 AP Photo
|
||||
Posted on 02/02/2003 2:54:30 PM PST by NormsRevenge
NASA: Shuttle Temperature Rose Suddenly
By PAUL RECER, AP Science Writer
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. -
NASA (news - web sites) officials said Sunday that space shuttle Columbia experienced a sudden and extreme rise in temperature on the fuselage moments before the craft broke apart.
|
|
||||||
NASA space shuttle program manager Ron Dittemore said the temperature rise — 60 degrees over five minutes in the mid-fuselage — was followed by an increased sign of drag that caused the shuttle's computerized flight control system to try to make an adjustment to the flight pattern.
Dittemore cautioned that the evidence was still preliminary, but that one of the possibilities was that there been damage or a loss of thermal tiles that protect the shuttle from burning up during re-entry into the Earth's atmosphere.
"We are making progress," Dittemore said, adding that the combination of new engineering data and an observer who reported seeing debris from the shuttle while it was still passing over California may create "a path that may lead us to the cause."
The shuttle broke up shortly before landing Saturday, killing all seven astronauts. Most of its debris landed in eastern Texas and Louisiana.
Earlier Sunday, NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe named a former Navy admiral to oversee an independent review of the accident, and said investigators initially would focus on whether a broken-off piece of insulation from the big external fuel tank caused damage to the shuttle during liftoff Jan. 16 that ultimately doomed the flight 16 days later.
"It's one of the areas we're looking at first, early, to make sure that the investigative team is concentrating on that theory," O'Keefe said.
The insulation is believed to have struck a section of the shuttle's left side.
Dittemore said the engineering data showed a temperature rise in the left wheel well of the shuttle about seven minutes before communication was lost with the spacecraft. One minute later, there was an even more significant temperature rise in the middle to left side of the fuselage.
The drag on the left wing began a short while later, causing the shuttle's automated flight system to start to make adjustments.
"There may be some significance to the wheel well. We've got some more detective work," Dittemore said.
The manufacturer of the fuel tank disclosed Sunday that NASA used an older version of the tank, which the space agency began phasing out in 2000. NASA's preflight press information stated the shuttle was using one of the newer super-lightweight fuel tanks.
Harry Wadsworth, a spokesman for Lockheed, the tank maker, said most shuttle launches use the "super-lightweight" tank and the older version is no longer made. Wadsworth said he did not know if there was a difference in how insulation was installed on the two types of tanks.
Wadsworth said the tank used aboard the Columbia mission was manufactured in November 2000 and delivered to NASA the next month. Only one more of the older tanks is left, he said.
O'Keefe emphasized that the space agency was being careful not to lock onto any one theory too soon. He vowed to "leave absolutely no stone unturned."
For a second day, searchers scoured forests and rural areas over 500 square miles of East Texas and western Louisiana for bits of metal, ceramic tile, computer chips and insulation from the shattered spacecraft.
State and federal officials, treating the investigation like a multi-county crime scene, were protecting the debris until it can be catalogued, carefully collected and then trucked to Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana.
The effort to reconstruct what is left of Columbia into a rough outline of the shuttle will be tedious and painstaking.
When a shuttle piece was located this weekend, searchers left it in place until a precise global position satellite reading could be taken. Each shuttle part is numbered; NASA officials say experts hope to trace the falling path of each recovered piece.
The goal is to establish a sequence of how parts were ripped off Columbia as it endured the intense heat and pressure of the high-speed re-entry into the atmosphere.
At least 20 engineers from United Space Alliance, a key NASA contractor for the shuttle program, were dispatched to Barksdale for what is expected to be a round-the-clock investigation.
Other experts, including metallurgists and forensic medicine specialists, are expected to join the investigation. Their focus will be on a microscopic examination of debris and remains that could elicit clues such as how hot the metal became, how it twisted and which parts flew off first.
In addition to NASA's investigation, O'Keefe named an independent panel to be headed by retired Navy admiral Harold W. Gehman Jr., who previously helped investigate the 2000 terrorist attack on the USS Cole (news - web sites).
Gehman's panel will also examine the Columbia wreckage, and come to its own conclusions about what happened. O'Keefe described Gehman as "well-versed in understanding exactly how to look about the forensics in these cases and coming up with the causal effects of what could occur."
Joining Gehman on the commission are four other military officers and two federal aviation safety officials.
Officials used horses and four-wheel-drive vehicles to find and recover the shuttle pieces. Divers were being called in to search the floor of Toledo Bend Reservoir, on the Texas-Louisiana line, for a car-sized piece seen slamming into the water.
Some body parts from the seven-member astronaut crew have been recovered and are being sent to a military morgue in Dover Air Force Base in Delaware.
Columbia came apart 200,000 feet over Texas while it was streaking at more than 12,000 miles an hour toward the Kennedy Space Center (news - web sites). A long vapor trail across the sky marked the rain of debris.
Looking for a compforting song and dance eh?
Or is it that you want to be lied to *nicely*?
I would guess that your time in retail sales just hasn't properly readied you for the world of the engineer and his totally concrete thought processes ...
Sure ... break out the Lego or Tinker Toy set and have a crack at it ...
Most people have difficulty changing their car's oil or installing a relatively simple CD player (and FORGET upgrading their PC!) -
- yet, they think the space shuttle can be radically redesigned in favor of safety with no performance or payload carrying penalty!
THAT amazes me ...
And they were showing *clean*, continuous video of that here in the Dallas area ...
Professional TV photogs like John Pronk who *shot* that video for WFAA CH 8 here in Dallas know when they have an image out-of-focus - why do you think it clears up so damn fast?
Your flippant response amazes me.
I pray that you are not an engineer or scientist. If you are, God help us all........
The key benefits of the shuttle design was its ability to deliver a good sized payload and or crew into orbit and then be able to re-use the vehicle.
Unfortunately, it hasn;t performed like a PeterBilt or Mack truck, tho it has been a workhorse for a lot of years. But we do need a new approach and better vehicles if we ever hope to travel further out into the solar system.
Here's a link to a NASA report that acknowledges that insulation probably damaged thermal times during ascent for STS-87:
It was foam...PLUS ICE!!!
That was disclosed by some reporters who had been clued in by a "Whistleblower" on background. In other words, it is NO ACCIDENT that both "happened" in January in bitter cold. Challenger, it was O-Rings.
Columbia it was ICE that formed around the top of the Liquid Hydrogen insulating foam that literally RIPPED the insulating foam off at maximum Acceleration.
Later reports didn't mention the ICE, only foam.
Kinda like the way the "take" on OKC changed over time.
(Besides being such an obnoxious person), You are wrong on both counts.
From the NASA press kit:
-------------
Return to Launch Site
The RTLS abort mode is designed to allow the return of the orbiter, crew, and payload to the launch site, Kennedy Space Center, approximately 25 minutes after lift-off.
The RTLS profile is designed to accommodate the loss of thrust from one space shuttle main engine between lift-off and approximately four minutes 20 seconds, at which time not enough main propulsion system propellant remains to return to the launch site.
An RTLS can be considered to consist of three stages-a powered stage, during which the space shuttle main engines are still thrusting; an ET separation phase; and the glide phase, during which the orbiter glides to a landing at the Kennedy Space Center. The powered RTLS phase begins with the crew selection of the RTLS abort, which is done after solid rocket booster separation. The crew selects the abort mode by positioning the abort rotary switch to RTLS and depressing the abort push button. The time at which the RTLS is selected depends on the reason for the abort. For example, a three-engine RTLS is selected at the last moment, approximately three minutes 34 seconds into the mission; whereas an RTLS chosen due to an engine out at lift-off is selected at the earliest time, approximately two minutes 20 seconds into the mission (after solid rocket booster separation).
------------------
so your rude statement to me: "I suggest you come back to this discussion when you can make informed recommendations,..." has a particular delicious karma to it.
I love it when such a pompous ass is delivered his due.
Do you think the space shuttle design was just the result of a senior class project handed out by an overly-driven teaching assitant?
Holey Moses man!
What did you expect me to say?
As a normal citizen, and no scientist, I occasionally pick up a book or two on space, just for the interest of it. We normal folks pick up books with "Mars Direct" missions and think "Why not?"
Then I read that every time we launch a shuttle we are essentially rolling dice. So for a simpleton like myself, the question is " If we have a hard time managing this, how will we ever get to Mars?"
But once again, I am just a simpleton who would like the see the first man on Mars wearing an American Flag on his arm.......
Can we do better? Sure. Show our engineers the money and we can do it better, safer and cheaper. That's if space exploration is made a priority again, and not just a hobby for some politicians.
I wish I'd kept my original interpretation to myself. If I did, I wouldn't feel like such a fool and I'd have those 2GB's of data transfer back (I only have 3GB DT/month included in my hosting account!).
You slight NASA on so little real, actual undertsnding of the risks versus benefits -
- yet you will drive a car in unknown condition?
Who's loonier now - NASA or ???
At least NASA has done actual risk analysis ...
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.
