[Lokibob]

The picture, finally.

[yonif]

this does nothing but create more questions.

[Chad Fairbanks]

Well, that makes everything perfectly clear. I don't have any more questions. Case closed.

Next!

[RightWhale]

The picture, finally.

Good job getting that.

The damage looks huge.

[mikenola]

What the heck is that? Hi-res my butt, looks more like a thermal image than RGB.

[Ramius]

THAT is the picture that all this fuss has been about???

Yeesh.

[TheLooseThread]

Perhaps we should all look up the word "confirm" in the dictionary....

:)

[Ichneumon]

The proportions look really strange on that photo. For one thing, the front of the orbiter looks more slender and "pointier" than the blunt nose of the shuttle, and the wingtips don't look right either.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

I agree. Finally a picture. That Kalifornia astronomer that won't release his pics of the shuttle makes me want to jack-slap him.

[Budge]

Chick this thread out for a very good discussion.

[Cicero]

Did they degrade the picture before releasing it?

[bribriagain]

picture bump

[#3Fan]

The damage isn't next to the fuselage like I heard. With the angle of the photographic perspective, it looks to be a ways away from the fuselage.

[Enlightiator]

Good, this post with picture deserves being in breaking news. NASA has also posted a larger photo and sensor data timeline graphics at:

http://www.spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/investigation/sensors/index.html

IMHO, this left wing leading edge damage tends to point to the obvious first "suspect" - damage to the left wing by the exernal tank foam debris. I will await further NASA analysis of course.

[brityank]

I watched part of the newsbrief, and Ronald Dittemore made it clear that NO determination has been made of exactly what this shows.

Why a stark white skyview background? Why an extremely pixilated outline? To me, it looks fake.

[polemikos]

http://images.spaceref.com/news/2003/02.07.03.usaf.jpg

[Balata]

The initial NASA Mission Management Team (MMT) assessment of the debris impact made Jan. 18, two days after launch, noted "The strike appears to have occurred on or relatively close to the "wing glove" near the orbiter fuselage.

The term "wing glove" generally refers to the area where the RCC bolt-on material is closest to the fuselage. This is also the general area where USAF imagery shows structural damage.

The second MMT summary analyzing the debris hit was made on Jan. 20 and had no mention of the leading-edge wing glove area. That report was more focused on orbiter black tiles on the vehicle's belly. The third and final summary issued on Jan. 27 discusses the black tiles again, but also specifically says "Damage to the RCC [wing leading edge] should be limited to [its] coating only and have no mission impact." Investigators in Houston are trying to match the location of the debris impact with the jagged edge shown in the Air Force imagery.

This tells me they made three assesments of the situation.

The first on Jan 18, two days after the launch, which states the strike appears to have occurred on or relative close to the "wing glove" area near the orbital fuselage.

The second, on Jan 20 which made no mention of the wing glove area.

And finally the third, on Jan 27 which also neglected to mention the wing glove area.

My question is, why did they leave the area they initially though was struck out of their subsequent two assesments?

It looks to me like they are overlooking first impressions.

Or, perhaps we just have incomplete data.

[FreedomCalls]

I disagree that the photo definately shows the left thruster firing to correct an off-nominal yaw. The plume you see trailing the left wing could be a smokey metallic plume from burn-through of the leading edge of the wing spar just under where the reinforced carbon-carbon is attached. If the RCC leading edge was cracked at take off, and the heat infiltrated under it during re-entry, we could expect to see a plume of smoky metallic debris from the burn through -- kind of like the smoke from an arc welder. That could be what is visible here. Clearly the leading edge has suffered trauma of some sort.

[Lady Jag]

Rotated and made symmetrical (mirrored left side) and it looks like right side fusilage is also distorted in their photo

[hole_n_one]

It's really a Rorschach inkblot, isn't it?

[Joe Hadenuf]

Bang!

Telemetry and photographic analysis indicate the breakup of the historic orbiter took place as she slowed from Mach 20-to-18 across California, Nevada, Arizona and New Mexico with the loss of structural integrity 205,000 ft. over north central Texas where most of the debris fell.