NASA Press Conference LIVE THREAD

Fox, CNN, networks, NASA TV | February 2, 2003 | NASA

[snopercod]

Any time now...

[WFTR]

He now seems rather dismissive of questions regarding inspecting or viewing the wing closely to see if there was damage.

I see two explanations for any change in his attitude towards this issue. The first is that they may have looked at it much more closely over the past 24 hours and come closer to a conclusion that the falling foam wasn't a problem. The second is that they have said all that they can say on the topic until they have more time to review the data. They might as well dismiss these questions until they are in a position to answer them intelligently based on the data.

[DoughtyOne]

Two is all you need in a pinch.

[Magnum44]

Any thoughts about post #458? What did you do in ops?

[txradioguy]

Did anyone else see "Meet The Press" this morning? I was listening and not really watching, but I thought someone on there was starting to float a balloon trying to blame this on "Bush cuts to the NASA budget." Can someone verify this and who said it? I was wondering how long it would be before the RATS tried to hang this on W. I smell another "What did he know and when did he know it?" rant from Hitlery if this is true.

[Jael]

Looks like Joe Farrah was reading our thread from last night, eh?

[snopercod]

The cracks were in the "flow liners" in the bellows between the orbiter and the SSMEs. No big deal, IMO.

Yes, I am saying that the stresses on the orbiter during re-entry are less than on an airliner during normal operations.

Columbia, especially, was way overdesigned, structurally. That's why it could have never reached the ISS. It was too heavy.

[Jael]

I think it matters, don't you?

[alancarp]

for some reason I think one is in scotland at some raf base?

I don't recall myself, but you're probably right: they have rarely done polar orbit launches in which the shuttle takes off...um, pretty much straight up the east coast of the US. Scotland would be appropriate in that case.

[John Jamieson]

I'm thinking now that this could be a realitively quick return to flight:

New foam inspections on the ET and maybe heavy duty foam in certain areas.

Reduced max reentry weight (won't affect most flights).

Some kind of CYB tile inpection on orbit (easy at the ISS).

The 32 month delay last time was agonizing.

[Jael]

BTW, I only quoted NASA on the issue.

[Rafterman1]

Did anyone else see "Meet The Press" this morning? I was listening and not really watching, but I thought someone on there was starting to float a balloon trying to blame this on "Bush cuts to the NASA budget."

Yeah, there was some drivel over on DU last night along the same lines. What morons!

[Rain-maker]

If you have the same tile and insulation problem for 5 years and fail to fix it, that is incompetence.

Although if your into repeating the same thing and expecting different results, they have a room for you at Betheseda.

[Jael]

I guess I didn't get the Holiday Inn part. :-)

[txradioguy]

I heard a report last night that said it was the heaviest (4.1 MILLION tons) and able to carry the least amount of cargo. The heavy weight was why it never docked with the ISS as well.

[Amelia]

Nevermind, finally found it on a back page of the NASA site: STS = Space Transportation System.

[txradioguy]

Well if the RATS do try to hang this on W, I hope the public is as repulsed by this blatent bit of politics as thos of us on here will be.

[Doohickey]

The arm wasn't installed for this trip.

[Jael]

Mr. Jamieson, I have been reading your very informative posts on these threads and just wanted to say thanks for the information you have provided.

I was wondering if you had time to look at these two reports and comment?

http://ltp.arc.nasa.gov/space/team/journals/katnik/sts87-12-23.html
"Damage numbering up to forty tiles is considered normal on each mission due to ice dropping off of the external tank (ET) and plume re-circulation causing this debris to impact with the tiles. But the extent of damage at the conclusion of this mission was not "normal."

The pattern of hits did not follow aerodynamic expectations, and the number, size and severity of hits were abnormal. Three hundred and eight hits were counted during the inspection, one-hundred and thirty two (132) were greater than one inch. Some of the hits measured fifteen (15) inches long with depths measuring up to one and one-half (1 1/2) inches. Considering that the depth of the tile is two (2) inches, a 75% penetration depth had been reached. Over one hundred (100) tiles have been removed from the Columbia because they were irreparable."



http://www.arnold.af.mil/aedc/newsreleases/1999/99-041.htm
"According to NASA, during several previous Space Shuttle flights, including the shuttle launched Nov. 29, 1998, the shuttle external tank experienced a significant loss of foam from the intertank. The material lost caused damage to the thermal protection high-temperature tiles on the lower surface of the shuttle orbiter."

[snopercod]

I was an OTC.

Yes, putting the ISS in the high-inclination (russian) orbit was a huge mistake for the US. (You can't launch to a lower inclination than your lattitude, so we chose the lattitude of Baikonur to be "inclusive".)

It costs us a 30% payload penalty every time we launch to the ISS. (We can thank AlGore and clinton for that.)

There is absolutely no way an orbiting shuttle could carry enough fuel to change it's inclination from 39 to 51 degrees.

[John Jamieson]

"4.1 MILLION tons" WoW!

Actually it weighs about 200,000 pounds (I haven't been able to find the exact numbers)

Columbia is the heaviest orbiter and this was the heaviest reentry ever attempted. Causes more heating. Might have been just a little too heavy.