2. I.e., is fatal elvon burn-through a more frequent potential occurance than discussed so far?"that is the only case I saw, however, it was so serious they changed the tile layout and types of tile in that position. and now ..... dah dah dah - I heard, they hadn't done it on the colombia, yet.
1) Its loss would have produced a significant, sudden and detectable increase in drag with resulting flight control movements which would have shown up in telemetry. No such sudden jump was detected prior to loss of communication due to ionization (which is the earliest possible point of vehicle breakup).
2) Ground observation noticed a sudden detachment of something from the orbiter over California which produced a much larger incadescent image than the number of later smaller thingies detaching from the spacecraft. Speculation here has focused on that first big flare being the port gear door coming off. But, since this incident did not produce an immediate jump in drag, what might it have been besides the gear door, and why didn't that produce a drag spike?
I have not seen any consistent explanation of the likely other effects of loss of the port gear door, just assumptions that isolated effect x or isolated effect y might have resulted. What would have happened to the airflow at that point, what would have happened to the door hinges, how might hot gases have entered the vehicle and what likely sensor readings would that have caused?
The evidence I have seen indicates a slow accumulation of problems and thingies detaching (belied by the initial big flare of something or other detaching from the spacecraft) and gradual increasing port drag, with the drag graph indicating an eventual, sudden, loss of control during the period after communications loss due to ionization.
Loss of the gear door over California, or at any other time prior to communications loss, just does not fit this known pattern. It fits some evidence, but not the pattern, IMO.
I'd appreciate your opinions on this.