the r i n g fasteners
f a i l e d during descent and t h a t t h e r i n g s were l o s t a t water Impact. The flashing l i g h t s
and RF beacons p e r f o m d normally.

EXTERNAL TANK
t s met w i t h no LCC (launch c m i t c r i t e r i a ) violations. ET
A11 prelaunch r ~ u i r ~ n were
i o nentry were as predicted and impact was withfn the f o o t -
(external tank) s ~ p ~ r ~ t and
ent was- as @ ~f t h only
w ~ minor ~
i e e / f r o s~t t ~ ~
vero p r t o r t o f l i ~ h t . B.11 01 ~ ~ p ~ r a ~ ~ o n ~ l
d ~ ~ ~ ~wfths the~exception
~ ~ o f tthe onse-cone~ ~ ~ y
A i~~~~~~~ o f f scale. Nose-cone purge w2s main-
king t e s t ~ x ~ @ r j @ n(table
ce KEa).

The SSHE (Space Shuttle main engines) prestart, s t a r t , mainstage and c u t o f f performances
were a l l goad. The HPOTP (high pressur oxidizer turbo pump) and HPFTP (high pressure
f u e l turbo pump) t u r b i n e tenpet-atures r e close t o predfcted. The main engine 1 LPOTP
(low pressure oxfdize turbo pmp) discharge pressure channel B d r i f t e d upward t o 600 psia
a t 330 seconds. ?his as probably an instrumentation e r r o r ( t a b l e Ira).
e was very satisfactory during the prelaunch and launch
.
s t a t e operations, and no une
.
are o r s o f k a r e f a t l u r e s experienced. Closed-loop operation
Wo unexpected o s c i l l a t i o n s occurred during steady-
overshoots occurr@dduring t h r o t t l i n g operations.
XM ~ R ~ P U L S KSVSTE
0~
Liqufd oxygen and I f q u i d ~ y d r Q propellant
~ ~ n loading was completed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y . Purge
requirements p r i o r t o and during loading r e metc A f t c o ~ p a r t m ~ n hazardous
t gas concen-
well & t h i n l i m i t s . There s evidetPce o f ~ ! ~ ~ ~ oleakage
g e n a t the T-0
n ~ dthe redline limit by manual operation o f
as ~ i n t ~ i below
sh valve (table ITa)e P ~ o ~ ~precondi~ l a tionjng
~ t was satisfac-
tory; all i n t e r f a c e pressures and t peratures were met and a l l SSME prestart requirements
r e satisfied.

6
The engine s t a r t buildups and t r a n s i t i o n s t o mainstage were normal. Engfne operation
and performance d u r i n ge appeared satisfactory. During steady-state performance,
ET/ORB (Orbiter) pres temperatures, and O ~ $ / S S ~ Epressures and temperatures
satisfied interface r ts. Qufck-100 e r a t i o and t h r u s t values from t h e
f l i g h t Indicate repea i n e perfonnanc r - l e v e l t h r o t t l i n g operation appeared
normal. Engine shutd atisfactory. urred approximately 1.0 second l a t e r
than predicted.

The s t i c k i n g closed of the gaseous hydrogen flow control valve no. 1, which f a i l e d t o
respond t o 13 o f 16 commands from T+10 t o T+375 seconds remains under investigation
(table IIa). However, s a t i s f a c t o r y tank p r e s s u r i m t i o n was maintained throughout t h e
required time period.
The l i q u i d owgen ullage pressure slump a t T+30 seconds t o 17.5 psid (waiver l i m i t i s
18.3 psid) continues t o be investigated. The problem can be reconstructed. A new waiver
l i m i t w i l l be proposed f o r f u t u r e f l i g h t s ( t a b l e I I a ) .

7
 SPACE^^ SYSTEM PERFOR
The SL-1 (Spacelab-l anission) was t h e f i r s t of two f l i g h t s comprising t h e Spacelab VFT
( V e r i f i c a t i o n F l i g h t Test) P r ~ ~ r ~ m
The
. Spacelab-l c o n f ~ ~ u r a t i oconsisted
n o f an i n t e r -
connected Spacelab t r a n s f e r tunnel, long module, and s i n g l e pal:&. CPSE i c
support equipment) included the S M M (Spacelab window adapter assembly), SAL ( s c i e n t i f i c
airlock), and an aft-end cone-mounted viewport assembly. The Spacelab-l configuration,
included experiment hardware i n t h e module and on the p a l l e t representing f i v e broad areas
o f investigation. Also included throughout t h e configuration was hardware c m p r i s i n g t h e
Spacelab-1 VFI ( V e r i f i c a t i o n F l i g h t I ~ s t ~ n t a t i o system
n9 t o provide f o r t h e a c q u i s i t i o n
o f additional data required t o a c c m p l i s h t h e objectives o f t h e VFT Program. The mission
duration was extended an additional day because t h e expenditure o f consumables was less
than predicted, providing t h e opportunity f o r addittonal Spacelab v e r i f i c a t i o n and
experiment act iv i t i es.
All SL-1 VFT functional objectives are believed t o have been performed i n accordance w i t h
t h e t i m e l i n e and f l i g h t procedures. A procedural e r r o r i n t h e a c t i v a t i o n o f t h e V F I o r b i t
mode, and a r e a l - t f m @..cision t o cycle power t o t h e VFI system during a 27-hour period o f
t h e f l i g h t did r e s u l t i n t h e loss o f some YFI data ( o r i g i n a l l y planned t o be acquired
throughout t h e o r b i t a l phase o f t h e mission); however, no impact t o VFT evaluation objec-
t i v e s i s expected from t h i s loss o f data.
With t h e exception o f a minor number o f anomalies, t h e Spacelab system operated satisfac-
t o r i l y t o support t h e secondary objective o f t h e mission t h a t was t o obtain valuable
s c l e n t i f i c , appl kat?ons, an4 t e c h n o l o g data from t h e j o i n t United States and European
ry ~ ~ y l o aand d t o ~ ~ 0 n $ t r t ~o t hee ~user c nity, t h e broad c a p a b i l i t y
l e ~I I b contains a compilation o f Spacelab system
s c t a n t f f i c r e s ~ a r f a~b ~
the ~ ~ ~ f14ght.
c ~ The~ problems a ~ are -described
~ i n subseguent sections

The Spacelab ECLS ( ~ n ~ ~ r Q ~ ~ t hema? control system and

pay1oad f nterfac gni f i c a n t ECLSltheml-re1 ated
anmal ies occurr
Structural Subsystm
A l l low-frequency accelerometers were functional and y i e l d i n g measurements w i t h i n t h e
’ predicted range. The l a t e r a l ( V 9 accelerations a t launch w r e lw, consistent w i t h a
t r i c a l SRS t h r u s t profiles. The frequency content, evaluated on t h e basis o f shock
spectrum c ~ p ason, ~ i was consistent t h p r e f l i g h t predlctions. e

Vibration and acoustic masur n t s were well w i t h i n t h e measurement range and w i t h i n

e n ~ i r o n ~ ~ npredictions.
tal V

I n general, t h e ~ e a $ u sr t~r a~i n l e v e l s were 1 I) and w i t ~ i nt h e predicted ranges.

e SWAA was us& ~ x t ~ n s during
i ~ ~ the
~ y mission t o support periment 33 photographic
operations, A I I these o p ~ r a ~ ~ oM@re
n s CO~dMcted~ i t ~ o incident.
u t
rfomance during SL-l was tandin^ din^. The SAL supported both eltperimnt 20
and experiment 22 operations i n accordance wfth t h e mfssion tineline. The S i t was also
operated during t h e c o l d t e s t arci t h e hot. t e s t as p a r t o f t h e VFP. A l l mechanisms were
operated successful ly.
The performance of both v p o r t s (one i n t h e SWAA and one i n the aft-end cone) was nominal
throughout the mission. o u t e r cover l a t c h and r o t a t i o n mechanisms operated without
i n c i d e n t and t h e o p t i c a l q u a l i t y o f the triple-layer glass was demonstrated by l i v e TV
downlink p i c t u r e s o f the p a l l e t taken through the aft-end-cone viewport.
Camand and Data b n a g m n t System
Software Assessment: The Spacelab software i n the experiment computer and s u b s y s t m
computer functioned n w d n a l l y w i t h only minor problems during the mission, An ECOS
( e x p e r i w n t computer o p e r a t i n g system) c r a s h was experienced; however, t h i s c r a s h only
occurred as a result of a patch t h a t was i n s e r t e d t o attempt t o work around the RAU 21
problem and a c q u i r e data. Several other patches were made t o the ECOS t o help s o l v e the
RBU 21 problem and these patches worked successfully. A l l patches, including the patch
that caused the ECOS crash, were v e r i f i e d a t the HSFC Software Development F a c i l i t y . The
v e r i f i c a t i o n o f the patch which caused the ECOS c r a s h was limited by the i n a b i l i t y t o
d e f i n e the RlUl 21 f a i l u r e c h a r a c t e r i s t j c s f o r a l l mission c o n f i g u r a t i o n s i n real-time.
An SCOS (subsystem computer o p e r a t i n g systemj e r r o r message f s under i n v e s t i g a t j o n because
t h e e r r o r t h e o r e t f c a l i y should have detected by STS ground o r uplink systems. The
SCOS reported r e c e i v i n g a n " I n v a l i d C m n d . " One patch was made t o SCO
addf t i o n a l error-support d a t a shoul S r e p o r t receiving another "Invalid
SCOS did not report such a n e r r o r durfng the remainder o f the mission, and the problem
remains under i n v e s t i g a t i o n .

Subsystem Hardware: Ws a n i n t e g r a t e d subsyst , the CDHS (command and d a t a management

subsystem) p e r ~ o ~ di n a l l y . CCTW (closed c i r c u i t t e l e v i s i o n ) video was p a r t i c u l a r l y
o u t s t a n ~ ~ n ~TWQ
. an ies occurred, b u t i n both cases operational wrkarounds were
accompl ished.
The MDRR (high d a t a r a t e r e c o r d e r ) ~ ~ ~ a experfenced r @ ~ ~an ~electromechanical
y probfem
r e s u l t i n g I n e x c e s s i v e drag i n the tape d r j v e , and the drag caused an overcurrent condi-
t i o n i n the d r i v e motor ( t a b l e Xlb). The c o n d i t i o n was c l e a r e d by g ~ o ~ n d ~ ~ ~ v ree al lo- ~ e d
time procedures. The a n ~ d ~i d not ~ yrecur.
The second anomaly was with WAU 21 (table fIb). The d a t a a c q u i s i t i o n f u n c t i o n s o f thls
RAU were lost when the freon loop coldplate t m t p e r a t u r e (on which the RAU was mounted)
exceeded 2 2 O C. Ihe loss o f these Functions i m p a c ~ ~NASA d p a ~ l e t - m o u ~experiments
~@~ and
mi ssion-dependent @ ~ u i ~ ~~ r kn a tr o~ u n ~were
s imp1 anent ?d, including ECOS patches and
power management t o reduce h e a t induced intG the f r e o n l r o p , and experiment o p e r a t i o n s
continued i n a degraded mode.

The EPOS ( e l e c t r f c a l power d i s t r l b u t i o n system) performed nominally throughout t h e

mission. SL-I power consumption was ~ p p r o x ~ m a ~ 1.2 e l y kW 1 er t h a n predicted; however,
Spacelab subsystem c o n s ~ ~ was ~ ~ nearly
o n a t the l e v e l predicted, P a r t i
for t h e less-than-predicted power cansimption a r e t h a t some experiments
as much as o r ~ g i n ~ t~ ~l ym ~ l and i n h~e a~t e r duty c y c l e s
the cold test. hand, some experim@nt$ a s
than predicted p

9
 4
I

Habitabil i t x
. The Spacelab crew systems interfaces functioned well w i t h no s i g n i f i c a n t c r w c o m n t s
reported. The general architecture, c o l o r u t i 1 i z a t i o n and subsystem work stations
appeared satisfactory.

modul e was sat is f act ory .

The Orbiter f o o t r e s t r a i n t s were q u i t e effective. Handrail placement throughout t h e

The area l i g h t i n g was very good. The l i g h t l e v e l s were reduced dirring a p o r t i o n o f t h e

mission by t u r n i n g o f f selected l i g h t s t o help reduce freon loop heat load i n support o f
RAU 21 workarounds. Na s i g n i f i c a n t impact on operetions was noted.
Communications using t h e Spacelab intercomsystem eild t h e wlreless headsets were satis-
factory. Background noise d i d not a f f e c t communications, except when e q u i p e n t t h a t was
known premfssion t o be above specified noise values was operated. To improve operational
efficiency, the f l i g h t crew has recommended revisions be made t o t h e Spacelab i.itercom-
munfcations system. This r e v i s i o n would allow monitoring and operational f l e x i b i l i t j .
nriation would provide a functional c a p a b i l i t y s i m i l a r t o the present Orbiter
system. The Spacelab Program i s reviewing t h e recommendation.

Safety Assessment
A l l Spacelab caution and warning, and emergency parameters remained w i t h i n t h e i r t i n i t s
except f o r planned a c t i v i t i e s . During changeout o f t h e LiOH canisters, t h e cabin fan
d i f f e r e n t i a l pressure exceeded the lower 1i m i t. *en manually c o n t r o l l i n g t h e atmosphere
t o obtain nitrogen regulator o ~ e r a ~ ~ othe n , SL-1 oxygen and n i t r o g t n f l o w rates e r e
exceeded; also, t h e Orbiter cab'ln d e l t a p/dette t measurmnent i n d i c a t i o n exceeded i t s
l i m i t during t h i s operation.

F1 l g h t I ~ ~ t r ~ ~ n t a ~ ~ o n
~ ~ ~ o ~ a nwas
The f l i g h t instrumentation $ u ~ s y s pt e c esatisfactory. One anmaly was
observed. The VFI tape recorder d i d not go i n t o the record mode when cmdnded t o QO
so v i a t h e RAU by a ground command. H ever, i t d i d function normally v i a the control
nds. There was no impact t o VFT data acquisition requirements on orbit.
During t h e descent phase, only the f i r s t 7 minutes o f the required descent data were
recorded. The cause and impact o f t h e loss o f these data i s being assessed.
ORB1 TER/SPACELAB INTER FACES
The vehicle performance i n v o l v i n g t h e SpacelabjOrbiter e l e c t r i c a l , f l u i d , and mechanical
fnterfaces was excellent w i t h only one s f g n i f t c a n t an ly. On t w occasions, t h e
Spacelab S M S (Subsystem Computer Operating System) rejected MCC opl inked HPRR (high data
r a t e recorder) "standby" conunands its i n v a l i d ( t a b l e I I c ) .
c

ORBITER
The overall p e r f o m n c ? o f t h e Orblter was satisfactory. A discussion o f the s i g n i f i c a n t
anomalies I s contained i n t h e following paragraphs. A complete l i s t o f t h e Orbiter f l i g h t
anomalies are contained i n t a b l e IIc.

/'
 During relaunch operations, the left-hand (orbital ~ n @ u v @ r i nsyst
g
(Backup\ pitch actuator failed t o respond p crly i n the OFPS profile t e
ry actu&tor, the backup actuator was dls-
Ire secondary actuator was activated and the
backup actuator was disabled f o r the
inder o f the m i ss
Water Tank B Quantity Increase Greater Than fuel Cell &iter Output
Beginning a t about 334:12:00 G.rn.t., the flow rate f r t h e fuel c e l l s t o water tank B was
20 cclrnin greater than that calculated based on fuel-
Analysis o f the water dump profiles Indicated t h a t an excesslve amount of gaseous hydrogen
was entrained i n the water output the fuel cells. Successful management o f the supply
and potable water systems was imp1
S-Band Antenna System Problem
Beginning a t about 338:21:16 G.rn.t., several S-Band r r peaks (up t o 16W)
curred briefly (minutes) and randmly f o r t
en the upper quad ~ n t e n ~ were
a s selected; h
nificantly affected ~ h ~ the ~mission.
~ ~ ~ ~ u t

A t 337:21:30 G.rnotrs the S lock. ~ ~data ~ l

RSf eo PA I , the two-
trader of t h mission.

Shortly a f t e r landing a t 342:23:54:14 G.mrt.. MU-1 p r ~ ~ t u r @s lh yu t down because o f an

conditton. A t 3 2:23:58:38 6.rn.t.. AFO-2 also s h u t dwn because o f an under-
U-3 was s h u t down nomi nal ly. Postfl D ght i pection r ~ v ~ a l eextensive
d damage
i n i t y of these APU’s. An investigation t e has been organized t o deternine
the cause o f these failures.
GPC-1 And GPC-2 Failed
A t 342:11:10:21 G,m.t. during computer reconflguratfon f o r entry, GPC-1, (OPS 2) failed.
Shortly th@reafter a t 342:11:16:45 G.m.t.* GPC-2 (OPS 2) also falled. All a t t
bring GPC-1 back on line were unsuccessful.
ory dump fndfcated some ry a1terietions had occurred.
lned i n OPS 3 and was us n t set uith GPC-3
and ~ ~ ~ $ ~A tn Orbiter
g . now wheel 2:11:16:45 G.rn.t.)

ne Unit NO. 1 Failed

F

342:16:42:31 G.rn.t. an
‘Ich indfcated t h a t IW-1 .
342:17:03:46 Gem.t., f a u l t messages w@rerecelved
The BITE ( b u i l t in t e s t equipment) p
e failure t o the dc/dc no. 1 card i n the IPW-1 power supply. IMU-1 was po
I
I
ib
and there was no mission impact.

. i

11
 Brake Damage
The i n f t i a l Orbiter t ilng o p a t i o n from the Edwards Alr Force Base runway
by a locked r i g h t out ard brake. Fleld site inspection revealed that the
liner on the no. 3 rotor was damaged. All four brakes bere r ved and returned t o the
vendor f o r a detailed inspection and fallure malysls.
Reaction Control System R30 Thruster leiiked
A t 335:10:36:58 G.m.t., the reaction control system primary thruster R3D incurred an oxi-
dizer leak and was deselected. After 113 hours, the leak had stopped; and, alehoujh the
nozzle temperature rose above t h e hot-fire redline value of 65' F, the thruster was not
reselected and there as no impact t o the mission.
AERODYNMICS
0.25 Hertz Oscillation During Entry
On a l l previous f l i g h t s i n the region betwen' ch 2 and 1, a small amplitude lateral/
directional oscillatory motion has been presen One explanatfon of the cause was
t r i c a l flow separation i n phase w i t h the rudder inputs due t o the large speedbrake
To test t h i s theory on STS-9, a s p @ ~ ~ r areduction,
k@ whir' theoretfcally should
opped the l l w f t cycle was input B STS-9 f l i b h f data s ~ ~ t h
@a t dthe
levels o f o $ c i l l a t i ~were
~ as high or higher than those observed on previous flights.
Also the elevon moved u 2* rwe than was ~ ~ @ which
~t hiu s ~reduced
~ @ the atleron
$
@ ~ ~ ~ due t o etlcvon position
cttan f n a ~ ? ~~~~~t~~~~~~~
loss in a ~ e f ~~ @ @ ~ ~durfng
~~ v STS-4
e ~~ @ ~ ~ SI'S-8 flights i s n
~h~~~~~
Eo be t h e cause o f the ~ ~ c i l l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .

. ..

12
 m
C
0
4
U
a
0

3
84
rl

E
0.

E
I C
I
I

i tL.

. 1
I
I
P
m
W

1 C
-4
L

21 4
0
al
w Q
L)
3

I e
I
I
I
E
E
I
f
! s

13
.

0 cn 0 m
FI F! % r!
..
2
N
m
..
\E
c.l

N
m
..
22
N
..
2
N
CCI F
(c,
m
m
VI

U
.
I---

.
I
-.

14
n

15
Y

.
.L-
.I.

w..
c.l

5!
.
.
I
rl
m
w
z!c

16 i
 I

/I

.
-'.

17
 .
Q

18
 s

,/'
."

19
..
2
..
2
el
..
N
..
rd
m (*( M
m m m

20
 --I-- ------ e

w
4
YI
cy

E
p.
P
z
@a
4
t
v)

21
 4

. % ..
In
a-.

8
..
m

u
f-
P
W

Q
9 .
m3:
61
3 U
a
*
0
N
.
.
.
N
1 N
N
. .
0
N
.j
hl
u1
Ev
\9
N

22
 ..
h
\

m
?!
N
d
c)

n
w
u
2n

n
cz
i
I
i
n
d
E0

PI
hl
.
0
N
OI
N 8 M
m
*
N
m
m
F?
U
m

23
,

24
/ ’
c

I t 1I
IYl I

25
26
M
.-

-
i

-F
*
_
!
2
y.
+J
c
0
CJ
v
j:
!

. .

i
I
n
N
2

3nia

27
 \

c Ill 1

.. L

./
.,I ,.
I

28
 -..

I'

29
..
. .
 4

,. .- _-- t
a

'A

I . .,

31

.. -
I,
 ‘ *
Ill I
. .

,
/‘

.
..-I
~ .-

- ... .

.
I
U

32
 J .
I .

' * .
i

33

,
R

34
 I

1 -

..
VI
w
c
0
2

35
I

Ill I

r
Y

id

. .

36
 J

..
m
W
c
3
z

37
4
HI I
 Is
v)
e

'.

..
/' UI
c
W
0
z

40
 I .

n
15.
E.,
.
E-
blo

41
 I
i
/

E
(0
c
Q.

t
I

_-. --.

..
c1
w
I-
O
L

42
 QE
ALI

b
__ --

---'--'--
A
,

. -

43

.' .I
 i
I \

44
 .

,-

,
I

I ’

45

..
 I,
I'
,i
I
. :

A
U
6J
J
.c
.-
0
0
v
E
m
c
n
h
cs
.
r
3r
.c
i,
u
ro

L
0
I! E
3
0
' ,
' ,,

46

I
 i I .f' I ,"

_IJ_I__
e

,*-

. I

.'*.

D1

LVlP

c
a '.
Y i

N
v)
..
ul
W
c
0
z

47
 ,

c * m
,

Fk
Pz:
y1.4

h
U
.
cu
a
E
.I-
C,
E
0
0
v

E
lu
c
n
h
c,
c
>
.
r
c,
0
m
zL
u

..

’ /
I ,
 ,

..
UI
W
c
O
2
I
I

49

I
 h

F3
E
w
4,
E
0
V
v

E
tu
c
n.
3
.c
>

*.
v1
W
I-
O
z

50
I

CI
U
01
J
c
c
CI
e
0
U
Y

c
UJ
c
p.

.3
Y

51
\
..
Y
I

i€L
u

.
I
r(

(u
L
J
cn
iE
 .

I
-_

_- i

53
 I I II
lei I

h
.
'D
a,
J
E
c
44
E
0
V
U

E
1z1
P
ca.
3
.
I-
>
c
u
0
rcI

EL
0

E
c
ccI
4
H
5
QJ
L
I
En
z

54
 N

q--
I -

,-

0
.A
LL
!. VI
a

,,/

*A.

.I '

55
 , ,.J
,
I

L
3

,
I .

r -

m
w
t
0
2

56
 J .
I .
,/'

ORIGINAL
OE POOR

. -

_ . ---

57
 . .
", 1

I
..

.- -

n
 I

' i
w
1
I

,-

c5
-0
m
a
K
. -
.r
c, *
c
0
u
-0

a
E * ' .
L
u

,1 '
c

/.-'

f
59

I
---- _--_.- I

e-

/
 .. 8
, . .
. . . .
r
. .

Ill I

II

!
I
i
' *

. I , ,
. .

I
, ."
I'

61
!
 I

E
I I
--

. I

h
.
-u
aJ
J
C
w-
U
c
I 0
P
In
0
u
P
E
P
" m
P
a.

P
d

E'-
?

62
 i ! .

63

I
 I
WI

036

64
t

ii

65