NASA-CR-193059

NSTS-08274

STS·42 !
I
SPACE SHUTTLE
MISSION REPORT
CI NASA-CR-193059
19930016800

~~--- ~~
!

(NASA-CR-193059) ST5-42 SPACE N9.3-25989

SHUTTLE MISSION REPORT (Lockheed
"'. Engineering and Sciences Co.) 32 p
Unc 1as •

G3/16 0163511 1

l --

(" February 1992

LIBRARY COpy
MAR ~l t t992
LANGLEY RESEARCH CENTER
LIBRARY NASA
NI\SA
National Aeronautics and
HAMPTON VIRGINIA_--J

Space Administration

Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center

Houston, Texas.
 NSTS-08274

STS-42
SPACE SHUTTLE
MISSION REPORT

, ,

Approved by

Da id W. Camp
anager, Flight Data and
Evaluation Office

Prepared by
Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company
for
Flight Data and Evaluation Office
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
LYNDON B. JOHNSON SPACE CENTER
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77058
February 1992
 STS-42 Table of Contents

Title Page
INTRODUCTION . . . 1

MISSION SUMMARY 1

VEHICLE PERFORMANCE . . . . . . . . • • . • • • • •
3
SOLID ROCKET BOOSTERS/REDESIGNED SOLID ROCKET MOTORS 3
EXTERNAL TANK . . . . . . . • • • • . 5
SPACE SHUTTLE MAIN ENGINE . .....• 5
SHUTTLE RANGE SAFETY SYSTEM 6
ORBITER VEHICLE SUBSYSTEMS 6
Main Propulsion System . • . • • • • • • • 6
Reaction Control Subsystem • . . • • • 7
Orbital Maneuvering Subsystem ..•• 8
Power Reactant Storage and Distribution Subsystem 9
Fuel Cell Powerplant Subsystem • . . • • • . • • 9
Auxiliary Power Unit Subsystem . . . • • • • • • 10
Hydraulics/Water Spray Boiler Subsystem . • • • 10
Environmental Control and Life Support Subsystem 11
Smoke Detection and Fire Suppression • • 12
Airlock Support System . . . . . . • • • . • • • • • 12
Avionics and Software Subsystems . • • • 12
Communications and Tracking Subsystem • . • • 13
Operational Instrumentation. . . . • • 14
Structures and Mechanical Subsystems • 14
Aerodynamics. • • . • . . . . . • • • 15
Thermal Control Subsystem • . . . . • • 15
Thermal Interfaces and Aerothermodynamics 16
Thermal Protection Subsystem • • • . • • • • 16
GOVERNMENT FURNISHED EQUIPMENT/FLIGHT CREW EQUIPMENT • 17
PAYLOADS/EXPERIMENTS . . . . . . • . 18
SPACELAB EXPERIMENTS. . • • 19
.. " MIDDECK PAYLOADS. . . . 21
GET-AWAY SPECIAL PAYLOADS • . . . • • 21
DEVELOPMENT TEST OBJECTIVES AND DETAILED SUPPLEMENTARY 22
OBJECTIVES
DEVELOPMENT TEST OBJECTIVES . • . 22
DETAILED SUPPLEMENTARY OBJECTIVES 23
PHOTOGRAPHIC AND TELEVISION ANALYSIS • • 24

iii
.
PR!8I!OtNG PAGE 8lAN.K NOT FilMED
IAGI 1/ INTENTIONAUI 8WfI
 Table of Contents (Concluded)

List of Tables

Title Page

TABLE I - STS-42 SEQUENCE OF EVENTS 25

TABLE II - STS-42 PROBLEM TRACKING LIST 27

iv

, ....
 INTRODUCTION

The STS-42 Space Shuttle Program Mission Report contains a summary of the
vehicle subsystem operations during the forty-fifth flight of the Space Shuttle
Program and the fourteenth flight of the Orbiter vehicle Discovery (OV-103). In
addition to the Discovery vehicle, the flight vehicle consisted of an External
Tank (ET) designated as ET-52 (LWT-45); three Space Shuttle main engines
(SSME's), which were serial numbers 2026, 2022, and 2027 in positions 1, 2, and
3, respectively; and two Solid Rocket Boosters (SRB's) designated as 'BI-048.
The lightweight redesigned Solid Rocket Motors (RSRM's) installed in each one of
the SRB's were designated as 360L020A for the left SRM and 360Q020B for the
right SRM.
'" . This report satisfies the Level II Space Shuttle Program requirement, as docu-
mented in NSTS 07700, Volume VIII, Appendix E, which requires each major organ-
ization supporting the Space Shuttle Program to report the results of its
evaluation of the mission and identify all related in-flight anomalies.
The primary objective of the STS-42 mission was to complete the objectives of
the first International Microgravity Laboratory (IML-1). Secondary objectives
were to perform all operations necessary to support the requirements of the
Gelation of Sols: Applied Microgravity Research (GOSAMR), Student Experiment
81-09 (Convection in Zero Gravity), Student Experiment 83-02 (Capillary Rise of
Liquid Through Granular Porous Media), Investigation into Polymer Membrane
Processing (IPMP), Radiation Monitoring Equipment-III (RME-III), and Get-Away
Special (GAS) payloads carried on the GAS Beam Assembly.
The sequence of events for the STS-42 mission is shown in Table I, and the
official Orbiter Problem Tracking List is presented in Table II. In addition,
each Orbiter subsystem anomaly is discussed in the applicable subsystem section
of the report, and a reference to the assigned tracking number is provided.
Official ET, SRB, and SSME anomalies are also discussed in their respective
sections of the report and the MSFC-assigned tracking number is also shown.
The crew for this forty-fifth Space Shuttle flight was Ronald J. Grabe, Col.,
USAF, Commander; Steven S. Osvald, Pilot; Norman E. Thagard, M.D., Mission
Specialist 1 (Payload Commander); William F. Readdy, Mission Specialist 2; David
C. Hilmers, Col., USMC, Mission Specialist 3; Roberta L. Bondar, Ph.D, Payload
Specialist 1; and Ulf D. Merbold, Ph.D, Payload Specialist 2. STS-42 was the
third flight for the Commander, the fourth flight for Mission Specialist 1 and
Mission Specialist 3, the second flight for Payload Specialist 2, and the first
flight for the remaining three crew members.

SUMMARY

The STS-42 mission was launched at 022:14:52:32.992 G.m.t.

(9:52:32.992 a.m. e.s.t. on January 22, 1992) from launch complex 39A at KSC.
STS-42 was the first flight of the Spacelab IML-1. The launch was delayed
59 minutes 33 seconds awaiting the resolution of a fuel cell 2 hydrogen-pump
motor anomaly and also because of high readings from the KSC field mill network.
1
Approximately 7 hours 50 minutes prior to launch, a current change on ac bus 2
phases Band C occurred simultaneously with a fuel-cell hydrogen-pump
motor-condition Launch Commit Criteria (LCC) violation. About six hours later,
the phase C ac circuit breaker to the pump was cycled in an effort to gain a
better understanding of the ac current and sensor data signatures and to clear
any contamination from the circuit breaker contacts. In summary, there was no
indication of an anomaly associated with the pump performance, inverter
performance, or fuel cell performance, and as a result, the decision was made to
proceed with the countdown to launch.

All SSME, RSRM, and SRB start sequences occurred as expected and the launch
phase performance was satisfactory in all respects. First stage ascent perform-
ance was normal with SRB separation, entry, deceleration, and water impact
occurring as anticipated. The ET, main propulsion system (MPS) and Orbiter per-
formance was also normal with main engine cutoff (MECO) occurring at
510.1 seconds after lift-off. Both SRB's were successfully recovered.
Yith the successful completion of the orbital maneuvering subsystem (OMS) -2
maneuver, the Orbiter was inserted into the planned 163 nmi. circular orbit at
an inclination of 57 degrees.
A waste collection system (YCS) anomaly occurred when the crew was attempting to
reconfigure the YCS for commode use. The commode control handle became
disconnected from the commode control valve linkage and, as a result, the crew
was unable to open the YCS commode control valve. An in-flight maintenance
(IFM) procedure was uplinked and implemented by the crew, and full YCS operation
was restored. Later in the mission, the roll pin within the valve sheared on
both sides and caused the valve/shaft to rotate freely. Another IFM procedure
was performed that restored full YCS operation. The YCS remained operational
for the remainder of the mission.
At 028:21:00:19 G.m.t., reaction control subsystem (RCS) thruster L3A was
deselected by the redundancy management (RM) software because of an oxidizer
leak which was confirmed by a decrease in the thruster injector temperature.
At 029:02:40:00 G.m.t., the injector temperature began to recover, indicating
the leak had stopped. The thruster was reselected at 029:07:49 G.m.t. and was
placed in last priority. The thruster had not been fired prior to the leak and
was not fired during the remainder of the mission.
Consumables usage remained below planned levels throughout the mission and, as a
result, mission planning was changed to incorporate one additional day of flight
with landing planned for January 30, 1992, at 10:07 a.m. c.s.t.
The flight control system (FCS) checkout was satisfactorily performed at
029:13:12:27.87 G.m.t. Auxiliary power unit (APU) 2 ran for 3 m~nutes
30 seconds during the checkout, and approximately 9 lb of fuel was used. No
flight control system anomalies were noted.

Late in the mission, the crew reported what appeared to be venting from the aft
compartment. No leaks were noted until multiplexer/demultiplexer (MOM) flight
aft (FA) 4 was powered up, at which time thruster R4U was noted to have an
oxidizer leak. The thruster was deselected by the RCS RM at 030:05:04:42 G.m.t.
Spectacular pictures of the leak were documented with an onboard t e l e v i s i o n - - \
2
 camera and the leak rate was estimated to be approximately 4.8 lb/hr. The
manifold (4) was later isolated for entry. This thruster also was not fired
during the entire mission.
The RCS hot-fire test was performed at 030:10:20 G.m.t. All thrusters except
L3A and R4U were fired during the RCS hot-fire test. A decision was made to not
fire the L3A and R4U thrusters because of the leaks noted earlier in 'the
mission.
The crew completed Spacelab operations, as well as entry preparations and
stowage. The payload bay doors were satisfactorily closed at 30:12:34:56 G.m.t.
The deorbit maneuver was performed at 030:15:05:03.4 G.m.t. The maneuver was
approximately 178.2 seconds in duration and the differential velocity was
310.1 ft/sec. Entry interface occurred at 030:15:35:44 G.m.t.
Main landing gear touchdown occurred at Edwards Air Force Base concrete runway
22 at 030:16:07:17 G.m.t. Nose landing gear touchdown occurred 10 seconds later
with wheels stop at 030:16:08:16 G.m.t. Preliminary indications are that the
rollout was normal in all respects. The flight duration was 8 days 1 hour
15 minutes 43 seconds. The APU's were shut down by 030:16:24:13.5 G.m.t., and
the crew completed the required postflight reconfigurations and departed the
Orbiter landing area at 030:17:06 G.m.t.

VEHICLE PERFORMANCE

The vehicle performance section of this report contains a discussion of the

operation and performance of each element (SRB, ET, SSME, and Orbiter) of the
Space Shuttle vehicle.
SOLID ROCKET BOOSTERS/REDESIGNED SOLID ROCKET MOTORS .

All SRB systems performed as expected. The SRB prelaunch countdown was normal,
and no SRB or RSRM LeC or OMRSD violations occurred.

Power up and operation of all case, igniter, and field joint heaters were
accomplished routinely. All RSRM temperatures were maintained within acceptable
limits throughout the countdown. For this flight, the heated ground purge in
the SRB aft skirt was powered up and the case/nozzle joint and flexible bearing
temperatures were maintained within the required LCC ranges.
, , The RSRM propulsion performance was well within the required specification
limits, and the propellant burn rate for each RSRM was normal. RSRM thrust
differentials during the buildup, steady-state, and tailoff phas~s were well
within specifications. All SRB thrust vector control prelaunch conditions and
flight performance requirements were met with ample margins. All electrical
functions were performed properly. The SRB flight structural temperature
response was as expected. Both SRB's were successfully separated from the ET at
127.8 seconds.
Postflight inspection of the recovered hardware indicated that the SRB thermal
protection system (TPS) performed properly during ascent with very little TPS
3
acreage ablation. Separation subsystem performance was normal with all booster
separation motors expended and all separation bolts severed. Key RSRM propul-
sion performance parameters are presented in the table on the following page.
The entry and deceleration sequence was properly performed on both SRB's. RSRM
nozzle jettison occurred after frustum separation, and subsequent parachute
deployments were successfully performed. The aft ring cap on the left aft skirt
was cracked during water impact. The right SRB forward access door was damaged
during towback due to the sea conditions. Both SRB's were recovered ,and
returned to KSC where disassembly was completed and refurbishment activities
were initiated.
After removal of the left and right nozzle during the postflight disassembly and
assessment of the RSRM nozzle-to-case joints, gas paths were observed through
the polysulfide adhesive with erosion and sooting of the wiper O-rings (Flight
Problem STS-42-M-1). Gas penetration on the left side at 57.6 degrees was more
extensive as blow-by was observed at the wiper O-ring. The gas path measured
0.25-inch circumferentially minimum at the step and opened up to 4.2 inches
RSRM PROPULSION PERFORMANCE

Parameter Left motor, 63 OF Ri~ht motor, 63 OF

Predicted Actual Predicted Actual
Impulse ga 6es
1-20, 10 lbf-sec 64.63 63.75 64.72 64.09
1-60, 10 6 lbf-sec 172.75 171.91 172.92 171.85
I-AT, 10 6 lbf-sec 297.00 296.91 296.75 297.08
Vacuum Isp, lbf-sec/lbm 268.40 268.36 268.4 268.74
Burn rate, in/sec 0.3669 0.3648 0.3675 0.3648
Event tim.s, seconds
Ignition interval 0.232 N/A 0.232 N/A
Web time 111.4 112.2 111.2 112.0
Action time 123.4 124.8 123.1 124.5
Separation cue, 50 psia 121.3 122.7 121.0 121.6
PMBT, of 62.0 63.0 62.0 63.0
Maximum ignition rise rate, 90.4 N/A 90.4 N/A
psi/10 ms

Decay time, seconds 2.8 2.9 2.8 3.5

(59.4 psia to 85 K)

Tailoff imbalance Predicted Actual

Impulse differential, N/A 566.7
klbf-sec

4
circumferentially just forward of the wiper O-ring. The gas path contained
heat-affected polysulfide. The glass cloth phenolic (GCP) was also
heat-affected along the fixed housing GCP wiper O-ring at 57 degrees. The
heated area measured 4-inches circumferentially and O.4-inch axially. Soot was
observed up to the wiper O-ring from 45 to 77 degrees and past the wiper O-ring
(downstream wall of the O-ring groove) intermittently from 52.2 to 68.4 degrees.
Soot was also noted in the vent slots at 57.6 degrees and 64.8 degrees. No soot
was observed on the primary O-ring. Erosion of the wiper O-ring was observed
for 2.2-inches axially and O.16-inch radially (centered at 57.6 degrees). The
erosion depth was measured to be O.02-inch maximum. A blow hole of this magni-
tude has never been experienced on a flight RSRM nozzle-to-case joint, and the
investigation of this anomaly is continuing. However, blow-by that does not get
through the wiper O-ring to the primary O-ring seal is not a safety-of-flight
concern.
EXTERNAL TANK
All objectives and requirements associated with ET propellant loading and flight
operations were met. All ET electrical equipment and instrumentation performed
satisfactorily. ET purge .and heater operations were monitored and all performed
properly. Propellant loading was completed as scheduled, and all prelaunch
thermal requirements were met. No LCC or OMRSD violations were identified.
As expected, the normal ice/frost formations for the January atmospheric
environment were observed during the countdown. Normal quantities of ice or
frost were present on the liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen feedlines and on the
pressurization line brackets. A small amount of frost was also present on the
liquid hydrogen protuberance air load (PAL) ramps. All of these observations
were acceptable based on applicable NSTS documentation. The Ice/Frost Red Team
reported that no visible anomalous TPS conditions existed.

The ET pressurization system functioned properly throughout engine start and

flight. The minimum liquid oxygen ullage pressure experienced during the period
of ullage pressure slump was 14.4 psid.
As usual, the ET tumble system was deactivated and radar reports from Bermuda
confirmed that the ET did not tumble. ET separation was confirmed to have
occurred properly, and based on MECO time, ET entry and breakup occurred within
the planned footprint.
After ET separation from the Orbiter, the crew took pictures of the ET, and the
photographs showed two possible divots in the intertank region (Flight Problem
STS-42-T-1). The divots are estimated to be between 8 and 12 inches in
diameter. The STS-42 ET utilized the two-gun spray method of insulating the
intertank region. This was only the second tank flown that used ,the new TPS
application/configuration. Analysis of this condition is continuing.
SPACE SHUTTLE MAIN ENGINE

All SSME parameters were normal throughout the prelaunch countdown and were
typical of prelaunch parameters observed on previous flights. Engine ready was
achieved at the proper time, all LCC were met, and engine start and thrust
buildup were normal.
5
Preliminary flight data indicate that SSME performance at start up and during
mainstage, throttling, shutdown, and propellant dump operations was normal.
High pressure oxidizer turbopump (HPOTP) and high pressure fuel turbopump
(HPFTP) temperatures appeared to be well within specification throughout engine
operation. The SSME controllers provided the proper control of the engines
throughout powered flight. Engine dynamic data generally compared well with
previous flight and test data. All on-orbit activities associated wfth the
SSME's were accomplished successfully. No failures were identified from the
flight data or postflight inspections of the engine.
SHUTTLE RANGE SAFETY SYSTEM

Shuttle range safety system (SRSS) closed-loop testing was completed as

scheduled during the launch countdown. All SRSS safe and arm (S&A) devices were
armed and system inhibits turned off at the appropriate times. All SRSS
measurements indicated that the system performance was as expected throughout
the flight.
Prior to SRB separation, the SRB S&A devices were safed, and the SRB system
power was turned off, as planned. The ET system remained active until ET
separation from the Orbiter.
ORBITER VEHICLE SUBSYSTEMS

Main Propulsion System

The overall performance of the MPS was excellent. All pretanking purges were
properly performed, and liquid oxygen loading was performed as planned with no
stop-flows or reverts. There was one liquid hydrogen stop-flow/revert that was
initiated early in replenish. This was required because of a leaking liquid
hydrogen replenish valve as evidenced by leak detector 27 indicating above 4
percent. The Ice/Frost Red Team retorqued the valve packing, thereby stopping
the leak. Liquid hydrogen replenish flow was restored about 2 hours 30 minutes
after the stop-flow/revert was initiated. No LCC or OMRSD violations occurred.

A failure in the data system at KSC resulted in the loss of 50 Kb data trans-
mittal to the MSFC Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) for a period of 3
hours and 21 minutes (022:08:01:00 to 022:11:22:00 G.m.t.) during propellant
loading operations. The loss of these data resulted in MSFC providing
preliminary propellant loading results based on manual calculations using low
sample rate data provided in real time. Fifty Kb data again became available to
MSFC at approximately Launch -2.5 hours. MSFC provided JSC with the Launch
-1.75 hour projection which was used for the official prediction for launch.

Throughout the preflight operations, no significant hazardous ga~ concentrations

were detected, and the maximum hydrogen level in the Orbiter aft compartment was
203 ppm (corrected), which compares well with previous data for this vehicle.
The MPS helium system performed satisfactorily. Prior to T-2 hours, data indi-
cated that the helium concentration in the aft compartment peaked at 10,860 ppm,
and later stabilized at 7,500 ppm. There was one momentary spike in the helium
concentration to more than 10,000 ppm after T-2 hours. However, the level

6
quickly decreased to 7,500 ppm; consequently, the spike was not an LCC
violation. These helium concentrations are historically typical of the OV-103
vehicle.
The calculated propellant loads at the end of replenish versus the inventory
loads shows a loading accuracy of -0.022 percent for the liquid hydrogen and
+0.023 percent for the liquid oxygen.
Ascent MPS performance was completely normal. Preliminary data indiqate that
the liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen pressurization systems performed as
planned. Also, all net positive suction pressure (NPSP) requirements were met
throughout the flight. Space Shuttle MECO occurred 510.1 seconds after
lift-off. This flight was the second for the fixed orifice/flow control valve
on OV-103 and the fifth flight for the Space Shuttle Program using this
configuration. The postflight evaluation of actual performance versus predicted
performance revealed no irregularities.

Entry and landing performance was nominal with 57.5 lb of helium consumed during
entry. However, the liquid hydrogen topping valve open-position indicator did
not come on when open power was applied at 5 minutes prior to entry interface
(Flight Problem STS-42-V-09). The closed indicator did go off and the closed
indicator came back on as planned later in entry when open power was removed.
Reaction Control Subsystem
The performance of the RCS was nominal except for primary thrusters L3A and R4U,
which both exhibited oxidizer leakage during the flight. A total of 3739.3 lb
of RCS propellant was consumed during the 8-day mission.
The Orbiter attitudes flown during this flight provided a hot environment for
the RCS thrusters. During the bay-South attitude, the injector temperatures of
the right ReS up-firing thrusters were predicted to reach 181°F; in the
bay-North attitude, the injector temperatures of the right RCS down-firing
thrusters were predicted to reach 190 of. Seven bay-South attitudes and four
bay-North attitudes were flown. The maximum injector temperature for the right
RCS up-firing thrusters was 165 of. The maximum injector temperature for the
right RCS down-firing thrusters was 173 of. Later in the mission, three +Z axis
local vertical (+ZLV) attitudes were flown, and this resulted in the forward RCS
forward-firing thruster injectors reaching temperatures as high as 133 OF.
Because preflight analysis predicted a hot thruster environment, a flight rule
annex change that clarified the Shuttle Operational Data Book (SODB) temperature
constraints was processed prior to the flight. The thrusters can be operated up
to a thruster valve seat temperature of 150 of. Above that temperature, the
closing of the thruster valve could "pound" the Teflon seat and tncrease the
chance of leakage at colder temperatures. The non-operating thruster valve seat
maximum temperature is 175 of. Above this temperature, the Teflon seat would
begin to degrade without a thruster firing. Since predictions indicated that
the injector temperature would be 10 of warmer than the valve seat temperature,
the flight rule change allowed the injector temperatures to reach 160 of under
operational conditions and 185 of under non-operational conditions. None of
these revised temperature limits were exceeded.

7
At 028:21:00:19 G.m.t., RCS thruster L3A was deselected by the RM software
because of an oxidizer leak that was confirmed by a decrease in the thruster
injector temperature to less than 30 of (Flight Problem STS-42-V-05). At
029:02:40:00 G.m.t., the injector temperature began to recover, indicating the
leak had stopped. After the thruster temperature recovered to 90 of, the
thruster was reselected and was placed in last priority. The thruster had not
been fired at any time up to the deselect ion nor was it fired at any 'time
following the reselection.
•
Late in the mission, the crew reported venting from the aft compartment. Data
showed no leaks until MDM FA 4 was powered up at which time data confirmed that
thruster R4U had an oxidizer leak (Flight Problem STS-42-V-06). MDM FA4 was
powered off during the mission along with MDM's flight forward (FF) 2 and FF 4
as part of the group B power down to conserve cryogenics. The thruster was
deselected by the RCS RM at 030:05:04:42 G.m.t. The oxidizer leak was
documented with an onboard television camera and the leak rate was estimated to
be approximately 4.8 lb/hr. Manifold 4 was later isolated for entry since the
leak did not recover, and the oxidizer quantity had leaked down to approximately
4 percent lower than the fuel quantity at that time. This thruster also had not
been fired up to the time of the deselect ion and the thruster was never
reselected. A postflight review of the oxidizer quantity data indicated that
the leak had started at approximately 030:02:53 G.m.t.
Data during entry revealed that the RCS thruster F1D fuel injector temperature
reached 245 of for about 5 minutes during entry, and this is the highest
temperature ever recorded for this measurement. The SODB constraint is 230 of
for 1 hour on the valve seat with a differential pressure of 175 to 300 psid .~
across the valve. Since the differential pressure across the valve was 155
psid, the SODB constraint was not violated. This irregularity continues to be
evaluated in an effort to understand the temperature increase.

Vernier thruster F5L was deselected as "failed leak" three times during the
mission. The thruster was deselected each time by the RM when the oxidizer
injector temperature dropped below the leak detection limit of 130 OF. The
deselection in each case was not caused by a propellant leak, but rather was
caused by the Orbiter attitude and the thruster F5L low duty cycle that allowed
the thruster to cool. In each case, the thruster was reselected, and the
thruster leak detection was inhibited. After the thruster was fired and the
injector temperatures were above 130 of, the leak detection was reenabled.
The aft RCS oxidizer manifold 1 temperature exceeded 100 of, which is the
certification limit for the RCS bulk propellant. Temperatures as high as 123 OF
were observed. However, the SODB allows the distribution system temperature to
reach but not exceed 150 OF to protect the operating limit of the thruster valve
seats.
Orbital Maneuvering Subsystem

The OMS performance was nominal with no discrepancies noted during the two
maneuvers (OMS-2 and deorbit). Both firings were performed with both engines in
the straight-feed mode, and the total firing time was 337.4 seconds on each
engine. Propellant usage for the two firings was 8,134 lb of oxidizer and
4,914 lb of fuel.
8
The left-hand and right-hand fuel quantity gaging system indicated high during
prelaunch operations and have exhibited irregular behavior during the last three
missions that the pods were flown. The left-hand and right-hand oxidizer gaging
systems operated nominally throughout the mission.
Power Reactant Storage and Distribution Subsystem

The power reactant storage and distribution (PRSD) subsystem performance was
nominal throughout the mission with no discrepant operation noted. ~he vehicle
was flown in the four-tank-set configuration. The PRSD subsystem supplied
2310 lb of oxygen and 291 Ib of hydrogen to the fuel cells for the production of
electrical energy. Based on the lift-off and landing indicated quantities,
approximately 81 Ib of oxygen was supplied to the environmental control and life
support subsystem (ECLSS) for crew breathing. A 31-hour mission extension at
the average power level of 17.2 kW was possible with the cryogenics remaining in
the PRSD subsystem at landing.
Fuel Cell Powerplant Subsystem

The fuel cell powerplant subsystem performed nominally from lift-off through
landing; however, an anomaly occurred during prelaunch operations. The total
energy produced during the mission was 3317 kWh at an average power level of
17.2 kW and 567 amperes. The fuel cells produced at total of 2,601 Ib of water
during the mission.
During prelaunch activities at approximately 022:07:02 G.m.t., a fuel cell 2
hydrogen-pump motor-condition LCC violation occurred simultaneously with a
current change on ac bus 2 phases Band C (Flight Problem STS-42-V-01). Fuel
cell 2 hydrogen pump motor condition increased from 0.6 V to 1.48 V for
approximately 6 seconds. The LCC limit is 1.0 V. The ac bus 2 phase C current
decreased about 0.16 ampere, and phase B increased about 0.25 ampere. All other
fuel cell 2 parameters were reading nominal. There was no noticeable change in
the phase A current. The pump-motor condition was nominal (0.52 - 0.56 Vdc)
from fuel cell 2 activation until this anomaly, and performance was nominal
(0.56 - 0.60 Vdc) thereafter for the remainder of the flight.

An inverter problem was ruled out because no ac bus voltage fluctuations were
observed, and the main engine controllers did not indicate a phase shift or
voltage violation. Orbiter data indicated a possible intermittent high
resistance path to phase C of the motor. The rationale for waiving the LCC
violation was based on a worst-case condition of an open circuit to one phase of
the hydrogen and coolant pump motors. This would result in the hydrogen and
coolant pump motors running on two phases. The pump motors would not be
affected since they are certified to operate on two phases.
I
Postflight laboratory testing and data analysis led to the following
conclusions. An ac bus 2 inverter phase angle change did not occur; a hydrogen
pump motor anomaly did not occur; a power factor change could not have caused
the anomaly. The most probable cause was the high resistance condition that
existed in the phase C circuit path to the fuel cell pump package. The possible
causes of the condition were believed to be an intermittent connection of a
connector pin/socket; panel L4 circuit breaker contamination; or relay failures
within the fuel cell. Troubleshooting is being performed on the Orbiter to
isolate the cause of the anomaly.
9
 Auxiliary Power Unit Subsystem
The APU subsystem operated nominally throughout the mission. Fuel consumption
and run time are shown in the following table.
APU 1 (SIN 310) APU 2 (SIN 301) APU 3 (SIN 312)
Flight Phase Time, Fuel Time, Fuel Time, .
Fuel
min:sec consumption, min:sec consumption, min:sec consumption,
Ib Ib Ib

Ascent 18:54 51 18:54 51 18:55 49

FCS checkout 03:30 9
Entry 84:04 174 61:18 139 61:19 151
.
a 102:58 225 83:42 199 80:14
Total 200
a The total includes 16 minutes 54 seconds of APU operation after landing.

The APU 1 EGT 2 measurement became erratic about 24 minutes after the APU was
started for entry, and then the measurement failed off-scale low shortly
thereafter. The sensor will be removed and replaced during turnaround
operations.
The second irregularity was noted when the APU 3 seal-cavity drain-line pressure
slowly decayed from 19 psi to 14 psi over a 30-minute period during entry. The
gear box pressure rose from 7.5 psi to 11.0 psi during the last 20 minutes of
APU operation, and the APU lubrication oil outlet pressure rose from
40 to 50 psi during the same time period. A hydrazine leak into the gear box
was caused by this change in pressure.
HydraulicslWater Spray Boiler Subsystem
The hydraulics/water spray boiler subsystem operated nominally throughout the
mission. Excellent water spray boiler (WSB) vent heater operation was observed
throughout the prelaunch period. Steam vent temperature 2A was the highest
(normally low and causing loss of APU ready condition on this vehicle) of the
three vent temperatures during the prelaunch period, and none of the three ready
indications were lost prior to APU start.
Reservoir quantities during ascent did not decrease significantly. Also,
reservoir pressure stayed relatively constant except for the initial expected
decrease resulting from decreasing atmospheric pressure during ascent. WSB
water usage was nominal with systems 1, 2, and 3, using approximately 1.6 Ib,
0.9 Ib, and 1.0 Ib of water, respectively, during ascent. Spray initiation for
system 1, 2, and 3 occurred at 245 OF, 260 OF, and 256 OF, respeQtively, which
was within specification.
Throughout the on-orbit period, reservoir quantities, pressures, and
temperatures tracked each other, and there was no evidence of hydraulic fluid
leakage. Seven circulation pump runs (six for hydraulic system 1 and one for
hydraulic system 3) occurred for thermal circulation early in the flight.
However, about one day into the flight, the vehicle attitude was changed to
top-Sun, which provides 100-percent sunlight to the payload bay, and no more
circulation pump runs were required.
10
WSB vent heater operation on the A controller was normal. WSB 1 required
55 minutes and WSB 3 required approximately 42 minutes to increase the vent
temperatures above 122 of, while WSB 2 required only 18 minutes. The delays in
WSB 1 and 3 were postulated to be due to ice removal from the vent areas. All
WSB core temperatures exceeded the upper limit of 60 of as specified by the
in-flight performance requirement. These high temperatures are believed to be
caused by the extended warm attitude of the vehicle for this flight and not due
to core heater malfunctions.
I
Hydraulic/WSB performance during the FCS checkout was normal. No spray cooling
was required because lubrication oil temperatures remained below 250 of due to
the limited APU run duration of 3 1/2 minutes.
Reservoir quantities, temperatures, and pressures as well as WSB steam vent
heater operations were normal during entry. All three hydraulic systems
performed nominally with hydraulic fluid temperatures never exceeding a nominal
220 of by APU shutdown. WSB water usage for entry cooling was 32.8 Ib for
system 1, 12.1 Ib for system 2, and 19.9 Ib for system 3.
Environmental Control and Life Support Subsystem

The atmospheric revitalization system (ARS) performed nominally throughout the

mission. No carry-over of water from humidity separator A or B was noted.
The ARS air and water coolant loops performance was normal. The carbon dioxide
partial pressure was maintained below 4.35 mmHg throughout the mission. Cabin
air temperature and relative humidity peaked at 84.5 of and 54.5 percent,
respectively. Avionics bays 1, 2, and 3 air outlet temperatures peaked at
110 of, 110 of, and 94 of, respectively. The avionics bays 1, 2, and 3 water
coldplate temperatures peaked at 93.5 of, 95 of, and 84.5 of, respectively.

The Orbiter air revitalization pressure control system (ARPCS) performed

normally throughout the period of control with both .systems being used to
satisfy turnaround checkout requirements. One irregularity in system
performance occurred during ascent when several high cabin-pressure alarms were
annunciated. The cabin pressure increase was the result of a combination of the
following conditions: a slightly high cabin pressure (14.86 psia) initially at
launch; seven crew members breathing on the launch/entry suit oxygen supply; and
the normal cabin pressure increase due to cabin temperature increase during
ascent. All of these conditions were nominal; however, the generic cabin
pressure backup flight system (BFS) calibration curve was O.32-psi higher than
the actual OV-103 pressure calibration curve, and this was the major contributor
in the BFS-computed cabin pressure being at the alarm value of 15.0 psia.
The supply water performed satisfactorily throughout the mission., By the
completion of the mission, all of the supply water in-flight checkout
requirements and all but one of the waste water requirements had been performed.
Supply water was managed through the use of the flash evaporator system (FES).
No supply water dumps were performed due to the vehicle cooling requirements.
The supply water dump line temperature was maintained between 65 OF and 94 OF
with the operation of the line heater.

11
Yaste water was gathered at approximately the predicted rate. Two waste water
dumps were performed. The first dump had an average dump rate of
1.96 percent/minute (3.24 lb/minute), while the second dump had a degraded flow.
The second water dump consisted of four segments over a 1-hour 7-minute period
during which the waste tank quantity was dumped from 87.9 percent to
42.6 percent. The dump rate during the first segment degraded from an initial
rate of 1.9 percent/minute to a final rate of 1.5 percent/minute, violating the
OMRSD lower limit of 1.6 percent/minute (Flight Problem STS-42-V-08)~ The
remaining three segments had a dump rate of 1.6 percent/minute. The dump rates
for the second dump were still within the experience band of past flights.
These lower dump rates remained within the range in which it was considered safe
to continue dumping, if required to support an extension of the mission. The
cause of this degradation is under evaluation.
The waste water dump line temperature was maintained between 58 of and 84 OF
throughout the mission, while the vacuum vent line temperature was between 60 of
and 83 of.

The waste management system performed its functions acceptably; however, one
significant anomaly occurred. A yeS anomaly occurred when the crew was
attempting to reconfigure the yes for commode use. The commode control handle
became disconnected from the commode control valve linkage and, as a result, the
crew was unable to open the yes commode control valve (Flight Problem
STS-42-V-03). An IFM procedure was uplinked and implemented by the crew, and
full yes operation was restored. Later in the mission, the roll pin within the
valve sheared on both sides and caused the valve/shaft to rotate freely.
Another IFM procedure was performed that allowed the crew to visually identify
the appropriate valve positions. The yes remained operational for the remainder
of the mission.
Performance of the active thermal control system (ATeS) was normal for the
duration of the mission. The radiators were deployed and restowed without
incident.
Smoke Detection and Fire Suppression Subsystem
The smoke detection subsystem performed normally throughout the mission. Use of
the fire suppression subsystem was not required.
Airlock Support System
Use of the airlock support system was not required during this mission as no
extravehicular activity (EVA) was planned or performed. The tunnel adapter
system was used to support Spacelab access and no anomalies were Inoted.
Avionics and Software Subsystems
Performance of the integrated guidance, navigation, and control subsystem was
nominal during all phases of the flight. Likewise, the performance of the
flight control system was nominal with no irregularities noted. Also, the
inertial measurement unit (IMU), star tracker, and flight software performance
was satisfactory. All displays and controls operated nominally.
12
An irregularity was noted in that a single input/output (I/O) error was logged
against FA 1 MDM prom sequence C at 026:08:02 G.m.t.; however, no bypass
occurred. If two consecutive errors had occurred, a bypass would have occurred.
The bite status read after landing was clear of any errors. The MDM will be
monitored during turnaround processing for any recurrence of this event.
The performance of the electrical power distribution and control subsystem was
nominal throughout the flight, but one anomaly was noted prior to lift-off.
This anomaly (Flight Problem STS-42-V-01) is discussed in the Fuel Cell
Powerplarit Subsystem section of this report. •
Communications and Tracking Subsystem
Communications and tracking subsystem performance was acceptable, but five
anomalies and one irregularity in subsystem performance were noted.
At 022:16:48 G.m.t. while over the Indian Ocean Station, the S-band FM hemi
antenna switched to the upper antenna without a command being given, and
subsequently, the antenna did not switch when commanded. Approximately
1.5 hours later over the Oak Hangar Station, a command was again sent, but no
response was observed. Following a switch to manual antenna control, the
antenna switching worked correctly. Control of the S-band FM hemi antenna was
returned to the general purpose computer and no repeats of the uncommanded
switching were noted. S-band FM hemi antenna switching will be monitored on
subsequent flights for recurrences of this irregularity.
Early in the mission, closed circuit television (CCTV) camera D was powered up
for Earth observations, and the downlinked signal was severely degraded (Flight
Problem STS-42-V-02a). In all camera modes, the automatic light control (ALC)
cycled from full bright to dark and then back again. The video appeared to stop
cycling when a mode switch occurred and the light level was within a narrow
band. However, when the light level went outside this narrow band, the ALC
began cycling again. This camera is a -508 type that had been modified to
prevent blooming problems. The camera was not used for the remainder of the
mission. Postflight testing will be performed.
On at least two occasions, the CCTV camera A color wheel became stuck and then
later became free (Flight Problem STS-42-V-02b). In each case, the camera again
began operating properly.

On flight day 6, contamination of the imaging tube was noted on CCTV camera C,
which rendered camera C unusable for the remainder of the mission (Flight
Problem STS-42-V-02c).
The TAGS telemetry measurement indication on the ground changed ~or no known
reason and did not correlate with other onboard TAGS indications (Flight Problem
STS-42-V-04). A power cycle of the TAGS was performed in an effort to clear the
telemetry irregularities. Following the power cycle, the TAGS experienced
several false jam indications and the crew performed the TAGS jam malfunction
procedure. One additional false jam occurred after the malfunction procedure
was performed and was cleared. No further false jams occurred; however, in the
mode 1 uplink, the TAGS hardcopier did not produce an image. During
troubleshooting, a mode 2 image was sent with the crew reporting that the image
was very fain t •
13
Later in the mission, the TAGS was powered up for a test transmission on mode 4.
Mode 4 is a high-resolution gray scale mode that requires between 16 and 17
minutes per page to develop an image. The TAGS operated properly during the
mode 4 test and it was determined that the TAGS was available for transmission
of photographs. At 29:06:10:00 G.m.t., a TAGS mode 3 uplink transmission was
executed since it had not been used previously. The crew commented on the
transmission, describing the page as "washed out a little bit" and "i'! may be
difficult to read." In an attempt to increase the image intensity, the scanner
gain was set to 3, and another transmission was made. The crew commented that
the page was still a little washed out and the small fonts were illegible, but
the crew did agree that the mode 3 transmissions could be used to supplement the
teleprinter message.
The crew reported that multiple anomalies had occurred with the onboard
communications crew equipment (Flight Problem STS-42-V-07). The anomalies
enumerated by the crew included the following:
a. The C wall unit had a constant beeping noise, regardless of which leg
unit was being used for transmission (Flight Problem STS-42-V-07B);
b. Channel 1 of the wall unit A that was located in the Spacelab failed
for a period of 20 minutes on flight day 5. Channel 2 operated
properly. Channel 1 recovered for a short period, but then failed for
the remainder of the mission (Flight Problem STS-42-V-07B);
c. One Orbiter leg unit failed to transmit, but it could receive.
Postflight troubleshooting isolated the failure to the transmit
synthesizer (Flight Problem STS-42-V-07A);
d. The leg units were not marked with identification numbers;
e. Some of the leg units drained their batteries in as little time as
2 hours, whereas other batteries lasted as long as 2 days. The battery
lifetime was irrespective of the procedures used by the crew to
activate the batteries (Flight Problem STS-42-V-07C); and
f. The volume level from the speaker unit in the Spacelab was so low that
the unit was inadequate as a communications device.
Operational Instrumentation
The operational instrumentation operated satisfactorily throughout the mission
with one failure. During entry, the APU 1 EGT 2 measurement became erratic and
eventually failed to the lower limit. The EGT sensors have recorded failures on
a number of previous missions and the loss of this measurement dqes not impact
the mission.
Structures and Mechanical Subsystems

All structures and mechanical subsystems operated satisfactorily. Braking was

initiated at 134.8 knots and continued for 37.3 seconds. The maximum brake
pressure on each braking mechanism as well as other brake data are presented in
the following two paragraphs.
14
 The left inboard brake 1 pressure was 872 psi t and the right inboard brake 1
pressure was 912 psi. The left inboard brake 3 pressure was 859 psia t and the
right inboard brake 3pressur'e was 938 psia. The left outboard brake 2 pressure
was 912 psi and the right outboard brake 2 pressure was 952 psi. The left
outboard brake 4 pressure was 833 psi and the right was 991 psi.

The brake energies wer~ 27.95 million ft-Ib on the left-hand outboard brake t
28.03 million ft-Ib on the left-hand inboard brake t 30.32 million ft-Ib on the
,
brake. '
.
right-hand inboard brake, and 30.83 million ft-Ib on the right-hand outboard

The sink rate at main gear touchdown was approximately 2 ft/sec, and the pitch
rate at nose gear touchdown was 3.68 ft/sec. The Orbiter weight at landing was
218,130 lb. The rollout distance was 9811 feet. Winds were 2 knots from
300 degrees true at the time of touchdown. The main landing gear tires were in
good condition fora concrete runway landing.
During the postlanding inspection, the entire exterior surface (flexible
insulation blanket and thermal barrier) of the Orbiter right-hand vent door 7
exhibited a yellow-orange discoloration. The surrounding Orbiter sidewall was
not discolored. Wipes were taken of the outer door area where the irregularity
existed as well as from the structure inside the door and a chemical analysis
was performed on these samples. Analysis of the wipe samples indicated the
presence of tin, which is associated with room temperature vulcanizing (RTV)
material. The vent door blanket has been removed and samples of the blanket are
being analyzed at KSC, JSC, and Rockwell~Downey .
.-----
At 029:13:23 G.m.t., the crew heard a loud noise. The crew stated that the
noise sounded like a "pop" and was accompanied by a vibration that was likened
to a tremor. Data analyzed from that period did not show any irregularities.
This noise was also heard on STS-9, the first Spacelab flight, and strain gage
data from the instrumented transfer tunnel indicated movement of the joints at
the attachment point of the Spacelab tunnel to the Orbiter primary structure.
Aerodynamics
The ascent and entry aerodynamic responses were nominal. During entry, the
control surfaces and angle-of-attack were as expected; however, the elevon
schedule was slightly off of the predicted values because of the more forward
center-of-gravity. The entry aerodynamic control surfaces test was performed'
during entry with all programmed test inputs (PTI's) being completed. The
manua1 1 body flap maneuver was not performed •
..
Thermal Control Subsystem
I
The performance of the thermal control subsystem (TeS) was nominal during all
phases of the mission with all temperatures being maintained within acceptable
limits. The high beta angles (up to ~75 degrees) and resulting 100-percent
sunlight conditions resulted in the most extreme thermal environments of the
Space Shuttle Program for several. subsystems. These subsystems include the
primary RCS thrusters, injectors, and valve seats, the OMS main engine fuel and
oxidizer lines, and the aft p:rimary RCS oxidizer manifold line in the starboard
RCS stinger.
15
One irregularity was noted when a fault detection annunciator (FDA) alarm was
received on the APU 2 fuel test line temperature 2 when the te~perature dropped
to 48 OF approximately 3 minutes after MECO. The conditions resulted from the
line temperature being just above the heater "on" thermostat set point at
lift-off. The ground support equipment (GSE) power to the heater was lost at
lift-off and the heater is usually not enabled until 1 hour after lift-off.
Howeverf because of the lower temperature, the heater was enabled about 20
minut~s int~ the mission.

Instrumentation irregularities that were noted included the oxidizer tank

temperature measurement on the starboard OMS pod that was inoperable during the
mission and has been inoperable during the previous two flights of this vehicle,
STS-39 and STS-48.
As reported in the Auxiliary Power Unit subsection of this report, the EGT 2
sensor on APU 1 failed during entry. The EGT sensors have failed on a number of
APU's during previous flights.

The starboard OMS engine oxidizer feedline temperature reached 126 of, exceeding
the operating constraint of 125 of, but not the non-operating limit of 150 of.
Thermal Interfaces and Aerothermodynamics
All prelaunch thermal interface temperatures were maintained within limits;
however, the start of ET tanking was delayed 1 hour to avoid the potential of
violating the LCC. No anomalies or irregularities were noted during prelaunch
activities in the area of thermal interfaces.

Acreage heating was as expected during entry. Analysis of aero thermodynamic

data is continuing.
Thermal Protection Subsystem
The TPS performed satisfactorily and the general condition of the TPS tiles was
very good, except for the higher than usual number of hits with a major
dimension greater than 1 inch. The overall boundary layer transition from
laminar to turbulent flow was symmetric, occurring at 1215 seconds after entry
interface.
During the postflight inspection, a total of 209 hits were noted and 44 of these
had a major dimension greater than 1 inch. A comparison of these statistics
with previous missions shows that this mission had a greater than average number
of hits. The Orbiter lower surface sustained a total of 159 hits of which 38
had a major dimension greater than 1 inch and 14 of these had a major dimension
greater than 3 inches. None of the TPS damage was attributed to material from
wheels, tires, or brakes.
The chin area tiles and gap fillers looked very good; however, five tiles on the
left-hand nose landing gear door had broken edges. This area of the vehicle
also sustained approximately 17 hits with a major dimension greater than 1 inch.

Three seals in the left-hand leading edge of the wing and one seal from the
right wing have a degraded coating. The right-hand ET door had five tiles
damaged. The ET doors thermal barriers experienced normal heating, and no main
16
landing gear door (MLGD) tileswe~edamaged. However, the right-hand MLGD
outboard thermal barrier was breached at the forward corner, and the MLGD left
inboard thermal barrier was frayed and protruding.

The engine-mounted heat shield blankets were in good condition except for a
two-foot long split in the outer cover of SSME 3 and a frayed cover near the
bottom of SSME 1. The base heat shield peppering was nominal, and arl other
areas of the vehicle looked nominal.
•
Windows 3 and 4 had a heavy haze, and a light haze was present on all of the
other windows. Streaking was noted on windows 2 and 3. Slight periphery tile
damage was noted on windows 2, 4, and 5, and the captive gap filler between
windows 4 and 5 was breached.
The ascent integrated heating was nominal from both the aerodynamic and plume
heating standpoint. Analysis of the heating inputs to the Orbiter continues.
Entry heating was also within nominal limits. Analysis based on postflight
inspection and data review has shown nominal operation.

FLIGHT CREW EQUIPMENT/GOVERNMENT FURNISHED EQUIPMENT

Overall, the flight crew equipment performed satisfactorily; however, two

anomalies were noted, neither of which had any impact on the mission.

At 024:21:53 G.m.t., the crew reported that the amount of water dispensed by
the galley rehydration station did not correspond to the selected water
quantity. The condition was remedied by cycling power to the galley control
electronics. During the postflight debriefing, the crew stated that these
erratic dispenses were common occurrences throughout the flight. Early in the
flight, cycling power to the electronics did alleviate the problem; however, as
the flight progressed, cycling the electronics power became less and less
effective in correcting the dispensed amount. Evaluation indicates that this
condition was most likely caused by electromagnetic interference (EMI) and
can normally be corrected by resetting the control electronics. This particular
galley unit historically has been the most susceptible to EMI and is scheduled
to be removed from OV-103 during the next flow and modified into the repackaged
galley. This modification includes improved EMI shielding.

An attempt to remove the sleep station lower panel for cabin air filter cleaning
was initially unsuccessful. The crew reported that the sleep station panel was
jammed in place. Analysis determined that the panel could be pried open should
mandatory cleaning of the filter be required. Later in the mission, the crew
performed a detailed inspection of the area and found that the s~iding portion
of the door was not fully open, a condition that prevented the lower panel from
being removed. Access to the cabin filter was gained and the filter was
cleaned.
The crew initially reported that the Orbiter cabin air cleaner power-on light
was on, but the fan did not come up to speed. The next day, the crew reported
that the cleaner was operating properly. This irregularity is being evaluated.

17
During the postflight inspection, three unfired pyrotechnics were found in the
Orbiter aft fuselage gas sampling system (OAFGSS) (Flight Problem STS-42-V-10).
Two pyrotechnics are attached to each of the six bottles in the OAFGSS and these
pyrotechnics are normally fired during ascent. The right gas sampler assembly
experienced a failure during flight. The bottle 2 fire-closed pyrotechnic did
not fire and the bottle 3 fire-open and fire-close pyrotechnics did not fire.
All other bottle pyrotechnics fired as expected. The electronics/battery
hardware was shipped to the Flight Equipment Processing Contractor for failure
analysis. The pyrotechnics and bottles that did not function will undergo
further verification of the malfunction at KSC, and then the hardware will be
shipped to JSC. The initial theory is that the gas sampler system lost power
during flight between the fire-open and fire-close signals on bottle 2. The
four bottles that functioned properly have been analyzed for hydrogen and oxygen
content and the levels are nominal in three of the four bottles, well within the
non-flammability region. Bottle sin 1374, however, leaked in a significant
amount of air postflight and the samples is considered unusable.

PAYLOADS/EXPERIMENTS

The STS-42 mission payloads consisted of the IML -1 (Spacelab long module),
which encompassed nine materials science experiments and seven life science
experiments in microgravity; five middeck payloads; and nine GAS experiments
that were located on the GAS bridge assembly in the payload bay.
Activation of the Spacelab began about 2 hours 20 minutes after lift-off, with
the crew entering the Spacelab module about 3 hours 37 minutes after launch.
Vith the mission progressing very smoothly and consumable usage being less than
planned, the mission was extended for one additional day during which both the
life sciences and materials science investigations benefited. Spacelab systems
performed almost flawlessly. The Orbiter provided a trouble-free and stable
platform to conduct the IML science activities. More than. 100 percent of the
premiss ion planned science activities were completed. In addition, well over
100 hours of television were downlinked, and approximately 70 video tapes were
recorded. More than 100 crystals, billions of cells, and hundreds of plants
were returned. After more than 7 days and 14 hours of operations, the Spacelab
was deactivated for entry.
All cargo integration hardware, which includes the Spacelab utility kit, aft
flight deck wiring, and retention hardware functioned nominally. The crew did
report hearing a loud "pop" that has been attributed to the Spacelab transfer
tunnel. This sound was also heard on STS-9 and in both cases is believed to be
a normal characteristic of the Spacelab transfer tunnel which contracts and
expands due to the solar-induced thermal environment.
The IMAX camera system was flown on IML-1 to obtain footage for use in a film on
the human and robotic exploration of the cosmos. The working title of the film
is "Destiny in Space." The IML-1 interior shots were chosen to document human
adaptation to the microgravity environment, while the exterior shots focused on
high-latitude Earth shots that are not available on most missions.

18
 SPACELAB EXPERIMENTS
All of the Spacelab experiments worked well and provided good results. The
preliminary results of each Spacelab experiment are as follows:
a. Fluid Experiment System - The objective of this experiment was to study
crystal growth and fluid behavior in microgravity conditions. More
than 11 runs were made to solidify crystals of triglycine sulfate
(metal modeling salts), and nearly 300 holograms were made •• Also, over
15 hours of crystal growth were obtained in cell 1 and more than
900 holograms were obtained from cells 1 and 2.
'.
b. Vapor Crystal Growth System - This experiment was first flown on
Spacelab 3. Periodic monitoring of the seed crystal early in the
mission revealed polycrystalline growths on the faces of the crystal.
Temperature adjustments were made that etched these growths from the
seed crystal, and the mercury iodide crystal began to grow.
preliminary reports indicate a crystal approximately 16 by 16 by 8 mm
in size, which is the largest space-grown crystal.
c. Mercuric iodide crystal growth - this objective of this experiment was
to grow mercuric iodide crystals. the experiment was previously flown
on Spacelab 1 and Spacelab 3. six mercuric iodide crystals were grown
in six different cartridges.
d. Organic Crystal Growth Experiment - This experiment used the organic
crystal growth facility to grow large single crystals of
superconducting organic chemicals.
e. Cryostat - This experiment used two separate thermostatic chambers, one
in a stabilizer mode and the other in a freezer mode, to grow protein
crystals under different thermal conditions.

f. Protein Crystal G~owth - This experiment has been flown on four

previous Space Shuttle missions: STS-26, STS-29, STS-32, and STS-37.
All experiment equipment worked well with 15 types of protein crystals
being grown in the 120 chambers.
g. Space Acceleration Monitoring System - This system measured on-orbit
Shuttle accelerations in support of other microgravity experiments.
h. Critical Point Facility - The objective of this experiment was to
measure material properties at the critical point. The crew reported
that an interesting behavior was noted in the fluid when it passed
through the critical point.
i. Gravitational Plant Physiology Facility - The objective of this
experiment was to perform a biological investigation of plants during
space flight. Initial data indicate that the oat and wheat seedlings
grew faster and larger than expected.

19
j. Biorack - The objective of this experiment was to perform a biological
investigation of various life forms during spaceflight. This
experiment was also flown on the D-1 Spacelab mission. Preliminary
results indicate that, in microgravity, bacteria have thicker cell
walls that would reduce the effectiveness of antibiotics.

Fly data were obtained for two days; however, over the course of the
mission all of the flies died. The science team suspects that trace
amounts of the hardware sterilization fluid used during groqnd
preparations may have remained in the containers, since the ground
control populations also had a high death rate.

k. Space Physiology Experiments - The objective of this experiment was to

investigate human space adaptation and motion sickness. During one of
the experiment runs, an umbilical cable was caught in a sled rail, and
a few ball bearings were released into the laboratory. All of the
bearings were collected and the experiment continued to operate
properly throughout the mission.
1. Microgravity Vestibular Investigations - The objective of this
experiment was to study space motion sickness. An overs peed limiting
device (pendulum) stopped the chair operations during its first run.
The Spacelab Microgravity Vestibular Investigation (MVI) had completed
a sinusoidal run and was about 6 seconds into a ramp run when the
20-ampere circuit breaker tripped. The circuit-breaker tripping
incident on the MVI was evaluated for Orbiter impacts. A review of
fuel cell currents at the time of the tripping showed that the currents
were normal and no current spike was indicated. The circuit breaker
was reset, but continued to trip during MVI pitch operations. The
irregularity was traced to an out-of-balance pendulum sensor within the
experiment and was not the result of actual overcurrent conditions.
An in-flight maintenance procedure was performed to limit the movement
of the pendulum, since it was found to be more sensitive in zero g than
in 1 g. The helmet interface box vents were cleaned to eliminate
thermal conditions that were degrading experiment video. The science
team reported that a substantial amount of data that quantified the
human vestibular function in the microgravity environment had been
collected.
m. Biostack - The objective of this experiment was to investigate space
radiation effects on biological materials. Four Biostack radiation
detectors were installed in a Spacelab rack and under the laboratory
floor, where they operated throughout the mission. The data will be
used to determine the biological impact of cosmic radiation and aid in
the design of better radiation protection for spacecraft.
n. Mental Workload and Performance Evaluation - The objective of this
experiment was to test human performance of computer tasks in zero-g.
The data collected during this experiment will be used to design
workstations that are the most comfortable and efficient for humans to
use, and to plan future Space Station operations.
... ~

20
 o. Radiation Monitoring Container/Dosimeter - The objective of this
experiment was to measure the effect of space radiation on biological
materials. The data are being evaluated by the sponsor.
MIDDECK PAYLOADS
Five payloads were flown on the middeck. These were:
a. Gelation of Sols: Applied Microgravity Research (GOSAMR) - ~he
objective of this experiment was to investigate processing of gelled
Sols in microgravity. All experiment operations were nominal.
b. Student Experiment SE 83-2 - The objective of this experiment was to
study zero gravity capillary rise of liquid through granular porous
media. All experiment operations were nominal.
c. Student Experiment SE 81-9 - The objective of this experiment was to
study convection in zero gravity. All experiment operations were
nominal.
d. Investigation into Polymer Membrane Processing - The objective of this
investigation was to manufacture polymers in orbit. All experiment
operations were nominal.
e. Radiation monitoring equipment (RME-III) - The objective of this
experiment was to measure radiation environment while on orbit.
The data are being evaluated by the experiment sponsor.
GET-AWAY SPECIAL PAYLOADS
In addition to the Spacelab and middeck experiments, nine GAS payloads were
flown in 12 canisters that were connected to the GAS Bridge Assembly in the
payload bay. The nine GAS payloads were as follows:
a. G-086 - Effects of Microgravity on Cysts Hatched in Space; Thermal
Conductivity and Bubble Velocity of Air in Water - This experiment
operated nominally.
b. G-140 - Marangoni Convection in a Floating Zone - This experiment
operated nominally.
c. G-143 - Glass Bubbles in Glass Melt - Preliminary data indicate that
this GAS payload operated nominally.
d. G-329 - Solidification Phenomena of Metal Alloys - This lexperiment
operated nominally.
e. G-336 - Measurement of Diffuse Zodiacal and Galactic Emissions at B, R,
and V Standard Astronomical Wavelengths - This experiment operated
nominally.
f. G-337 - Performance of Thermoacoustic Refrigerator Under Microgravity -
This experiment operated nominally.
21
 g. G-457 - Gas-Liquid Separation Under Microgravity - It is assumed that
the payload operated nominally during ascent; however, a status check
during on-orbit operations indicated a malfunction and it is believed
to have been caused by low battery voltage.
h. G-609 and G-610 - Ultraviolet Observations of Deep Space - During the
third observation, video confirmed that the motorized door assembly did
not open, thus preventing the payload from taking data. Successive
attempts to restart the payload in a more thermally benign Orbiter
attitude were unsuccessful. •

i. G-614 - Motion of Debris Under Microgravity Conditions; Low-Melting

Point Materials Processing - This experiment operated nominally.
In addition to these GAS experiments, ballast was flown in two of the canisters.

DEVELOPMENT TEST OBJECTIVES AND DETAILED SUPPLEMENTARY OBJECTIVES

A total of 15 Development Test Objectives (DTO) and nine Detailed Supplementary

Objectives (DSO) were planned for this mission.
DEVELOPMENT TEST OBJECTIVES

DTO 0242 - Entry Aerodynamic Control Surfaces Test (Part 6) - All PTI's were
performed and evaluation of the data is being performed by the sponsor.
DTO 0301D - Ascent Wing Structural Capability Evaluation - The data were
collected for this experiment and are being evaluated by the sponsor.
DTO 0305D - Ascent Compartment Venting Evaluation - The data were collected for
this experiment and are being evaluated by the sponsor.

DTO 0306D - Descent Compartment Venting Evaluation - The data were collected for
the experiment and are being evaluated by the sponsor .

. DTO 0307D - Entry Structural Evaluation - The data were collected for this
experiment and are being evaluated by the sponsor.
DTO 0308D - Vibration and Acoustic Evaluation - The data were collected for this
experiment and are being evaluated by the sponsor.
DTO 0312 - ET TPS Performance (Method 2) - In the performance o~ this DTO, a
total of 29 images of the ET were acquired by the crew using the hand-held
Hasselblad camera with the 250mm lens. Excellent views of the ET after
separation were also acquired with the 16mm Arriflex hand-held motion picture
camera.
Review of the ET photography, both 70mm and 16mm, taken by the crew at
approximately 15 minutes into the mission revealed two 8 to 12-inch bright
regions on the ET intertank between the left bipod attachment point and the
22
,---. forward attachment point to the left SRB. Prelaunch closeout photographs are
being reviewed to determine if these bright regions are foam repairs or regions
of damage caused during ascent.
DTO 0319D - Shuttle/Payload Low Frequency Environment - The data were collected
for this experiment and are being evaluated by the sponsor.

DTO 0623 - Cabin Air Monitoring - All activities were completed in support of
this OTO. The data are being evaluated by the sponsor.
OTO 0635 - Eyewash Demonstration - The eyewash demonstration was successfully
completed on flight day 5.
OTO 0641 - Spacelab C02 Control - Activities for this OTO were initiated on
flight day 2 at 22 hours 6 minutes mission elapsed time and were successfully
terminated on flight day 6 at 5 days 12 hours 27 minutes mission elapsed time.
The DTO was completed with the Spacelab Lithium Hydroxide (LiOH) cartridges not
being changed out throughout the flight. During the DTO period, the Orbiter
cabin partial pressure CO 2 was maintained below 4.0 mmHg and the Spacelab cabin
below 5.5 mmHg, both of wfiich are well below the upper limit of 7.6 mmHg CO ,
2
DTO 0648 - Electronic Still Photography Test (Test 3 without downlink) - There
was not downlinked from this test; however, it is believed that the OTO was
completed.
DTO 0651 - EDO Cycle Ergometer Hardware Evaluation - The extended duration
Orbiter (EOO) cycle ergometer was the primary exercise device used during this
flight. The crew reported that the modifications to improve the vibration level
were successful. In-flight video and data from the Space Acceleration
Measurement System will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the cycle as an
exercise device and its compatibility with microgravity experiments.
OTO 0653 - Evaluation of MK I Rowing Machine - The rower was used for several
exercise sessions and reported to be quiet, but uncomfortable. The comfort
problems were similar to those experienced on the ground. Preliminary results
indicate that the use of the rowing machine resulted in less "g" disturbances to
the vehicle than the cycle ergometer.
0805 - Crosswind Landing Performance - Cross winds were not of the magnitude
required for this OTO.
DETAILED SUPPLEMENTARY OBJECTIVES

DSO 0466 - Variations in Supine and Standing Heart Rate, Blood Pr,essure, and
Cardiac Size - This OSO was performed only during preflight and postflight
operations. Data are being evaluated by the sponsor.
DSO 0469 - In-Flight Radiation Dose-Distribution [Tissue Equivalent Proportional
Counter (TEPC) only] - The OSO was completed and data are being evaluated by the
sponsor.

23
DSO 0470 - The Relationship of Space Adaptation Syndrome to Middle Cerebral
Artery Blood Velocity Measured In-Flight By Doppler - This DSO was performed and
the data are being evaluated by the sponsor.
DSO 0603B - Orthostatic FunctionD.uring Entry, Landing, and Egress - Data were
collected during entry and postlanding and are being evaluated by the sponsor.
DSO 0611 - Air Monitoring Instrument Evaluation and Atmospheric CharacteriZation
(Configuration 1 and 2) - Archival organic sampler data were success~ully
recorded and microbial air sampler data were also successfully recorded with an
additional day of data collected. Data are being analyzed by the sponsor.
DSO 0613 - Changes in the Endocrine Regulation of Orthostatic Tolerance
Following Space Flight - Data were collected for this DSO during preflight and
postflight operations and are being evaluated by the sponsor.
DSO 0901 - Documentary Television - Over 100 hours of video were downlinked
during the mission.
DSO 0902 - Documentary Motion Picture Photography - This DTO was successfully
accomplished and the photographic data are being evaluated by the sponsor.
DSO 0903 - Documentary Still Photography - This DTO was successfully
accomplished and the photographic data are being evaluated.

PHOTOGRAPHIC AND TELEVISION ANALYSIS

On launch day, 25 videos were reviewed. During the mission, 69 films of the
expected 69 were reviewed. The detailed review revealed no anomalies or
irregularities.
Seven videos of landing were transmitted to JSC for review and analysis.
Additionally, seven unprocessed films were received the day after landing, and
review of these films began on February 3, 1992. No anomalies or irregularities
were noted during the film and video analysis.

24
 TABLE I.- STS-42 SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
/ .. ~

Event Description Actual time,

G.m. t.
APU activation APU-l GG chamber pressure 022:14:47:48.54
APU-2 GG chamber pressure 022:14:47:49.95
APU-3 GG chamber pressure 022: 14:4'7: 51.16
SRB HPU activation LH HPU system A start command 022:14:52:05.172
LH HPU system B start command 022: 14: 5,2: 05.332
RH HPU system A start command 022:14:52:05.492
RH HPU system B start command 022:14:52:05.652
Main propulsion Engine 3 start command accepted 022:14:52:26.435
System start Engine 2 start command accepted 022:14:52:26.569
Engine 1 start command accepted 022:14:52:26.703
SRB ignition command SRB ignition command to SRB 022:14:52:32.992
(lift-off)
Throttle up to Engine 3 command accepted 022:14:52:37.316
100 percent thrust Engine 2 command accepted 022:14:52:37.329
Engine 1 command accepted 022:14:52:37.344
Throttle down to Engine 3 command accepted 022:14:53:00.196
75 percent thrust Engine 2 command accepted 022:14:53:00.210
Engine 1 command accepted 022:14:53:00.224
Throttle up to Engine 3 command accepted 022:14:53:31.877
104 percent thrust Engine 2 command accepted 022:14:53:31.891
Engine 1 command accepted 022:14:53:31.905
Maximum dynamic Derived ascent dynamic 022:14:53:39
pressure (q) pressure
Both SRM's chamber LH SRM chamber pressure 022:14:54:35.002
pressure at 50 psi mid-range select
RH SRM chamber pressure 022:14:54:35.672
mid-range select
End SRM action RH SRM chamber pressure 022:14:54:37.672
mid-range select
LH SRM chamber pressure 022:14:54:38.152
mid-range select
SRB separation command SRB separation command flag 022:14:54:40
SRB physical LH rate APU A turbine speed LOS 022:14:54:40.832
separation RH rate APU A turbine speed LOS 022:14:54:40.832
Throttle down for Engine 3 command accepted 022:14:59:57.967
3g acceleration Engine 2 command accepted 022:14:59:57.981
Engine 1 command accepted 022:14:59:57.955
3g acceleration Total load factor 022:14:59:58.91
MECO MECO command flag 022:15:01:02
MECO confirm flag 022:15:01:03
ET separation ET separation command flag 022 :,15: 01: 21
OMS-l ignition Left engine bi-prop valve N/A
position Not performed -
Right engine bi-prop valve direct insertion
position trajectory flown
OMS-l cutoff Left engine bi-prop valve N/A
position Not performed -
Right engine bi-prop valve direct insertion
position trajectory flown

25
 TABLE I.- STS-42 SEQUENCE OF EVENTS (CONCLUDED)

Event Description Actual time,

G.m. to
APU deactivation APU-1 GG chamber pressure 022:15:06:43.21
APU-2 GG chamber pressure 022:15:06:44.45
APU-3 GG chamber pressure 022:15:06:45.66
OMS-2 ignition Left engine bi-prop valve 022:15:28:41.0
position I

Right engine bi-prop valve 022:15:28:41.0

position
OMS-2 cutoff Left engine bi-prop valve 022:15:31:20.7
position
Right engine bi-prop valve 022:15:31:20.6
position
Payload bay door open PLBD right open 1 022:16:19:25
PLBD left open 1 022:16:20:44
Flight control
system checkout
APU start APU-2 GG chamber pressure 029:13:12:27.87
APU stop APU-2 GG chamber pressure 029:13:15:57.94
Payload bay door close PLBD left close 1 030:12:32:56
PLBD right close 1 030:12:34:56
APU activation APU-1 GG chamber pressure 030:15:00:07.30
for entry APU-2 GG chamber pressure 030:15:22:53.90
APU-3 GG chamber pressure 030:15:22:55.12
Deorbit maneuver Left engine bi-prop valve 030:15:05:03.4
ignition position
Right engine bi-prop valve 030:15:05:03.4 ~,

position
Deorbit maneuver Left engine bi-prop valve 030:15:08:01. 7
cutoff position
Right engine bi-prop valve 030:15:08:01. 7
position
Entry interface Current orbital altitude 030:15:35:44
(400K) above reference ellipsoid
Blackout ends Data locked at high sample No blackout
rate
Terminal area Major mode change (305) 030:16:00.53
energy management
Main landing gear LH MLG tire pressure 030:16:07:18
contact RH MLG tire pressure 030:16:07:17
Main landing gear LH MLG weight on wheels 030:16:07:18
weight on wheels RH MLG weight on wheels 030:16:07:17
Nose landing gear NLG tire pressure 030:116:07:27
contact
Nose landing gear NLG WT on Wheels -1 030:16:07:27
weight on wheels
Wheels stop Velocity with respect to 030:16:08:16
runway
APU deactivation APU-1 GG chamber pressure 030: 16: 24: 11.14
APU-2 GG chamber pressure 030:16:24:12.37
APU-3 GG chamber pressure 030:16:24:13.50
~,

26
 TABLE II. - STS-42 PROBLEM TRACKING LIST

Number I Title Reference Comments

STs-42-V-01 la) Fuel Cell 2 Hydrogen 022:07:02 G.m.t. A spike in the fuel cell 2 hydrogen pump motor condition was noted with
Pump Motor Condition Prelaunch a maximum value of 1.48 (LeC limit = 1.00). At the same time, AC 2
Spike/AC Bus 2 Phase IPR-53V-000l phase B showed a 0.25 ampere increase and phase C showed a 0.16 ampere
CUrrent Anomaly 1M 42RF01 decrease. Off-line testing duplicated the problem, most likely
failure cause is intermittent high resistance in power circuitry.
KSC: Resistance test and wire wiggle between panel L4 and fuel cell 2
interface. Visual check of associated phase C connectors
pins/sockets.

STS-42-V-02 la) CCTV Camera D 023:06:58 G.m.t. a) In all camera modes, the automatic light control (ALC) circuitry
Degradation (GFE) a) FIAR BFCE cycles from full bright to dark and back again. It appears to stop
029-F044 cycling when a mode switch occurs and the light level is within a
narrow band. When the light level goes outside this band, the ALC
circuitry begins cycling again.

b) CCTV Camera A Color b) FIAR BFCE b) On a couple of occasions and at various temperatures, the camera A
Wheel Stuck 029-F047 color wheel became stuck and later unstuck.

c) Camera C Degradation c) FIAR BFCE c) When camera C was used for downlink of payload bay views, the camera
N
029-F048 appeared to have delamination or some type of film on the faceplate.
-....J KSC: Remove cameras and deliver to Flight Equipment Packing
Facility.

STS-42-V-03 IWCS Commode Control HandleI024:16:10 G.m.t. During an attempt to configure the WCS for commode use, the commode
Linkage Failure CAR 42RF02 control handle became disconnected from the commode control valves.
PR ECL-3-15-Q859 The crew performed an in-flight maintenance (IFM) procedure and
regained use of the cOllUDOde. At 027:17:19 G.m.t., the pin inside the
the WCS ball valve sheared due to extra torque from the IFM. caused
loss of hardstops on ball valve. Further IFM provided initial hardstop
starting point and visual stopping point. WCS again functional.
Linkage removed at DFRC on February 3. Verified single shear dowel pin
failure where handle linkage mates to the vacuum valve shaft caused
initial problem. Later, double shear of roll pin near the valve caused
loss of hardstops.
KSC: Redesign in work for STS-50 and subsequent. will manifest IFM
tools for flights prior to STs-50.

STS-42-V-Q4 ITAGS Telemetry and ImagingI026:04:10 G.m.t. Telemetry on ground changed inexplicably and did not correlate with the
Problems. JSC-EE-Q668 onboard TAGS indications. TAGS was power cycled, after which false
jams were indicated. After false jams were cleared, pages,could pass
through, but were not imaged in mode 1 or mode 2. Faint images were
received in mode 3. Mode 4 transmissions were nominal.
KSC: Remove TAGS and deliver unit to Flight Equipment Packing
Facility.
 TABLE II.- STS-42 PROBLEM TRACKING LIST

NUmber I Title Reference C01llllleIlts

STS-42-V-05 ILeft Aft RCS Thruster 028:21:00 G.m.t. At 028:21:00 G.m.t., aft RCS thruster L3A (ser. no. 116) was deselected
L3A Failed Leak CAR 42RF03 by RM when the oxidizer injector temperature dropped below 30 of. No
IPR 53V-0005 thruster firings in process at that time. A review of the data
indicates an oxidizer valve leak. Thruster rewarmed itself indicating
the leak stopped. No leak postlanding
KSC: Remove and replace thruster L3A.

STS-42-V-06 IThruster R4U oxidizer LeakI030:03:07 G.m.t. Crew downlinked video of fluid leak from aft of vehicle. Power up of
CAR 42RF04 MOM FA4 verified R4U oxidizer leak. Leak also visible via tank
IPR 53V-0004 quantity decrease. Right manifold 4 closed for entry. No leak
postlanding.
KSC: Remove and replace thruster R4U.

ST5-42-V-07 IWireless communications 027:06:30 G.m.t. The crew reported that two CRU's had failed, one in the Orbiter and one
Equipment a) FIAR BFCE in the Spacelab. Also wall unit C had a constant beeping, and wall
a) Two CRU's bad 029-F045 and unit A was scratchy and quit working on flight day 5 for 20 minutes.
b) Wall units A & C 029-F046 Some of the leg units drained batteries in as little as 2 hours.
were Degraded KSC: Remove all affected units and deliver to FEPC.
c) Low Battery Life
N
C» STS-42-V-08 IDegraded Waste Dump Flow 023:15:08 G.m.t. During waste dump 2, the dump flowrate degraded from an initial rate of
Rate IM 42RF05 1.9 percentfminute to a final rate of 1.5 percentfminute on the first
IPR 53V-0008 segment. The remaining three segments had a dump rate of
1.6 percentfminute. Postflight urine solids filter removed and
replaced - looked okay. Data analysis of KSC flow testing continuing.

ST5-42-V-09 ILiquid Oxygen Topping 030:15:30 G.m.t. Open indication did not appear when valve was commanded open during
Valve Open Indication IM 42RF06 entry. Closed indication was lost. Closed indication came back when
Missing IPR-53V-0009 when valve commanded closed.
KSC: Verified bad microswitch. Valve removed and replaced.

ST5-42-V-10 10000SS Pyrotechnics Did Ascent - DiscoVeredlRight side bottle 2 "close" pyrotechnic did not fire, and no
Not Fire (GFE) in Postlanding pyrotechnics fired on bottle 3. All other bottle pyrotechics operated
Inspection properly.
FIAR BFCE-029-F006

: :

'-:';'$iO--'!it;

) .,)
 NSTS-08274 - STS-42 Space Shuttle Mission Report

NASA Headquarters CB/D. Brandenstein (10) ES3/y. C. Chang ECHS/Hamilton Standard C. WOodland, Prog. Mgr. Mr. .James V. Zimmerman
QPjB. Greenly CB/K. Colgan ES3/p. Serna SPAR Aerospace Limited NASA European Rep
QP/R. Perry CB/R. Grabe (7) ES6/C. W. Norris (2) External Distribution 1235 Ormond Drive c/o American Embassy
ar/M. Greenfield CB/T. Henricks ET/C. A. Graves, .Jr. (8) Mr. Willis M. Hawkins weston, Ontario APO New York, NY 09777
MCF/D. Hedin DA,lLibrary EK/SSD Library Senior Advisor Canada, M9L 2W6
KlJ/C. Perry DA15/D. Nelson 03/.J. W. Seyl (2) Lockheed Corporation commanding General
DA3/S. G. Bales GA,IT. W. Holloway P. O. Box 551 Darryl Strickland u. S. Army Logistics Center
Goddard Space FIt ctr DA3/R. K. Holkan QMVD. C. Schultz Burbank, CA 91520 P. O. Box 1940 Attn: ATCIr-PS/Col. Senegal
300/R. C. Bauman DAS/R. Legler .JL4/R. L. Squires North Highlands, CA Ft. Lee, VA 238001-6000
700/.J. R. Busse DAS;Library .JM2;Library (3) NASA-Lewis Research Center 95660-8940
700/T. E. Huber DF/.J. Knight M.J/T. R. Loe (2) Cleveland, OH. 44135 capt • .J. Behling
7l0/jW. Meyer DF7/p. Cerna NlVC. S. Harlan Attn: 333-1/T. Fuller A. S. .Jones (2) 6555 ASTG/SMSP
730jE. I. Powers DF72/Q. Carelock ND/M. C. Perry SPAR Aerospace Limited Cape canaveral AFS, FL.
730.l/.J. P. Young DG/.J. A. Wegener ND3/L. Lewallen Russell A. Larson 1235 Ormont Dr. 32925
400/V. Weyers 00410. Rickerl NS/D. W. Whittle Mail stop 4A Weston, Ontario,
100/p. T. Burr OO4/R. Nute P/VR. L. Berry Charles Stark Draper Lab. Canada M9L 2W6 R. A. Colonna (2)
302jW. F. Bangs OO4jLead FNJ PAI.J. R. Garman Inc. u. S. Embassy
3l3/R. Marriott OO411jE. B. Pippert PT3/S. Morris 555 Technology Square .J. Middleton Box 14
130/.J. Katz OO/.J. F. Whitely SAlC. L. Huntoon Cambridge, MA 02139 SPAR Aerospace Limited APO AP 96549
tfl45jM. LeBlanc SA,IW. D. Womack 1700 Ormont Drive
KSC DG47/Sim Sup's SD/S. L. Pool Mr. Ira Grant Hedrick Weston, Ontario, LESC-Houston
Library-D/(20 copies) DG66/H. Lampazzi SD2/R. D. Billica Presidential Assistant Canada M9L 2W7 B08/p. Davis
MK/B. H. Shaw DMV.J. C. Harpold SD24/D. A. Rushing for Corporate C07/LESC Library
LSO-420jW. K. Hollis DMVC. F. Deiterich SD4/N. cintron Technology N. Parmet C12/D. Harrison
IJoI22/.J. R. Montalbano SD5/.J. Charles Grumman Aerospace Corp 5907 Sunrise Drive C12/R. w. Fricke (5)
MSFC EA,IH. o. Poh1 SE/.J. H. Langford Bethpage, NY 11714 Fairway, Kansas 66205
CN22D/Respository (30) ECjW. E. Ellis SN15/D. pitts GE Government Services
EP5l/.J. Redus (5) EC/F. H. Samonski SP/C. D. Perner (5) Dr. Seymour C. Himmel R. Peterson 1050 Bay Area Blvd.
EE31/p. Hoag (5) EC3/D. F. Hughes TAlC. H. Lambert 12700 Lake Avenue, 11501 Mail stop 351-4A Houston, TX 77058
FASI/S. P. Sauchier EC2/M. Rodriguez TC3/.J. Lowe Lakewood, OH 44107 Honeywell Inc. Attn: A. Verrengia .
.JA01/.J. A. Downey EC4/L. o. casey TC3/T. Bruce 13350 Hwy 19
SA12/O. E. Henson EC3/E. Winkler T.J/L. E. Bell Mr. .John F. McDonald Clearwater, FL 34624 TRW
EC3/H. Rotter (2) T.J2/G. W. Sandars Vice President-Technical 1 Space Park Drive
Langley Research Center EC6/.J. W. McBarron (5) TM2/.J. Bates Services Aerospace Corporation Rl1/1850 - L. Stytle
Technical Libraryl EE/.J. Griffin VA/D. M. Germany TigerAir, Inc. P. o. Box 92957 Redondo Beach, CA 90278
Mail Stop 185 EE2/H. A. Vang VAI.J. C. Boykin 3000 North Claybourn Ave Los Angeles, CA 90009
EE3/p. Shack VE4jW. H. Taylor Burbank, CA 91505 Attn: W. Smith, MS/619 HQ AFSPACECOM/OOSL
Rockwell-Downey EE6/L. Leonard VF/D. W. camp Bldg 1 stop 7
AD75jData Management (50) EE6/R. Nuss VFjE. R. Hischke Dr • .John G. Stewart McDonnell Douglas-Houston Peterson AFB
EE7/M. D. Schmalz VF2jW• .J. Gaylor Manager, Office of D2/M. D. Pipher Colorado springs, Co 80914
Rockwell-Houston EE7/.J. C. Dallas VF2/.J. W. Mistrot Planning and Budget T3A1A. D. Hockenbury Attn: Capt. S. M. Young
Rl2A-130/.J. C. Snowden EK/I. Burtzlaff VF2/C. critzos TVA E6C9
Rl2A-130/.J. P. Shea ET5/.J. A. Lawrence VF2/R. Brasher 400 Commerce Avenue T. Myers, Sys Tech, Inc. Lockheed Advanced
ZCOl/C. Ritrivi EG/.J. Thibodeau VF2/K. E. Kaminski (25) Knoxville, TN 37902 13766 So. Hawthorne Blvd. Development Co.
Rl7E/.J. Woodard EG2/L. B. MCWhorter VF3/M. T. Suffredini (13) Hawthorne, CA 90250 P.O. Box 250
R20B/R. Pechacek EG2/K. D. Frank VF5/H. Kolkhorst TRW Sunland, CA. 91041
Rl6H/K. M. Rahman EG3/R. Barton VG/F. Littleton Houston, TX 77058 D. Molgaard Attn: D. Urie D/7212,
EG3/p. Romere VKjC. G• .Jenkins Attn: C. Peterson/H5 2525 Bay Area Blvd. B375, PjD6
.JSC EG3/S. Derry VP/C. McCUllough (3) Suite 620
MIA. Cohen EG4/.J. E. Yeo VP12/D. Fitts R. Hoey Houston, TX 77058 R. Birman
AC/D. A. Nebrig EK5jW. N. Trahan VRJD. D. Ewart 6510 Test Wing/TEG/236 General Electric Co.
AC5/.J. W. Young EP2/H • .J. Brasseaux WAIL. G. Williams Edwards ArB, CA 93523 L. R. Adkins/IBM Bldg Space Division
AP3/.J. E. Riley (4) EP2/L • .Jenkins WC/L. D. Austin Mail Code 6206 P. o. Box 8555
AP4jB. L. Dean (3) EP5/T. L. Davies WE/R. D. White .John Williams 3700 Bay Area Boulevard Philadelphia, PA 19101
BL,IW. L. Draper EP5/N. Faget ~jW• .J. Moon 1995 Ferndale Place Houston, TX 77058
BY4/History Office (2) ERjW. W. Guy ZR;Lt. Col. .J. McLeroy Thousands Oaks, CA 91360 Headquarters, Space Div
ClI/D. R. Puddy ES/D. C. Wade ZRl2/.J. A. Yannie .James R. WOmack Attn.: SSD/CLP
CA4/R. Filler ESjW. G. McMUllen (2) 1lARR/.J. White Ames Research Center .JPL/233-307 Los Angeles AF Station
CA4/3. Williams ES/.J. A. smith 1lARR/H. .Jones Moffett Field, CA 94035 4800 Oak Grove Dr P. o. Box 92960
ES3/C. R. Ortiz BARRjR. Hennan 233-17/3. Hart Pasadena, CA 91109 Worldway Postal Center
Los Angeles, CA 90009
Notify VF4/R. W. Fricke (FTS-525-3313) of any correction, additions, or deletions to this list.

) ) )