Posted on 07/27/2005 6:09:10 PM PDT by anymouse
The shuttle Discovery, like Columbia, shed a large chunk of foam debris during liftoff that could have threatened the return of the seven astronauts, NASA said Wednesday.
While there are no signs the piece of insulation damaged the spacecraft, NASA is grounding future shuttle flights until the hazard can be fixed.
"Call it luck or whatever, it didn't harm the orbiter," said shuttle program manager Bill Parsons. If the foam had broken away earlier in flight, when the atmosphere is thicker increasing the likelihood of impact, it could have caused catastrophic damage to Discovery.
"We think that would have been really bad, so it's not acceptable," said Parsons' deputy, Wayne Hale. But he said early signs are Discovery is safe for its return home.
A large chunk of foam flew off Discovery's redesigned external fuel tank just two minutes after what initially looked like a picture-perfect liftoff Tuesday morning. But in less than an hour NASA had spotted images of a mysterious object whirling away from the tank.
Mission managers did not realize what the object was — or how much havoc it would cause to the shuttle program — until Wednesday after reviewing video and images taken by just a few of the 100-plus cameras in place to watch for such dangers.
Officials do not believe the foam hit the shuttle, posing a threat to the seven astronauts when they return to Earth on Aug. 7. But they plan a closer inspection of the spacecraft in the next few days to be sure.
"You have to admit when you're wrong. We were wrong," Parsons said. "We need to do some work here, and so we're telling you right now that the ... foam should not have come off. It came off. We've got to go do something about that."
The loss of a chunk of debris, a vexing problem NASA thought had been fixed, represents a tremendous setback to a space program that has spent 2 1/2 years and over $1 billion trying to make the 20-year-old shuttles safe to fly.
"We won't be able to fly again," until the hazard is removed, Parsons told reporters in a briefing Wednesday evening.
Engineers believe the foam was 24 to 33 inches long, 10 to 14 inches wide, and anywhere between 2 and 8 inches thick, only somewhat smaller than the chunk that smashed into Columbia's left wing during liftoff in 2003. Its weight was not immediately known.
It broke away from a different part of the tank than the piece that mortally wounded Columbia. After the accident, the tank was redesigned to reduce the risk of foam insulation falling off.
Discovery's astronauts were told of the foam loss before going to sleep Wednesday.
Parsons stressed that Discovery's 12-day mission was a test flight designed to check the safety of future shuttle missions. He refused to give up on the spacecraft that was designed in the 1970s.
"We think we can make this vehicle safe for the next flight," he said, declining to judge the long-term impact on the manned space program. "We will determine if it's safe to fly."
Atlantis was supposed to lift off in September, but that mission is now on indefinite hold. Parsons refused to speculate when a shuttle might fly again, but did not rule out the possibility that Discovery's current mission may be the only one for 2005.
He said it was unlikely that Atlantis would be needed for a rescue mission, in the event Discovery could not return safely to Earth and its astronauts had to move into the international space station. Discovery, fortunately, appears to be in good shape for re-entry, he said.
In addition to the big chunk of foam, several smaller pieces broke off, including at least one from an area of the fuel tank that had been modified in the wake of the Columbia disaster.
Thermal tile was also damaged on Discovery's belly; one tile lost a 1 1/2-inch piece right next to the set of doors for the nose landing gear, a particularly vulnerable area.
Hale said none of the tile damage looked particularly serious, and likely would not require repairs in orbit.
Imagery experts and engineers expect to know by Thursday afternoon whether the gouge left by the missing piece of tile needs a second look. The astronauts have a 100-foot, laser-tipped crane on board that could determine precisely how deep the gouge is.
The tile fragment broke off less than two minutes after liftoff Tuesday and was spotted by a camera mounted on the external fuel tank.
If NASA decides to use its new inspection tool to get a 3-D view of the tile damage, the astronauts will examine the spot on Friday, a day after docking with the international space station.
On Wednesday, Discovery's astronauts spent nearly six hours using the boom to inspect Discovery's wings and nose cap for launch damage. The wings and nose are protected by reinforced carbon panels capable of taking the brunt of the searing re-entry heat.
Hale said the laser inspection turned up nothing alarming, but the analysis is ongoing.
They did not redeisgn the ET, just made some changes - added heaters, sheilding, camera, sensors, and cutaway some foam they thought they could do with out.
One way to look at it: our shuttle astronauts are safer in space in a damaged vehicle, than riding a London subway here on earth.
I don't think so. We didn't have the problem until the enviros made NASA get rid of the original insulation - which never failed. Since the change, there have been failures on every mission.
You could look it up.
http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2942
Griffin wants to junk the Space Shuttle and get to work on the CEV. Now.
The Goddard and the Wright brothers were working on a military contracts. Edison worked on developing applications for existing science, and Da Vinci was employed by his Prince. Big raw reseach requires massive public investment, without Isabella,Colombus would never have crossed the ocean.
The shuttle safety record is about 1 death per 12 flights.
Question? Is it in NASA's best interest to let the shuttle fail?
There is so much left do do on the moon. Practice for Mars. Radio astronomy on the far side. Learning how to live in space colonies. Extracting water and air from the soil. Learning to build shelters. Exploring our closest neighbor that we have scarcely trod on at all.
Watch "From the Earth to the Moon" Episode about Apollo 15 and Professor Lee Silver.
"OK, what the heck has NASA been doing for the past two years? It is completely insane that the exact same problem that killed 7 on Columbia happened again. I thought they spent the past two years and millions this very issue. For it to happen again is beyond belief...what kind of shop are they running down there?
If I was the current crew, I would be furious that they allowed this to happen again. I realize that space travel is a very dangerous business and you can never be sure that nothing will go wrong...but at least fix known problems...just plain crazy."
Exactly what I was thinking! That was the purpose for grounding them for 2 and a half years! This is our tax money folks. I support the program but whoever is running NASA has many questions to answer.
NO !!!
There is a small legal matter to attend to and then private industry will take care of developing outer space. As it stands now, however, private industry will not take care of developing outer space. Private industry is effectively excluded from outer space.
"Space flight is hazardous and not for weenies !!!"
And apparently some of the critics here think they are smarter then the engineers and brave astronauts combined on this challenging problem. What part of "test' flight is not understood? She wont fly again until this new data is processed and acted upon. thats the way it works.
As "Q" said on Star Trek....
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you'd better just go home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wonderous, filled with wonders to satiate desires both suttle and gross, but it's not for the timid."
For new land to be claimed it must be occupied. Robots are not going to make the grade in that repect, not until we can declare robots to be legal persons..
A major political decision will now have to be made because surely the fix will require additional funding that would be taken away from other NASA programs and the shuttle follow-on program.
IMO, "no insulation events" was the bottom line for this flight.
They need a mission that is difficult enough to clear out the current layer of inept management while attracting new and capable talent.
----
and recieving the proper funding to pay for it.
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.