position, shown in Figure 14. Using a laser level and a target block, the first table, table 2 as seen in  Figure 14, was leveled by placing the laser on one corner and the target block on the diagonally opposed corner. The target block was then relocated to the opposing corner of table 10 and was leveled relative to table 2. All table leveling was performed at the floor using an adjustable foot at the bottom of each table leg. Following the leveling of table 10 relative to 2, table 11 was leveled relative to 2. Tables 3, 12 and 13 were done similarly. All adjacent tables in between were then leveled and adjusted from level in order to “best fit” their edges and seams to those of the corner tables. Table edge height was assessed by feel across the top surface, from one table to the next. The final step was to bring into position the front table,  table 1, and level it to the table assembly. Following leveling and seam adjustment, each table was bolted to the adjacent table(s) to tighten the table seams, stabilize table position, and stabilize the overall table  assembly. Once set up was complete, the table assembly was ready for the table surface cover. With the  surface cover in place, table set up could be verified with system walk-outs and hand release  deployments. Through iterative hand release deployments and adjustments, the table assembly could be optimized for deployment tests. Perhaps the most critical of tables was table 1, seen in Figure 14, which  was at the spacecraft interface that supported the entire wing in its stowed state. Deployment time and path were sensitive to the transition of the panels and the elbow support stand across that first seam.   Figure 14.  Table Assembly Layout Of equal importance was the adjustment of the g-negation support frames and their respective air pads  such that system loads were evenly distributed across all air pads to prevent overloading of any sub-group of air pads. G-negation frames could be adjusted at the interface to the air pads to add or relieve load at pad locations. In this fashion, frame or pad to table interface was optimized at the time of frame installation to the stowed wing assembly. Air pad heights were adjusted so that there was free rotational spin at each pad. Inability to easily rotate any air pad indicated that pad was carrying too much load. Easy rotation and wobble at any air pad indicated that the pad had too much clearance from the table surface  and was not loaded enough. Adjustments to the respective frame(s) and pads were made accordingly.  Upon release of wing preload and system walk-out, hand release or official deployment, adjustments  could be made for further system optimization. This was possible by either adjusting both g-negation frames and air pads, or by adjusting the tables themselves to change table pitch or seam interface issues.  Additionally, the wing itself could be adjusted by modifying the pitch or roll of the spacecraft dolly. This  however had to be done with the wing in the stowed position and was only to be done if the dolly was notlevel in either regard. Spacecraft dolly position and adjustment is covered later in more detail. Of course, proper initial set up would alleviate need for post release adjustments. As such, once the system was  refined and understood, initial set up was efficient and all that was required. This was verified through successful post-test deployments which could not be preceded by verification walk outs. Following  10  11 9 8  7 6  5 4  3 2  13 1  12 341