Skip to comments.
NASA engineer questioned Columbia's ability to land after safety assurances
Florida Today ^
Posted on 02/12/2003 7:20:10 PM PST by Dbdaily
Edited on 05/07/2004 6:04:05 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
1
posted on
02/12/2003 7:20:10 PM PST
by
Dbdaily
To: Fred Mertz
ping
2
posted on
02/12/2003 7:32:56 PM PST
by
TLBSHOW
(God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
To: Dbdaily
In this case, Cain said he did not know Daugherty's specific concerns and, asked if he would like to have known, he said, "No." See no evil, hear no evil.
3
posted on
02/12/2003 7:34:20 PM PST
by
Sloth
To: Dbdaily
Yeesh... of course. I *would hope* that engineers do a lot of what-if-ing. That's what they do.
Where's the memo about the fear of "sprites" that could take down a shuttle?
Where's the memo that they could all be abducted by aliens from Planet P?
Somewhere, there's a memo on anything. Memos are funny that way.
4
posted on
02/12/2003 7:37:01 PM PST
by
Ramius
To: Sloth
See no evil, hear no evil. I dunno, it seems to me like lots of people saw and heard plenty of evil.
5
posted on
02/12/2003 7:40:17 PM PST
by
Ramius
To: Ramius; Jael
Oh my
6
posted on
02/12/2003 7:42:24 PM PST
by
fooman
(PC Kills!)
To: Dbdaily
To: Sloth
Move on. Nothing here. We all know that the shuttle was hit by lightning. An act of god.
8
posted on
02/12/2003 7:44:22 PM PST
by
cinFLA
To: Dbdaily
Sorry, that should have been:


To: Ramius
There is a difference here: This memo predicts what actually happened, at least to the extent it is known. The wheel-well instrumentation showed it was heating up, and then there was a catastrophe.
This, at the very least, shows a stronger connection between the debris strike on launch and the final result.
10
posted on
02/12/2003 7:44:53 PM PST
by
eno_
To: Dbdaily
Foamhead alert!
11
posted on
02/12/2003 7:45:27 PM PST
by
X-FID
To: eno_
This memo predicts what actually happened, at least to the extent it is known. Yes, you're right. We know exactly what happened. And... and... NASA must be covering everything up. Of course they are. That's why this memo never existed. That's why we don't know anything about sensors in wheel wells. That's why we don't know anything about heating.
Yes, it's all a big friggin' coverup.
12
posted on
02/12/2003 7:50:21 PM PST
by
Ramius
To: Carry_Okie
So what do you think that image is showing? I think it is interesting. Could mean a few different things.
13
posted on
02/12/2003 7:51:46 PM PST
by
Ramius
To: eno_
shows a stronger connection between the debris strike on launch and the final result It does? How so?
14
posted on
02/12/2003 7:53:18 PM PST
by
Ramius
To: Dbdaily
"The resulting loads .... would almost certainly blow the door off the hinges or at least send it out into the slip stream - catastrophic. Even if you could survive the heating, would the gear now deploy?"If this quote is authentic, it does not sound like it could possibly come from someone who understands the shuttle's aerodynamics.
If a wheel well opens up during the maximum stress/heat period, the only option for NASA is how soon to start picking up the debris. Period.
A wheels up landing is totally in the realm of fantasy at that point.
To: Ramius
I think the appearance of coping at the nose and along the fuselage might be diffraction through and around the gas plume from a yaw thruster resisting the effect of the obvious additional drag from the wing area.
There are many scenarios for the way the root and leading edge are distorted, but I won't go there right now.
To: Carry_Okie
Agreed... the angles of the approach, and relative angle of the orbiter to the camera make that photo difficult to interpret. It certainly looks like something is different with the left wing than the right, and the plume aft of the left wing is perhaps the most meaningful part, but having never seen a photo of the plasma cloud around any other shuttle landing, it's hard to say what this means.
I'm simply not buying the "foam" argument yet. Sure, it's among the possibilities, but it just doesn't seem likely at this point. It sounds like the lazy answer, not the right answer.
17
posted on
02/12/2003 8:21:24 PM PST
by
Ramius
To: TLBSHOW; fooman
Keep bumping me on this stuff. Please. :-)
18
posted on
02/12/2003 8:30:50 PM PST
by
Jael
(Thy Word is Truth!)
To: leadpenny
Info bump
19
posted on
02/12/2003 8:31:53 PM PST
by
Jael
(Thy Word is Truth!)
To: Jael
20
posted on
02/12/2003 8:43:31 PM PST
by
TLBSHOW
(God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson