NASA probes 'electric zap' mystery photo:Former astronaut wowed by photo

World Net Daily ^ | February 5, 2003 | Joe Kovacs

[gitmo]

"Wow."

That was astronaut Tammy Jernigan's stunned reaction last night when she viewed a photo of what appears to be space shuttle Columbia getting zapped by a purplish electrical bolt shortly before it disintegrated Saturday morning.


Former astronaut Tammy Jernigan

"It certainly appears very anomalous," Jernigan told the San Francisco Chronicle. "We sure will be very interested in taking a very hard look at this."

The photo was one of five captured by an amateur astronomer in San Francisco who routinely snaps pictures of shuttles when they pass over the Bay area.

The pictures were taken just seven minutes before Columbia's fatal demise.

The Chronicle reports that top investigators of the disaster are now analyzing the startling photograph to try to solve the mystery.

The photographer continues to request his name be withheld, adding he would not release the image publicly until NASA has a chance to study it.

"[The photos] clearly record an electrical discharge like a lightning bolt flashing past, and I was snapping the pictures almost exactly ... when the Columbia may have begun breaking up during re-entry," the photographer originally told the paper Saturday night.

Late yesterday, the space agency sent Jernigan – a former shuttle flyer and now manager at Lawrence Livermore Laboratories – to the astronomer's home to view the image, and have the Nikon camera brought to Houston today.

It was slated to be flown to the Johnson Space Center by a NASA T-38 jet this morning.

Jernigan reportedly asked the astronomer about the f-stop setting on his lens, and how long he kept the shutter open – apparently some four to six seconds. A tripod was used to steady the camera, and the shutter was triggered manually.

"In the critical shot," states the Chronicle, "a glowing purple rope of light corkscrews down toward the plasma trail, appears to pass behind it, then cuts sharply toward it from below. As it merges with the plasma trail, the streak itself brightens for a distance, then fades."

"I couldn't see the discharge with my own eyes, but it showed up clear and bright on the film when I developed it," the photographer previously said. "But I'm not going to speculate about what it might be."

David Perlman, science editor for the Chronicle, called the photos "indeed puzzling."

"They show a bright scraggly flash of orange light, tinged with pale purple, and shaped somewhat like a deformed L," he wrote.

Space shuttle Columbia's rollout to the launchpad (NASA photo)

Jernigan no longer works for NASA, though she's a veteran of five shuttle missions in the 1990s. Ironically, on her final flight, the orbiter's pilot was Rick Husband, who was at the helm at 9 a.m. EST Saturday when Columbia broke apart during re-entry into the atmosphere.

"He was one of the finest people I could ever hope to know," Jernigan said.

According to her NASA biography, Jernigan graduated from Stanford in 1981 with a bachelor's degree in physics. She went on to earn master's degrees in engineering science and astronomy from Stanford and UC-Berkeley respectively. She also holds a doctorate in space physics and astronomy from Rice University.

She's spent over 63 days above the Earth, completing 1,000 orbits, and having walked in space for nearly eight hours during her final mission aboard shuttle Discovery in 1999.

Before flying on shuttles, she was a research scientist in the theoretical studies branch of NASA Ames Research Center, working on the study of bipolar outflows in the region of star formations, gamma ray bursters and shock-wave phenomena in the interstellar medium.

Regarding the Columbia disaster, the space agency is additionally investigating reports of possible remnants found in the West, including California and Arizona.

"Debris early in the flight path would be critical because that material would obviously be near the start of the events," said Michael Kostelnik, a NASA spaceflight office deputy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[KneelBeforeZod]

George Norey, art bells replacement has been ZOT'd.

which one of you did it!!!???!!

http://coasttocoastam.com/gen/page50.html

[kwyjibo]

The out-of-order numbering sequence of recent shuttle missions has something to do with the Russians being out of sync with NASA on ISS missions. Not sure whether all shuttle missions are assigned to a specific orbiter, but I do know that Columbia couldn't reach the ISS orbit because it is too heavy and therefore couldn't have been reassigned to an ISS mission.

Anyway, STS-107 was originally scheduled to take place sometime last year or maybe 2001, but kept getting bumped because ISS missions were needed sooner than originally scheduled or due to some other problems. All shuttle missions are created and scheduled years in advance, so shuffling can take place with enough advance notice. STS-107 had no payload and was "experiment-only", so it was not a "high-priority" mission and could be bumped in favor of more critical missions without severe impact to the space program.

I got this information from another thread

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/835773/posts

Over there is a very interesting discussion on the different types of external tanks used. In a nutshell, the tank used on STS-107 was delivered to NASA in early 2000, sat in storage for three years, and is an older model with a history of shedding debris. It's worth reading if you have the time.

Sorry I couldn't make a direct link to the thread but I'm HTML-challenged.

[Rocketboy_X]

Don't forget, digital cameras are not intended for archival/research types of images. The blue streak might very well be an error in the camera's part.

[TXnMA]

The one news report I saw that mentioned a Nikon model called it a "Nikon 8".

However, I do see (at the links you posted) it reported as a "Nikon 880".

I trust reporters to get camera models right -- just as much as I trust their firearms knowledge when they report that a "9mm semiautomatic revolver" was used in a shooting... < /SARCASM >

Since the owner himself said he used film, rather than a Coolpix 880 digital, it was more likely a

Nikon N80 35mm SLR Camera

..which, as the photographer himself, said, uses...

FILM

ESD, my friend...plain old ESD -- just as FreedomCalls showed in #40.

[Timesink]

Okay, fair enough. We'll find out pretty soon, I'm sure.

BTW, I'm not a tinfoiler. I don't think this "zap" occurred; I'm just arguing over the camera model.

[TXnMA]

HTML-editing "Oops"!

#40

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

Nikon 880

[blu]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/836319/posts?page=31#31

Jernigan, who is no longer working for NASA, quizzed the photographer on the aperture of the camera, the direction he faced and the estimated exposure time -- about four to six seconds on the automatic Nikon 880 camera. It was mounted on a tripod, and the shutter was triggered manually.

[Sacajaweau]

bump

[aruanan]

You mean static discharge caused from rewinding too quickly or bulk loading too quickly under too dry conditions? I've gotten some beautiful static patterns that way. Some look like spikey trees growing out of a foggy swamp.

[Kenny Bunk]

The latter theory is supported by the Burst and Transient Source Experiment (BATSE) aboard the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory which has detected gamma rays coming up from the Earth
Thank you. That is excellent info.

[Richard Kimball]

Thanks for that info. A Nikon 880, shooting in the dark, on a four to six second exposure, manually triggered shutter, most likely shooting in high jpg mode (the buffer isn't big enough to shoot multiple frames in tiff format sequentially), at that distance of an object moving that fast would, IMHO, be very unlikely to produce an image without VERY high artifacting. I wouldn't say it's impossible, but highly unlikely that he produced anything that will shed light on what happened.

[TXnMA]

BTW, I'm not a tinfoiler. I don't think this "zap" occurred; I'm just arguing over the camera model.

Yeah, I figured that out -- and I apologize for even thinking you might be 'foiling' this time. (I've seen your posts on other subjects, and I should have known better...)

I've owned and used lots of Nikon bodies and lenses since I got my first Nikon F in the '60's. But, in this case we're both guessing based on the (highly suspect, IMHO ) ability of some SFChron's reporter to get something as technical as a camera model straight. BTW, I noticed that WND (wisely, IMO) dropped any reference to the specific camera model...

One of the remaining advantages of emulsion-based film over CCDs is that you can "push" it to extreme levels of sensitivity ("speed") during development. Based on my own experience and the photog's comments, I expect that is exactly why he was, apparently, processing his own film.

Hey, at this point, we're not even arguing; we're just trying to figure out if there is any real, usable info on that image -- film or digital... But based on experience (which I'm not at liberty to discuss further) with thousands of feet of film. I still expect the answer will be "film damaged by ESD".

[theFIRMbss]

>A scalar-burst strike on the US space shuttle Columbia has dealt a debilitating preemptive blow to Anglo-American plans for a Middle-East takeover. Cough... uh huh...

Even if it's just
science fiction, it's thrilling
stuff. Thanks for the link.

[Erasmus]

"I couldn't see the discharge with my own eyes, but it showed up clear and bright on the film when I developed it," the photographer previously said.

He can't be Serios, can he?

[blu]

I decided to be really radical and write to the reporter, asked him exactly what model Nikon (watch, it'll turn out to be a Canon!) the photog used, and if it was digital or film. You'd think that a reporter writing a story that might break the news of a wowser event would check his facts!

[the_marq]

The is by far the dumbest forum I have ever read, pardon me "silliest." Does no one remember that the Shuttle went down in broad daylight in a cloudless sky? Fercrissakes, look at the picture, it's dark and cloudy. Someone explain that!!!!

[czarleafs]

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30904

Digital camera...case closed.

"...A misquote concerning an early statement by the man led to some confusion about digital versus traditional analog images.

"I couldn't see the discharge with my own eyes, but it showed up clear and bright on the film when I developed it," the astronomer was originally published as saying. But the Chronicle has clarified that the device is indeed a Nikon 880 digital camera which has no need of film to be developed. "

[TomServo]

Fercrissakes, look at the picture, it's dark and cloudy. Someone explain that!!!!

It's called a joke. As anybody who had been here for more than a day would know.

[js1138]

This is a well known issue with Nikon Digitals--especially the higher end ones.

I would assume because professionals are drawn to the Nikon name and are more likely to use long exposures. When's the last time you saw your local snapshooter use a long exposure?