Replies

Uh, Dude
SLWT is used for ISS missions, the LWT is used for non-ISS misions. The difference in weight is a big deal for final orbit. Non-ISS mission = use old tank from stock.

This was covered in some depth in a press conference BTW.

Sorry you had to waste your morning.

Have fun.

But if the old tank had problems associated with it other than greater weight, it wouldn't be a great idea to use it on any mission. It appears that this MAY be the case.

Please reread the links to fully understand this.
I Apologize as this issue is complicated.

You Said:
"Uh, Dude
SLWT is used for ISS missions, the LWT is used for non-ISS misions. The difference in weight is a big deal for final orbit. Non-ISS mission = use old tank from stock.
This was covered in some depth in a press conference BTW.
Sorry you had to waste your morning.
Have fun.

First off, I am not having fun, and I do not feel I have wasted two entire days on this thus far. Your implication of that is not very nice.

Second:

Please go look up these missions.

STS-109 ET-112 NON-ISS SLWT Columbia 3/1/2002
STS-99 ET-92 NON-ISS LWT Endeavour 2/11/2000
STS-93 ET-99 (SLWT #4) Columbia 7/23/99

So I am afraid that is not the case. The SLWT has been used on Non-ISS Misions.

And there are a total of 3 different tanks.

Tank #1 Used 6 times.
Tank #2 LWT 10,000 Lbs, Lighter than #1
Tank #3 SLWT 7,500 Lbs Lighter than LWT. (First Flown in 1998)

Please read a bit more. And ask for a clarification, and I will be happy to provide it.

And as to the press conferences, I would not hold all my weight as to what they are saying, as they have made quite a few mistakes already, and they just made another one 30 minutes ago when they incorrectly stated there were only 3 instances of debris. There have been at least 5 Confirmed by their own websites.

Regards,
Joe