Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senator: Concerned Columbia Crew took Pictures of Damaged Left Wing
Florida Today.com ^ | Februrary 5, 2003 1:20PM | Staff Wire Report

Posted on 02/05/2003 1:23:55 PM PST by ewing

Crew members of the Space Shuttle Columbia were concerned about the orbiter's damaged left wing according to United States Senator George Allen. (Republican-Virginia)

One of the crew members, Mission Specialist David Brown, sent e-mail messages to his brother Doug during the mission, Allen said. In those e-mails, David Brown said that the crew took pictures of the left wing because they were concerned about it, Allen said.

The Senator was only repeating information he recieved from Doug Brown, said his spokeswoman, Carrie Cantrell. There was no phone listing for Doug Brown's home in Arlington and he could not be reached today.

A 2 and one half pound chunk of insulation foam struck the underside of the wing during lifoff as the shuttle sped upwards of 1,900 MPH last month. At the time NASA officials did not think the damage would be a problem, but the agency is now investigating the wing as a possible reason that Columbia shattered on re-entry into Earth's atmosphere on Saturday.

(Excerpt) Read more at floridatoday.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; News/Current Events; US: California; US: District of Columbia; US: Florida; US: Texas; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: columbia; feb12003; georgeallen; michaeldobbs; nasa; pictures; senator; sts107; wing
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-203 next last
To: ewing
NASA has a protective beaurocratic mentality. They have been fighting for money for so long a time, and manipulating news and facts to get it, that the bad habits have become ingrained, and the organization is a collective physcological mess. Letting it all hang out is an absolutely foreign concept to it.

My layperson's guess is that the Columbia will never fly again, and should not fly again, and lots of NASA types, and lots of ancilliary contractors, should all be put out of jobs. There is a budget deficit you know.

161 posted on 02/05/2003 5:22:17 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
Yeah ... how come this has not been brought up before now ...??

Becuase shuttle flights had become so common any news of the shuttle was not hitting the new cylces. And if it was not considered a major problem, it obviously would not have made news.

It seems like the potentially significant detail that it is now becuase hindsight is 20/20.

162 posted on 02/05/2003 5:29:35 PM PST by BJungNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wirestripper
There are no pixel lines in a full format digital cam. (smallest full format cam is 11mp, Kodak is 14mp)I have never taken pics in space but I am certain from the pics I have access to are seriously resized pictures.

163 posted on 02/05/2003 5:59:49 PM PST by Shanty Shaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: cantfindagoodscreenname
He probably was thinking about "alluded," but his public school education got in the way.

He said "eluded" when he meant "alluded" because he was probably "Quaaluded."

164 posted on 02/05/2003 6:01:00 PM PST by Erasmus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
Are the cracks in it for real?

No.

First of all, this is a shot of the front bulkhead of the cargo bay, and the stovepipe-looking object is one of the closure latches of the cargo bay doors.

Yesterday someone posted much clearer pictures of the same thing from another Shuttle mission.

The "crack" on the left is actually a wire lanyard holding the white cylindrical object at its end, and evidently plays a role in securing the doors.

The "crack" on the right is actually a seam between covers over something-or-another on the bulkhead. It's designed that way.

One other thing: There is some aparent bleed-over of the earth image in the background, over the edge of the cargo bay bulkhead. This looks to me like a combination of artifacts, beginning with slight lens flare and ending with the compromises in the image transmission and compression. I really don't see it as a faked image. Except for the red circles (~<)B^).

165 posted on 02/05/2003 6:11:28 PM PST by Erasmus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
Remember that photo of the guy on top of the WTC with the jet coming straight at him? Too many kooks with too much time on their hands.

And the most amusing thing is that the photo wasn't even the WTC. :-)

166 posted on 02/05/2003 6:13:55 PM PST by Erasmus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
No, the official excuse is now space debris

Right and I believe that like I believed their "don't touch the shuttle remains, they could be toxic" baloney. I am losing all faith in NASA telling us the truth about anything. They tried to bury the Challenger cause, now their trying to bury this one. Maybe its time to find a new space agency.

167 posted on 02/05/2003 6:14:02 PM PST by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ewing; ironman
Another iceman here. I stated so on Monday in several threads. We'll see? I don't think the foam could damage the wing as easily as ice. It's the difference between a ping-pong ball and a golf ball from a density and force of impact perspective. The problem with ice is political, on the other hand, becasue it's something the launch director has to make a go/no go decision on. The foam is an "oh $h!t" thing that doesn't require nearly as much subjectivity when determining risk. We will probably do some pretty simple aerodynamics analyses to see which is more plausible.
168 posted on 02/05/2003 6:15:17 PM PST by Rockitz (After all these years, it's still rocket science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill
If they took photos, then they most likely used a digital camera. I can not imagine that they would take photos that were not downloaded to Houston within minutes (even instantaneously) of taking the pictures. Hello, NASA...

I heard a NASA spokesman state emphatically "all pictures taken by the astronauts were shot on FILM and then stored to be delivered to Houston after the flight"

I heard a NASA spokesman state emphatically "all pictures taken by the astronauts were shot on FILM and then stored to be delivered to Houston after the flight"

Once more for emphasis:

I heard a NASA spokesman state emphatically "all pictures taken by the astronauts were shot on FILM and then stored to be delivered to Houston after the flight"

So in the 21st century we're sending men into space in a 20th century craft and they're thaking pictures with 19th century technology.

So much for the space age. (or someones lieing)

169 posted on 02/05/2003 6:29:34 PM PST by Gore_ War_ Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
Got a feeling this is phoney. I believe NASA said there is no way the astronauts could view the damage. And why would they send a message to home rather than NASA.

You are assuming the damage was on the bottom of the wing, the top is fairly visible from the cargo bay windows, and probably from the flight deck windows too. If they could see something, or thought the camera might see something, then it must have been on the top of the wing. The message could have been sent to his brother and to NASA of course. No need for either/or.

I'm also sure the message would have to go through NASA.

I don't think the astronauts had a separate "road-runner" line hooked up for private e-mails. Do you??

My understanding is that they do. The line of course would go through NASA servers, but that doesn't mean somebody at NASA would have to see it.

170 posted on 02/05/2003 6:43:21 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle
Can shuttle passengers even see under the wing?

No, but they can see the top, or part of it anyway. If they go EVA, they can see all of the top, even without leaving the cargo bay, they could go walk on the top if they wanted to. The bottom could be examined if they'd had the manipulator arm onboard, or an MMU, which would allow a "fly around" without risking damaging the tiles by actual contact.

171 posted on 02/05/2003 6:48:03 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
but if your brother was in space and sent you pictures, wouldn't you let people at NASA know ...??

The article says the pictures were not sent, only mentioned in the email. I'm sure if they had been sent, we'd be seeing them on the Senator's website by now!

172 posted on 02/05/2003 6:51:08 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Sundog
"Does any home handyman know what happens to a glue joint if you spit on it and wiggle it after it has setup for a time?"

Any home hanymen have any shuttle tile glue to play with?

Water does catalyze some chemical reactions, or even enter into the reaction itself. And sometimes this can produce an inferior result. I would think that if spitting on the adhesive was really practiced by technicians installing tiles without it being a tested and approved procedure, the technicians are liable for some really serious discipline, and if this, as an unapproved shortcut were known and condoned by superiors, there would be hell to pay.

The other portion of the comment about a "wiggle test" - a wiggle test on what seems to be a rather fragile bond could in itself produce a subsequent bond failure. I find this whole thing about spitting and wiggling rather unbelievable, and if true, rather disconcerting. Were I an occupier of a seat on a shuttle mission, knowing this, I would be C-O-N-C-E-R-N-E-D.
173 posted on 02/05/2003 6:53:21 PM PST by GGpaX4DumpedTea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill
If they took photos, then they most likely used a digital camera.

Not necessarily, they may have used the same camera(s) used to take pictures of the separation of the external tank. My understanding is that those are 35 mm film cameras. Up until very recently film had better resolution than most digital cameras. Goverment projects alway lag behind the current state of the art in technology, unless it's custom stuff they did just for the project.

174 posted on 02/05/2003 6:54:26 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
and the damage was under the wing ..

That is an assumption. We don't know that whatever they took pictures of, if they took them, had anything to do with the tank debris hitting the underside or leading edge of the wing.

175 posted on 02/05/2003 6:56:03 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Take that sentence, put it into Word, then run a grammar check. Pops right up with "alluded".

AP writers use a proprietary system, not Windows. I don't think it even has a grammar check, since AP writers are supposed to be able to ... you know, write...and the editors edit...

176 posted on 02/05/2003 6:59:45 PM PST by Timesink (My name's Harley Earl. And I've come back to build you a great tampon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
Yeah, I found that out later, thanks.
177 posted on 02/05/2003 7:11:47 PM PST by CyberAnt ( Yo! Syracuse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter
The wing is barely visible from the crew compartment.

A fair amount of it is visible from the cargo bay windows, just aft of those on the top of the crew compartment, when the cargo bay doors are open. There was picture here somewhere yesterday showing the science module in the bay (don't know if from another mission or this one), and you could see the wing upper surfaces better than I would have thought.

178 posted on 02/05/2003 7:13:24 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
I'm with you. When it comes to eyes in the sky, you can bet your sweet bippy our government can see every quarter inch of near earth space they desire to.

But not necessarily when they want to. The best imaging satellites are in fairly low and polar orbits. The shuttle and the satellite might not ever cross paths during a mission, even though the satellite goes over everyplace on earth nominally twice a day. Don't believe everything you see on "Enemy of the State" (a great movie nonetheless). And when they did cross paths, they might be moving right smartly relative to one another. Some or even most of that "blur" might be compensatable, since the same is true of points on the earth, only less so.

179 posted on 02/05/2003 7:19:13 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Cooter
The crew was asked to photograph the external tank upon separation.

They always do that, at least since "stuff" started falling off the tank on launch.

180 posted on 02/05/2003 7:21:25 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-203 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson