AP: Shuttle Impact Test Knocks Seal Loose

AP via Yahoo ^ | May 29, 2003 | Marcia Dunn

[mikegi]

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. - Foam shot at a fiberglass mock-up of a space shuttle wing knocked loose a seal Thursday, providing hard evidence for accident investigators who suspect Columbia was doomed from liftoff by a debris strike.

The investigators suspect a seal along the leading edge of Columbia's left wing was damaged when a chunk of foam insulation from the spaceship's fuel tank slammed into it during launch.

A spokesman for the Columbia Accident Investigation Board, Air Force Lt. Col. Woody Woodyard, described Thursday's result as "significant."

"We're not drawing any conclusions," Woodyard said, adding that more foam-impact tests are planned in coming weeks. "We've got to analyze the data and evaluate all the data before we can draw any conclusions."

In the first and only shot of the day at Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio, a 1.67-pound piece of real space shuttle foam insulation was shot at the fiberglass leading edge at 533 mph. The foam blasted through the 33-foot barrel of a nitrogen-pressurized gun toward the pretend panel No. 6 on the leading edge, tilted at a 20-degree angle.

Upon impact, the adjacent seal lifted and pulled toward panel No. 7, leaving an opening about 22 inches long, Woodyard said. The width of the gap ranged from the thickness of a dime to more than a quarter-inch.

All the parts in the abbreviated leading edge were fiberglass and came from the never-launched shuttle prototype Enterprise, which is housed at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, Woodyard said. In highly anticipated testing in June, researchers plan to shoot foam at real carbon-composite wing pieces that actually flew in space.

Fiberglass is about 2 1/2 times more resilient than the carbon composite material that makes up real wing panels and seals, Woodyard said. That would suggest that a real panel or seal would have been damaged even more by a foam strike.

Thursday's result was within impact predictions, Woodyard said. Earlier this month, researchers in San Antonio fired foam at the silica-glass thermal tiles that cover much of the space shuttles, but little if any damage resulted — also no surprise.

On Wednesday, the investigation board said a mystery object that floated away from the shuttle on Flight Day 2 back in January almost certainly was half of a wing leading-edge seal. Such a long, narrow slit would be enough to let in the scorching gases of atmospheric re-entry, and that hole likely would have grown as the shuttle continued its descent, enough to cause its breakup over Texas on Feb. 1.

All seven astronauts were killed, just minutes short of their Florida homecoming.

The board's chairman, retired Navy Adm. Harold Gehman Jr., has been reluctant to pin the blame on the foam strike, saying there isn't any hard proof. He also has stressed that the impact tests in San Antonio will show whether foam could damage a shuttle wing — not whether it actually did. But others on the 13-member panel have said they are convinced the foam led to the shuttle's destruction.

A final report by the board is expected by the end of July.

[mikegi]

Pretty much seals the case, IMHO, especially considering that this fiberglass test piece is more than twice as strong as the RCC used on Colombia.

[fooman]

mega ping

[NormsRevenge]

ping

[Fred Mertz]

Thanks for the ping.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

Bump!

[fooman]

ping

[jlogajan]

Upon impact, the adjacent seal lifted and pulled toward panel No. 7, leaving an opening about 22 inches long, Woodyard said. The width of the gap ranged from the thickness of a dime to more than a quarter-inch.

Unlikely to be visible from an earth based telescopic photo.

[ChadGore]

Re: The width of the gap ranged from the thickness of a dime to more than a quarter-inch.

If I turned in my work with a tollerance of + or -.100", I'de be fired on the spot.

[ChadGore]

Re: Unlikely to be visible from an earth based telescopic photo.

Very good point. We should take what we are learning into account to design and build the new shuttle.

[Orangedog]

Looks like the old fashioned ablative heat shielding wasn't such a bad idea after all.

[The Duke]

I guess the environmentalists who lobbied to replace the original heat shields can now feel free to put a notch in their belts.

[cake_crumb]

"Pretty much seals the case..."

LOL...just gotta make sure it doesn't get knocked loose. Sorry. The wording.

Anyhow, I've been avoiding these shuttle treads because they tend to be annoyingly tinfoil hattish.

I just stopped in to say (as a proponent of the foam insulation theory) ah HA! So it WAS the foam!!

OK....so when can we fix it with GOOD, SAFE non-ALGORE APPROVED foam and get the shuttle fleet back to work?

[DB]

I believe it was the foam that hit the shuttle that the environazis had replaced. It is weaker and more likely to fall off in flight.

[DB]

They need to carry a small robot craft that can inspect the vehicle externally via remote control.

[ChefKeith]

And in orbit that will acomplish???

The fact that the crew would still be F#$%ed

[DB]

Its been reported that they now think they may have been able to send a rescue ship.

With proper planning in the future they could have a backup ship minimally prepped for rescue so that it would be more practical if absolutely needed.

Another choice is to always carry enough fuel to reach the space station assuming that is possible.

[SierraWasp]

For what it's worth... I'll buy this reply, but not you next one. The so-called "EnvironMental Communutty" and all their political accomplices should be hauled into court, given a fair trial, then be hung for orchestrated murder!

That's just my most humble opinion. If you want to know what I really think... It's unprintable!!!

They used the space program's pictures to launch their movement into what it is today... Now these Luddites are killing the goose that laid their golden egg! They care nothing for "spaceship earth," just their own undue influence on public policy.

They have no redeeming social value to humanity!

[DB]

Was my "next" one really that bad?

[Carry_Okie]

First crack.

[DoughtyOne]

From the news conference on the day the shuttle broke up, I surmised three things.

1. The damage from the foam was much more significant that they let on.

2. The crew could have been rescued had NASA implemented an Emergency rescue plan.

3. Heads should role at NASA, some possible criminal negligence may have been involved all the way to the top.

Boy did I take heat from some people for making statements revealing my thoughts on this. Well, so far I'm still pretty comfortable with my initial conclusions.

NASA management basicly looks more vulnerable with each passing day. I have zero confidence in NASA management, so much so that if I were an astronaut, I'd refuse to fly until a complete shake-up of the system was instituted, including new management and a complete review of the current flight guidelines including the development of safety precautions that should have been instituted as long as three decades ago.

Even a lay person has more common sense than NASA management. Management??? LOL, more like a tragic comic relief team!