Posted on 02/04/2003 9:32:29 PM PST by Jael
Freeper Enlightiator broke the foam story here on Freerepublic many long hous before the media ever touched it. Please read his gracious post regarding his scoop.
Also hat's off to leadpenny for the original Columbia observation thread.
In Memory of The COlumbia
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/833885/posts?q=1&&page=51
[ Browse | Search | Topics | Post Article | My Comments ]
#368: Astronauts doomed from the start ^
To: Jael; Prov1322; Lancey Howard; McGruff; kattracks
All the credit goes to the guy who found out first!!! Enlightiator!!! I just did a few more google searches and got a tad more information. The original link at the NASA site no longer works. (The one that documents the problems with the foam breaking off and hitting the tiles.)
Thanks for the credit Jael, that was admirable on your part to take the time to link to my original post, but you did the most thorough job. Giving credit for "first source" isn't something the mass media often does, especially when they get their story ideas from sites like FreeRepublic!
I consider the Greg Katnik NASA article finding a group effort, starting with Prov1322's initial post Very close-up, slo-mo of the Columbia launch debris. which caught my attention and started my initial research (flash video no longer up unfortunately), through the far more excellent detailed posts you have made in this thread. [By the way, I have discovered that the reason you couldn't reach my link to NASA engineer Greg Katnick's article "Working on a Tile Damage Mystery (in which significant tile damage due to external tank insulation debris was found on Columbia's flight STS-87 in late 1997) was because I accidently linked to his bio instead of the article, which you fortunately managed to find again yourself and post in this thread. Interestingly, I first found the alternate link you posted in this thread, http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/2121/used_news.htm, but searched a little more to find the "official" nasa link. We must both use Google.]
So, WE Freepers broke this story about Katnick's NASA article first, on 2/1/2003 on Freerepublic at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/834139/posts?page=54#54.
As best as I can tell, this did not make the major news until the following two articles:
* Orlando Sentinel's Bob Shaw and Michael Cabbage wrote the article Foam chunks a problem since 1981. This was posted at www.orlandosentinel.com on Monday, 2/3/2003, however the same article with the title Fuel-tank insulation capable of causing `incredible damage' is at www.centredaily.com, a PA newspaper, with the post date 2/2/2003.* John Kelly's 2/3/2003 Florida Today article NASA's debris experts have been working on foam issue for years . This was posted at Freerepublic by McGruff at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/835049/posts.
Since that time, a Google news search shows Katnik's name all over the place, this story is really spreading. On 2/4/2003, The NY Times James Glanz and Edward Wong's article " '97 Report Warned of Foam Damaging Tiles-Absence of Freon Led to Detachment of Foam" also fell in line to make Greg Katnik a bit famous, as kattracks posted a link to at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/835505/posts.
But remember, we posted it here at FreeRepublic first!.
In my original post, I noted that Katnick had written an article. It was on a NASA educational site for students, and its obvious its the same source the big guys used -did they get it from FreeRepublic, or did they do their own search?; The news guys turned it into a "report," and the Orlando Sentinel provided this clarification just yesterday, 1/4/2003:
The NASA engineer credited with writing a sharply critical 1997 report about damage to heat-resistant tiles on the space shuttle Columbia said Monday that the report had actually been ghostwritten by another NASA writer.But Greg Katnik, a shuttle engineer who led the team that inspected the Columbia in December 1997, stood by the accuracy of the report. The report said more than 300 of the shuttle's fragile tiles had been damaged by foam insulation that fell off its external fuel tank during liftoff from Kennedy Space Center.
The report, which summarized a formal 76-page inspection analysis that Katnik had submitted to NASA, also said that more than 100 of Columbia's tiles had to be replaced and called the damage to the shuttle "significant."
But Katnik, a 20-year employee of Kennedy Space Center, said his formal analysis had been summarized and "embellished" by a NASA writer for NASA Quest, an agency-run Web site aimed at schoolchildren.
"I don't write that way either for kids or adults," he said. "I think he [the writer] was trying to make it dramatic for the kids.
"It wasn't meant to sound that dire," he added.
Katnik pointed to passages on the Web site describing a "massive" loss of insulating foam from the external fuel tank.
He said the NASA ghostwriter had accurately summarized the facts in his report -- which was not filed until February 1998 -- but had made the language more conversational. For example, his conclusion that the number of damaged tiles was "out of family" was changed to read, "the extent of the damage at the conclusion of this mission was not 'normal.' "
He said the NASA writer had turned his customarily "dry" technical language into something "that is more or less a detective story." It was intended to be an example of "how engineering is used to detect and fix a problem," he said.
The report was first cited in a story in Monday's Orlando Sentinel. The newspaper's attempts to reach him for comment Sunday had been unsuccessful.
On Monday, after receiving numerous calls from reporters, Katnik was given clearance by his NASA supervisors to answer questions.
Anthony Colarossi can be reached at acolarossi@orlandosentinel.com or 407-420-6218
368 posted on 02/04/2003 10:35 PM CST by Enlightiator (Still researching....)
Course, it'll be covered up and never make national news or anything.
The fact that the spray on foam insulation (SOFI) formula was changed should be questioned, but it won't be. It's doubtful that you'll ever see anything about this on the evening news.
Yeah, point blank, I want to know if NASA was forced by the Clinton EPA in 1997 (or thereabouts) to produce the foam without benefit of freon in its production. I want to know if the environmental extremists and their Democrat sponsors bear responsibility for the horrible deaths of seven astronauts.
Good question.
They did not give any more details.
They did mention that records of this were being impounded but I don't think it mentioned who was doing the impounding.
It amounts to the same thing if the new "enviro friendly" foam provided less insulation than the original foam. Then you'd be more likely to have ice form on it. Both the thermal and the structural qualities of the foam are important here. Degrading either would be problematic.
First I heard about this.
This is very interesting.
Course, if it's the EPA doing the impounding, they'll lose or shred them or otherwise destroy them like they did under Carol Browner.
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.