NASA Press Conference LIVE THREAD

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

[OldFriend]

And I guess you believe that if only there was asbestos used in the WTC the buildings wouldn't have fallen???????????

[woodyinscc]

"Actually the tile problems are over 22 years old"

"The choices are"
"To replace them with something else (cept their isn't anything else)."

They should have put up an incentive award to private corporations. Say 500 million, the problem would have been solved long ago.

[Redleg Duke]

"We are asking each other better questions on this thread than the reporters are..."

In other words, we are not moronic enough to be reporters!

[r9etb]

Ok, but I prefer listening to the guy Ron.

Ron Dittemore became a flight director when I was working at JSC. He is a very intelligent, organized, and capable man. Unless he's changed a lot since I left, you can trust what he says.

[Redleg Duke]

He said specifically that the sensors failed sequentially...not simultaneously.

[r9etb]

Please explain...they crawl over to the wing attach point and turn cranks...?

The wheels are deployed using explosive bolts, which are activated by the pilot pressing a button. The doors fly open and the wheels lock in place. (The button, BTW, is covered and well-protected, so it'd be highly unlikely that it was accidentally pushed.)

[Redleg Duke]

"They should have put up an incentive award to private corporations. Say 500 million, the problem would have been solved long ago."

Interesting. And incentive award to ignore a law of physics. Like I say, "Interesting",

[Orion78]

[r9etb]

You think he is lying to you about whether spy satellites could look at the shuttle? The same lens that could read a license plate on the earth's surface would not necessarily be able to turn and focus on something that is much closer. They are designed for specific tasks.

It's possible to look at other satellites from orbit, but the task is daunting.

First, the distances are measured in thousands of miles (as opposed to hundreds of miles for ground objects).

Second, the relative speeds are incredible -- 35,000 mph or so -- which leads to a requirement for very high rate rotations, coupled with very precise pointing during the rotation. Even spy satellites generally aren't designed to do both of these things at the same time.

The likelihood of getting a recognizable picture is slim, and the likelihood of getting a damage assessment is vanishingly small.

A better argument might be made for attempting a ground-based observation, but that, too, probably wouldn't have given a good enough picture, unless the damage was extensive.

[Revel]

Most likely the temp reading can be explained. Initially they showed an increase in temperature. Eventually the temperature would be high enough to destroy the sensor or the connecting wires to it. This would explain the eventual off scale reading. The computer was still operating and had not yet been effected by the heat which was in the left wing area. So it was just sending out a message which just basically indicated that it could no longer read information from the sensor. My guess is that what happened next was that the left wing area started to break apart from the heat. This would send the craft tumbling out of control which would then cause the rest of it to come apart and explode. At this point all communication would be lost.

[r9etb]

ISS was WAY above them (115 miles) and in a completely different orbit. Colombia is not capable of reaching ISS altitude anyway from the start, given its weight (the other 3 are lighter and for whatever other reasons, can).

Not quite. Columbia could and often did make it up to ISS altitudes. The real story is that it was too heavy to carry ISS components -- its payload capacity was significantly less than the other Shuttles.

[Rain-maker]

This was at least the second launch with shedding foam, and IIRC, was about the ninth with shedding foam. All previous flights that experienced shedding foam at liftoff returned without burning up on re-entry, so perhaps the mission managers were into repeating the same thing, and getting the same result.

You could make the same assumption about russian roulette, but no one will say it is safe, even if you beat the odds for a consecutive period of time.

If your made aware of the possibility of disaster, you eliminate that risk or kapow you lose.

[WoofDog123]

"Not quite. Columbia could and often did make it up to ISS altitudes. The real story is that it was too heavy to carry ISS components -- its payload capacity was significantly less than the other Shuttles."

I stand corrected. The pool of available first-hand knowledge (people who have worked in the space shuttle program) on this forum has been impressive.

[r9etb]

OH, PUHLEEEEZE! Do you really think that no one in the entire NASA organization considered a backup plan? I'm sure there is more to it than your blanket, thinly-veiled accusations...

They have an incredible array of backup plans, flight rules, and flight techniques. They were detailed before Challenger, and were all reviewed and updated as part of the post-Challenger shake-up. The "tile repair" problem is rather obvious, and I believe it was probably looked at in detail before being rejected.

[BureaucratusMaximus]

During the STS-87 mission, there was a change made on the external tank. Because of NASA's goal to use environmentally friendly products, a new method of "foaming" the external tank had been used for this mission and the STS-86 mission. It is suspected that large amounts of foam separated from the external tank and impacted the orbiter. This caused significant damage to the protective tiles of the orbiter. Foam cause damage to a ceramic tile?! That seems unlikely, however when that foam is combined with a flight velocity between speeds of MACH two to MACH four, it becomes a projectile with incredible damage potential.

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. http://www.arnold.af.mil/aedc/newsreleases/1999/99-041.htm

Ah yes...hold on...let me get my "I'm shocked" look on my face.

There are a few things I take from this whole situation:

1) The astronauts who lost their lives should be grieved, and their families prayed for.

2) The federal goveernment, once a again proves that it knows best, and knows the best for its faithful citizens.

3) Environmental whackos should be rounded up and killed. Reparations should be paid shoortly before they die to businesses that left this country becuase of "Green" regulations.

4) EVERYBODY should own a firearm.

[Cboldt]

. . . You could make the same assumption about russian roulette

Sheesh. I drive my car daily. It hits bumps daily. The tires keep on rollin.

There is a difference between playing with a loaded gun, and an object that you believe you have familiarity with (e.g., tire in the above example), that based on your past experience, careful examination, etc. does not "go off and blow your brains out." You know as well as I do that NASA was not knowingly playing some version of Russian Roulette. Well, I take that back. I believe they weren't . . . you believe what you want to. Fair enough?

[Cboldt]

I agree, left wing has something to do with this. I'm very curious as to the reasoned theories of what went first, second, etc. leading up to the ultimate demise.

[r9etb]

That is called the die in obit plan. There is no abort from reentry. There is no rescue plan.

You're right. I was in the post-Challenger Flight Rules Review meeting where this particular one was discussed. There wasn't a lot of discussion -- everybody knew that the only plan was to not get to that point in the first place. (This was the same meeting where they reviewed the flight rules governing the ground-initiated destruct sequence for a launch contingency....)

IIRC, the astronauts were more than a little interested in the topic.

[PatriotGames]

This caused significant damage to the protective tiles of the orbiter. Foam cause damage to a ceramic tile?!

Have you ever been riding in an open vehicle at 70 mph and get hit in the face by a mosquito? I have. I was almost knocked unconscious.

I was riding in a boat going only 40 mph and was hit by a cricket. THAT required stitches to my chin.

Foam hitting the tiles would be disastrous at Mach 2 - 4. However, on the video it doesn't look like foam. It looks like ice which would be even more disastrous.

[r9etb]

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

Of course you mean that it was too heavy to carry full-sized ISS components up to the ISS orbit. I'm pretty sure it flew above ISS altitudes on several missions.