Skip to comments.
BREAKING: NBC News finds Jan 30 NASA Memo showing serious concern about tile damage!
NBC News
| February 3, 2003
| Jay Barbree
Posted on 02/03/2003 6:03:22 AM PST by Timesink
Developing. Watch MSNBC for latest. Internal memo shows some engineers believe there was up to a 7 1/2-inch gash from the foam breakoff at launch. Memo was serious enough to go out to all NASA centers two days before disaster.
TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; US: Florida; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: columbia; columbiatragedy; feb12003; msnbc; nasa; nbcnews; shuttle; shuttletragedy; spaceshuttle; sts107
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 741-760, 761-780, 781-800 ... 881-887 next last
To: KantianBurke
if I'm understanding the information you just presented me correctly then they could have been saved by the manner which I took me less than a minute to formulate and knowing only te basics surrounding the ship's capabilitiesIt certainly appears that was possible, though I don't believe a bloodbath at NASA is the best way to go right now.
These people will have to live with this everyday of their lives.
To: Howlin
Didn't mean to imply you were. I was just trying to follow the discussion and figure out how best to insert the comment. These threads are running so long that I gave up trying to figure who to address and just sent it to the most recent participants.
Regards,
762
posted on
02/03/2003 6:51:32 PM PST
by
Magnum44
(remember the Challenger 7, remember the Columbia 7, and never forget 9-11)
To: KantianBurke
Once it had been determined the shuttle was in danger, Atlantis could have been sent up within a week. Once up in space, the ship could have sided up parellel to the Columbia, a member of Atlantis could have space walked out to the Columbia with a bag containing 7 space suits and (assuming Columbia had an airlock) then led the crew members out one by one. From there Atlantis could have flown back to earth. As NASA did not pursue this or any other line of action they must bear the burden of responsibilty for the deaths. If what I just proposed is impossible I'll step back of course.
At the press conferences today, I understood there was not enough oxygen left on board the shuttle to last a week. So sending the Atlantis was NOT an option.
763
posted on
02/03/2003 6:56:37 PM PST
by
justshe
(Eliminate Freepathons! Become a monthly donor. Only YOU can prevent Freepathons!)
To: Magnum44
Didn't mean to snap! It's been a long day of Whack-a-Mole, if you get my drift!
764
posted on
02/03/2003 6:58:13 PM PST
by
Howlin
To: KantianBurke
And they would have been dead when the next shuttle got there.
765
posted on
02/03/2003 6:59:46 PM PST
by
Howlin
To: ET(end tyranny)
You don't think the person doing the interview already KNEW this guy's stats and qualifications??? LOL Right, 'cuz the folks in the media would never interview someone unqualified. LOL back at ya.
It's obvious you know nothing about this guys resume, so go play somewhere else.
766
posted on
02/03/2003 7:00:46 PM PST
by
TankerKC
(If all else fails, blame it on a lack of patriotism.)
To: justshe
40 hours after Columbia had launched is when the NASA techs claim to have become aware of the damage. My plan is predicated on NASA erring on the side of caution and preparing Atlantis to go up less than two days after the Columbia had launched. Is it correct to assume Columbia would have had enough air by the point Atlantis would have reached her?
767
posted on
02/03/2003 7:01:14 PM PST
by
KantianBurke
(Who are YOU to legislate with my hard earned $$$??)
To: Howlin
if you can determine that the answer to post 767 is in the negative then you are correct. Otherwise Columbia's seven astronaunts would be with their families right now.
768
posted on
02/03/2003 7:04:09 PM PST
by
KantianBurke
(Who are YOU to legislate with my hard earned $$$??)
To: KantianBurke
Every "expert" that has been on TV today has said they would have run out of air.
I suppose they could all be in on the cover-up though.
769
posted on
02/03/2003 7:05:08 PM PST
by
Howlin
To: Howlin
Unless of course the Russians diverted this rocket with an emergency oxygen supply to orbit with the SS and the crew was able to retrieve oxygen cannisters
Soyuz Progress M-47 Launches to the Space Station
Marc Boucher
Sunday, February 02, 2003
As the world mourns the loss of the Columbia, the continuing mission of the International Space Station goes on as a Russian Soyuz cargo spaceship launched today with a regularly scheduled re-supply mission.
The purpose of this launch is to deliver cargo to the International Space Station (ISS). The shipment includes: fuel components, expendable equipment for scientific experiments, containers with food and parcels for the crew, sets of onboard documentation and scientific instruments for experiments at the ISS.
The M-47 Progress cargo spacecraft totals 7,290 kilogram in weight with a payload measured at 2,568 kilograms and was boosted by a mid-class Soyuz-U rocket.
The three member crew of the space station has enough supplies to last them through June. Since the shuttle fleet is now grounded the only way home for the crew at this time is by the Soyuz escape vehicle attached to the space station. If the shuttle is grounded for a longer period a new crew can be exchanged with the present one via a Soyuz launch. However a shuttle is required to help keep the space station in orbit. Every time the shuttle visits the space station it boosts the station into a higher orbit. If the shuttle can not boost the space station then it would eventually fall back to earth and burn up in the atmosphere.
To: KantianBurke
40 hours after Columbia had launched is when the NASA techs claim to have become aware of the damage
This is incorrect. At this afternoon's press conference, we learned that after launch, tests were done using MULTIPLE parameter's, including weight/distance/impact angles, and the damage was thought to be inconsequential using the most extreme parameters. It also was stated at the news conference today, that the 'tile' identified at launch, as hitting the left wing is not even confirmed. Not even the 'color' of the object which flew off.
771
posted on
02/03/2003 7:06:20 PM PST
by
justshe
(Eliminate Freepathons! Become a monthly donor. Only YOU can prevent Freepathons!)
To: Rome2000; KantianBurke
Not sure but the airlock may have been 'occupied' with the space lab tunnel. Maybe I missed it skimming the post, but if the lab is on board and mated to the tunnel, an exterior lock may not be available. Seems like a design oversight, I know.
Of course, I am looking at at from the crews perspective. One has to remember that the 'vehicle' side of NASA does not think of the shuttle as something the crew owns or is responsible for, they prefer to think of the crew as passengers or even renters. In fact, the crew really is not authorized to do anything with the vehicle on its own. All operations must follow the carefully constructed scripts with ground controllers giving their nods almost every step of the way.
From the ground controllers perspective, unless its a mission requirement, there's no need for the 'passengers' to be strolling outside.
772
posted on
02/03/2003 7:06:55 PM PST
by
Magnum44
(remember the Challenger 7, remember the Columbia 7, and never forget 9-11)
To: Howlin
I'll refrain from asking whether you can point to any of those sources of yours (in all likelihood none will be provided so I'll save breath) and simply ask how long the Columbia shuttle was up in space for. If it was equipped for longer than say 14 days their deaths could have been prevented by the simple plan that was presented earlier.
773
posted on
02/03/2003 7:08:21 PM PST
by
KantianBurke
(Who are YOU to legislate with my hard earned $$$??)
To: justshe
774
posted on
02/03/2003 7:11:30 PM PST
by
TLBSHOW
(God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
To: KantianBurke
Bill Nelson, for one. Other astronauts. And the press conference this very day, morning and afternoon.
775
posted on
02/03/2003 7:11:31 PM PST
by
Howlin
To: Howlin
No worries. Some of you have more energy 'Mole-Whacking' than I. :^)
776
posted on
02/03/2003 7:12:14 PM PST
by
Magnum44
(remember the Challenger 7, remember the Columbia 7, and never forget 9-11)
To: Howlin
LOL
you have a hard time making friends don't you?
Fact is they did not have to die!
777
posted on
02/03/2003 7:13:27 PM PST
by
TLBSHOW
(God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
To: justshe
I've read three different versions on FR threads as to what went on during the press conference. Not doubting YOU but I'm a bit skeptical as to what was said / interpreted as I was at work and didn't see for myself. Also once again I'm not a rocket scientist nor do I play one on TV so I'm making educated guesses. Still its hard to beleive that something logical and rational could not have been put in place for the Columbia 7.
778
posted on
02/03/2003 7:13:37 PM PST
by
KantianBurke
(Who are YOU to legislate with my hard earned $$$??)
To: TLBSHOW
We all have to die.
To: TLBSHOW
Are You really going there ??????
780
posted on
02/03/2003 7:15:33 PM PST
by
cmsgop
( Arby's says no more Horsey Sauce for Scott Ritter !!!!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 741-760, 761-780, 781-800 ... 881-887 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson