Yep, the problem is filling them with data. Even a DISP needs somebody to generate the data it shows. The SPEC has a specific process for that, and also a function to respond to user inputs.
The lines were pixel based.
For now "can of worms".
I don't think that ever happened... but I could be wrong. AFAIK small payloads had to make a custom bridge, or more often used one for the GAS canisters, that had a few side mount points. The ROEU wasn't a payload...
First time I heard of that, but I'd say probably no. I didn't look much into the ROEU, and most of what I looked at was on the electrical side, so I don't really know the details of the mountings.
The ROEU was for electrical connections... data or power, both could be payload dependent, so maybe not all used it.
Well, there was only one MPLM that was going to support "active payloads" and that was FM-03, Donatello that never flew. It was going to use a version of the ROEU called the Remotely Operated Fluid Umbilical (ROFU). ROEU was only used to supply keep-alive power to certain payloads to keep things like heaters going until permanent power could be supplied. Once the ROEU was disconnected, they were on a timer as the payload could no longer be kept at an safe temperature.
I use that term loosely, more a generic term for SSV for things in the payload bay for me, so sorry for that confusion.
I think the MPLM in general might be a good base payload to have in SSV to have more "complete" flights come with it by default. maybe a simple MFD for managing the cargo weights and such to simulate the transfers.
Hmm, IMO that is going outside of the project scope (which is already large enough). Yes, there are some payloads and missions already included in SSV, but they usually exist as a demonstration of some feature (I even removed some of them in the last version that where adding nothing).
Now I know why I didn't recognize the Drop Bridge Adapter... it doesn't seem to be "original" hardware. The regular location for the ROEU is mounted on top of the bridge rail. This might just be a custom location for the MPLM... and I just love things like this
There you go. I'm pretty sure I have a diagram somewhere showing that the PAM keel trunnion is one PLID aft of the forward longeron trunnions. Plus, it certainly looks like that:
The PLID numbering represents a position each 3.933 inches, starting somewhere forward of the vehicle (I don't know why). Anyway, in the PLB there are PLID positions that can have a keel passive latch, or a keel active, or a longeron passive or a longeron active, or some combination of them, or none at all. When a PLID can't have any latch, I still show the number in the diagram, without the Xo coord, as an indication that this particular PLID is unusable. When picking a PLID for a latch, only the PLIDs that support that latch type and location are shown.
That is not what I see: in the image above, the right trunnion seems to be on this side of the structure plane, while the keel trunnion seems to be on the other side of the structure plane.
update on this: The one i was looking at getting scanned is ITAR restricted. I'm reaching out to see if all of the checklists like this are restricted, or just this one for some reason.
But the IUS, being much more powerful, versatile and smarter, had its deploy checklist posted online by NASA itself...
