Posted on 07/28/2005 8:57:02 AM PDT by InvisibleChurch
Thursday, July 28, 2005 9:27 a.m. EDT Shuttle Foam Loss Linked to EPA Regs
As recently as last month, NASA had been warned that foam insulation on the space shuttle's external fuel tank could sheer off as it did in the 2003 Columbia disaster - a problem that has plagued space shuttle flights since NASA switched to a non-Freon-based type of foam insulation to comply with Clinton Administration Environmental Protection Agency regulations.
"Despite exhaustive work and considerable progress over the past 2-1/2 years, NASA has been unable to eliminate the possibility of dangerous pieces of foam and ice from breaking off the external fuel tank and striking the shuttle at liftoff," the agency's Return-to-Flight Task Force said just last month, according to the Associated Press. But instead of returning the much safer, politically incorrect, Freon-based foam for Discovery's launch, the space agency tinkered with the application process, changing "the way the foam was applied to reduce the size and number of air pockets," according to Newsday.
"NASA chose to stick with non-Freon-based foam insulation on the booster rockets, despite evidence that this type of foam causes up to 11 times as much damage to thermal tiles as the older, freon-based foam," warned space expert Robert Garmong just nine months ago.
In fact, though NASA never acknowledged that its environmentally friendly, more brittle foam had anything to do with the foam sheering problem, the link had been well documented within weeks of the Columbia disaster.
In Feb. 2003, for instance, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported:
"NASA engineers have known for at least five years that insulating foam could peel off the space shuttle's external fuel tanks and damage the vital heat-protecting tiles that the space agency says were the likely 'root cause' of Saturday's shuttle disaster."
In a 1997 report, NASA mechanical systems engineer Greg Katnik "noted that the 1997 mission, STS-87, was the first to use a new method of 'foaming' the tanks, one designed to address NASA's goal of using environmentally friendly products. The shift came as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was ordering many industries to phase out the use of Freon, an aerosol propellant linked to ozone depletion and global warming," the Inquirer said.
Before the environmentally friendly new insulation was used, about 40 of the spacecraft's 26,000 ceramic tiles would sustain damage in missions. However, Katnik reported that NASA engineers found 308 "hits" to Columbia after a 1997 flight.
A "massive material loss on the side of the external tank" caused much of the damage, Katnik wrote in an article in Space Team Online.
He called the damage "significant." One hundred thirty-two hits were bigger than 1 inch in diameter, and some slashes were as long as 15 inches.
"As recently as last September [2002], a retired engineering manager for Lockheed Martin, the contractor that assembles the tanks, told a conference in New Orleans that developing a new foam to meet environmental standards had 'been much more difficult than anticipated,'" the Inquirer said.
The engineer, who helped design the thermal protection system, said that switching from the Freon foam "resulted in unanticipated program impacts, such as foam loss during flight."
Right now we are at zero pounds shuttle payload.
I've got three words for you:
1. Read
2. Comprehend
3. Post
I was talking about Clinton.
But another ironic thing to consider - the regulations prohibiting Freon used in making insulation -EXEMPTED NASA.
Problem is - NASA is on the ozone hole scare, figuring more money there. So NASA has chosen to be politically correct, and while they could have chosen to continue insulating the external tank in the old way (using Freon) - NASA decided to set a good example and drop using Freon.
The NASA people who made this choice are responsible for the loss of the Shuttle Columbia - because there was ample evidence before its loss (starting in 1997) that the new style foam caused problems. Rather than fixing the problem by going back to what worked ... they ignored it!
Mike
The tank is very large. That would be a massive weight increase.
Did the original shuttle design include foam insulation?
With Challenger a number of issues snowballed to make that o-ring fail. The real mistake was in NASA's inability to see those factors were snowballing. The data was there.
freon is waaaay heavier than oxygen or nitrogen. I have been asking this question (how Freon would float into the high atmosphere) for years and so far, no one has answered it.
If people were smart, they would ask how long NASA has been aware of tiles and debris being sheered away. I goes back twenty years that I know of. I worked on the program.
People should also ask why we didn't go forward with plans for a much safer, and economical space vehicle long ago. The technology has been around, and it was developed because the shuttles were never intended to be in use this long.
The shuttles are too expensive to maintain, and the long ago planned next generation of vehicles would be capable of more flights at a fraction of the cost of launching shuttle flights, and with much greater safety.
There's a lot of politics behind the shuttle program, and the reasons why we continue to utilize the shuttles.
What do the ceramic pads do to the rotors? Do they need to heat up to an operating temperature before they start to grab?
Don't be a smartass!
The question has been settled.
A friend of mine emailed me this..
Is this the smoking gun?
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/45329main_hcfc4_001.pdf
Thanks Clock King, but I think that's for the main, liquid fueled engines, I was interested in knowing the output of the solid rocket booster strapped to the sides of the main fuel tank.
Best Regards
Sergio
Environmentalism kills.
"Another lovely mark on the legacy of our second worst President ever"
Carter the worst? He's got my vote.
"Maybe a few emails to Hannity, Neil Cavuto, O'Reilly, etc. to look into this might shine a light on this dangerous nonsense."
Don't forget John Stossel! He loves this kind of story.
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.