Sorry, but this guy is confused, there are thermal TILES on the orbiter, and there is foam insulation on the external tank. NOT the same thing. Therefore, this entire article is, um, Freon-free Fecal Matter.
You are right... and wrong. The thrust of the article was that PC environmentalism may be to blame for the destruction of Discovery. This guy has his facts a bit garbled but the basic thesis is sound. In 1997, environmentalists forced the elimination of exterior fuel tank foam that had been made with freon as part of the manufacturing process. The freon made foam did not slough off the tank in large chunks... the replacement "environmentally friendly" foam does!
The author is confused but correct.
The foam was changed for precisely the reason given. The foam now fails at a higher rate than previous for precisely the reason given.
The author went too far with his "no one knows" drama - and confuses the tiles with the foam, thus damaging his credibility. But the core facts are the facts - the foam was redesigned to be more environmentally friendly, with a resultant loss in performance which directly leads to this condition.
Diva's Husband
"Therefore, this entire article is, um, Freon-free Fecal Matter"
Poorly written, but the ET has been noted to cause problems. It's strange that NASA refuses to address this issue. Instead the NASA "experts" tell us the Shuttle is safe to launch after 2.5 years and hundreds of millions of dollars in studies. Yet, almost immediately after the launch the shuttle was grounded again for the same problem NASA refuses to address.
Next time NASA loses people because of the foam... NASA will be the "Freon-free Fecal Matter".
Holtz
JeffersonRepublic.com
An understandable error. He fails to understand that it is the change in foam formula that weakened the tank insullation, causing it to be prone to breakage, and that the resultant tumbling debris is the proximate cause of the tile problem.