Posted on 12/31/2008 1:34:25 PM PST by BuckeyeTexan
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. — Astronauts on the shuttle Columbia were trying to regain control of their craft before it broke apart in 2003, but there was no chance of surviving the accident, a NASA report said on Tuesday.
From the crew's perspective, the shift from what appeared to be a normal descent on Feb. 1, 2003, into tragedy happened so fast that the astronauts did not even have time to close the visors on their helmets.
Columbia broke apart about 20 kilometres over Texas as it headed for landing at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The cause of the accident was traced to a hole in one of the shuttle's wings, which was hit by a piece of falling foam insulation during launch 16 days earlier.
Seven astronauts were killed when superheated atmospheric gases blasted inside the breach like a blow torch, melting the ship's structure.
(Excerpt) Read more at theglobeandmail.com ...
Dr. Richard Feynman. RIP.
“The Shuttle is a prime example of the technology American Socialism produces.”
No not really. Its an example of a space craft designed by committee.
Socialism couldn’t have built it in the first place.
American socialism could and did. Think of what a Constitutional Republic upholding Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness (meaning Divine understanding and favor) could do. We would have faster-than-light transports already. Well, maybe, if such are possible. But you get the drift.
DC-X.
From Wikipedia:
# dry mass: 9100 kg
# GLOW: 18,900 kg
From here, the RL-10's exhaust velocity is: 4.53 km/s.
Delta-V (assuming no losses) to LEO is 9.8 km/s. The rocket equation says: delta-v = ve * ln(m0/mi). Assuming no payload it had a delta-V of approximately: 3.31 km/s. Not even a third of the way to orbit.
Like I said...then physics got in the way.
“True but the Apollo mistakes weren’t things that caused people to raise alarms only to be silenced.”
Really? How do you know that?
I watched one documentary on that. It wasn’t just the o-rings. Yes the o-rings failed but the hole filled up shortly after it opened. They think it was reopened at altitude by the very high cross winds that further stressed the joints. This is when it burned into the external tank.
I watched it from the causeway five miles across the lagoon. My aunt worked for a NASA contractor and got me a launch pass. Devastating! I was snapping pictures with my girlfriend's camera and pulled off the shuttle to get a pic of the steam cloud on the ground at the moment the shuttle exploded. It took everybody there a few moments to realize what had happened.
We had driven out there once or twice before at 0 dark thirty and the launch was scrubbed each time. We had one last chance to see a launch before we had to start back to CO. Boy did we get more than we bargained for. After they finally let traffic leave the cape we went to Disney World to use our last day on a three-day ticket. We just wandered around like zombies most of that day. How do you have fun after watching something like that?
I know they were frustrated with the delays but they should have scrubbed that launch too.
The meeting I sat in on discussed that all solid rocket boosters that were recovered and evaluated. The engineers and inspectors recorded MULTIPLE incidences of ‘blow by’ hot gasses through the O-rings.
There were two sets of O-rings. A primary and a secondary 0-ring. Many times there was evidence of partial blow by of the primary o-ring. Sometimes complete blow-by of the primary o-ring and partial blow-by of the secondary o-ring.
The engineers thought that the shuttle would blow up on the launch pad due to hot gasses blowing by the rigid o-rings. When it cleared the tower one remarked to his co-worker something like, “WE SURE DODGED A BULLET DIDN’T WE?” Then is blew, over a minute later.
Sorry but cross winds at that altitude? no wind up there at that altitude and compared to the speed of the shuttle when it blew any wind would be minimal. Crap the shuttle was going about 2,000 miles per hour (total guess) but a 100 mpg cross wind would be nothing. Sounds like CYA blaming it on the wind.
Investigations in incidents like this list every possible contributing factor. The wind might have contributed something like 0.001% but the 0-ring at 33F contributed 99.999%
NASA/Thiokol knew this beforehand that there was a probably a 33% chance it would be destroyed. The bureaucrats decided to launch anyway.
Nope, it was the cold temperatures on the 0-rings. Hard as rock didn’t seal. Kind of like a leaky faucet, except with very high pressure gasses at extreme temperatures.
I wish the media would report on how the new, eco-friendly insulation may have contributed to the disaster but the media will ignore even a significant, spectacular story if the story does not help leftist politics.
mpg = mph
Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesh.
I won’t even list my other typos on the above post but oh-well.
It will probably really chafe some hides but I have always thought that they sent Challenger up to please Pres. Reagan. They had made a big deal about the "first teacher in space" and Reagan was all set to include it in his State of the Union speech. The launch had been scrubbed at least twice before IIRC and the day it did go was the day of or the day before the SotU Address. It was the last chance to combine the two.
All the major contractors had a phone conference or tele-conference with NASA right before th launch to give the greed or red light.
In this meeting, the Morton-Thiokol engineers said NO GO. Mute was hit and the engineers were told to take off their engineer hats and put on their manager hats.
Sound was turned back on and the GO from the booster company was given. Then the explosion.
That was not just one of millions of decisions. That was to GO/NO GO decision.
CEO’s etc don’t get paid to design the diameter of the o-ring but they do get paid to make the big decisions right. In this case they screwed up. badly.
February 4, 1986
Mr. Speaker, Mr. President, distinguished Members of the Congress, honored guests, and fellow citizens:
Thank you for allowing me to delay my address until this evening. We paused together to mourn and honor the valor of our seven Challenger heroes. And I hope that we are now ready to do what they would want us to do: Go forward, America, and reach for the stars. We will never forget those brave seven, but we shall go forward.
Rumor I heard was that NASA changed to more ECO-friendly (less effective) glue to glue insulating foam to the liquid fuel tank, thus foam fell off and caused an ecological disaster of heavy metals, bodies, etc.
As always the solution of liberals is much, much, much worse than the problem.
See tagline.
I never heard it as a rumor either. This is the first time I have ever said it myself but I thought it that day.
Ahh so all the other parties involved weren’t aware of the temperature and the ice?
Do you even know what socialism is? There is little economic incentive for private companies to invest the $$ needed for a real program.
Of course they do it in movies so what the hey, warp speed ahead.
“Rumor I heard was that NASA changed to more ECO-friendly (less effective) glue to glue insulating foam to the liquid fuel tank, thus foam fell off and caused an ecological disaster of heavy metals, bodies, etc.”
NASA decided to comply with new EPA regulations.
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.