A rescue of the crew was unlikely

Washington Times ^ | 2/03/03 | Marcia Dunn, AP

[kattracks]

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla.

[John Jamieson]

I don't remember that (I helped launch it). But if true, what could anyone have done about it. We only had one finished orbiter.

[John Jamieson]

How do mate a Progess with an orbiter?

[John Jamieson]

Google it.

[Bobby777]

•NASA did not consider a spacewalk by the crew to inspect the left wing. The astronauts are not trained nor equipped to repair tile damage anywhere on the shuttle, Mr. Dittemore said.

it would seem easy ... it could be manuevered by tiny jet thrusters using tiny bursts of air or some other inert gas like helium ... a "lifeline" tether could be used but simple remote controls might be possible it seems ...

[Fitzcarraldo]

How do mate a Progess with an orbiter?

You don't. You maneuver it in towards the shuttle nose-first and clamp the shuttle cargo bay doors on part of it, then secure it with whatever means available. It would probably have to be modified to allow access by astronauts. I assume a working airlock was on Columbia.

[John Jamieson]

Are you in the Space bis Bobby or a proffesional critic or what?

Why are the experts always stupid?

[Bobby777]

it sounded like you knew the orbits is why I asked ...

[a_Turk]

In order for bodies such as satellites, the space station, or the shuttle to remain in orbit and not fall into the earth they have to move at some pretty high speeds (angular velocity) around the planet. In effect, the force of gravity has to equal the centrifugal force resultant from the angular velocity of the body. That velocity is about mach 20 for the shuttle, less for lighter objects or for those farther from the planet, and more for heavier ones or those closer to the planet.

Now, the space station and the shuttle were not travelling in orbits which were at identical angles to the equator. That means that, in order to bring them in line with each other, another set of forces must be overcome.. Try this with the front wheel of a bicycle: Remove the wheel. Hold it at it's axis with both hands. Have someone spin it. Now try to change the angle of the axis (move one end but not the other). You'll get enormous forces resisting you.

Once you're in orbit it's very expensive to change that orbit, especially your angle with the equator..

[John Jamieson]

Yeah a Leatherman ought to do it.

[John Jamieson]

almost right, weight has nothing to do with it.

[Fitzcarraldo]

Of course there is the problem of getting the Progress into the lower inclination orbit.

[Bobby777]

did I touch a nerve? ... these seem like pretty obvious questions ... when the Challenger blew there had already been severe problems with O-rings nearly burning through ... at least two Thiokol engineers were screaming about the temperature when Challenger was to launch ... and in the end it was concluded they ignored their warnings ... these are valid questions to ask when people die and expensive equipment is destroyed ... and other people have to risk their lives ...

[Bobby777]

yes I know about that ... my question was how far apart their orbits were ... however the question about potential damage to the wing seems to have been known from the launch ...

[John Jamieson]

Bobby, space travel is tough stuff. You can't pull over and change a tire. It's also dangerous; there are a thousand ways to die if something goes wrong.

We have some the best minds in the country running our space program. 17 people have lost their lives in almost 40 years. Everyone of those people fought a 100 others for the chance to go. I think that's an excellant record. NASCAR's is not that good.

[a_Turk]

Mass ends up on both sides of the equation does it not? The experiment at Pisa didn't include angular velocity did it? Fill me in please. My physics is a bit rusty..

[a_Turk]

I think the difference in orbits was 10.5 degrees..

[Lancey Howard]

Very interesting article.
It sounds to me like:
1. NASA failed to check out the damage to the wing.
2. Had the wing been inspected, a more reliable analysis of the risk of reentry could have been done.
3. If it was determined that the risk was too great to try to bring the shuttle in, there were options available, albeit none of them cozy.
A. They could have "limped" to the ISS and "floated over in their space suits".
B. The shuttle Atlantis could have been rushed into service and sent up for rescue.
C. An alternate reentry trajectory could have "relieved the heat on the ship".

Most importantly, NASA first needed to check out the wing.

[Bobby777]

I don't deny NASA has a good record ... and does amazing things ... what seems to get lost is often what happens in a large corporation ... the basics get pushed aside for schedules, etc.

one understands the potential for catastrophic failure on liftoff ... and no human can be expected to catch everything ... hence, checklists, redundancy, etc. ... (as you obviously know) ...

the tiles are such a critical element for re-entry, potentially unsurvivable indeed in case of even relatively small losses that I'm shocked there's very little capability to even give the bird a "once-over" while in orbit ...

[John Jamieson]

A not possible
B maybe
C not possible

D I would have jetasoned the SpaceHab and gone down with the ship.

[Bobby777]

thanks ...