Skip to comments.
New Analysis Sees Shuttle Breakup Beginning Earlier
new york times ^
| March 9 2003
| MATTHEW L. WALD with JOHN SCHWARTZ
Posted on 03/09/2003 8:41:48 PM PST by TLBSHOW
New Analysis Sees Shuttle Breakup Beginning Earlier
ASHINGTON, March 9 The shuttle Columbia was already spinning out of control, its left wing and left maneuvering jets damaged or destroyed, in the last two seconds of data transmission, two officials close to the investigation said today, citing a new analysis by NASA.
The analysis, scheduled for release early this week, paints a picture of desperate trouble far earlier in the shuttle's re-entry than had been previously described.
Investigators said on Feb. 25 that the Columbia's last two-second burst of data, sent about 9 a.m. Eastern time on Feb. 1, showed the shuttle still on course and in the proper orientation, although it had lost hydraulic pressure, which would have been crucial for landing.
They also reported at that time that the shuttle's rockets had been trying to counter a pull to the left, which could have been caused by roughness on the left side of the orbiter. The area might have been struck by debris on liftoff or damaged in some other way.
The new information shows the shuttle pivoting like a skidding car on its bulletlike path through the sky, its nose veering left at 20 degrees per second. That rate of skid, or yaw, was the fastest the shuttle's instruments could measure, so the actual rate could have been higher. At 20 degrees per second, the shuttle would have been in a slow pirouette, completing a circle every 18 seconds.
In addition, sensors in the left wing and in the left maneuvering rockets had mostly stopped reporting, indicating that those parts, if not already torn off, were "pretty well fried," one investigator said.
The analysis is in a document called Rev. 14, the 14th revision of the timeline, completed late last week but not made public. The Columbia Accident Investigation Board, led by Adm. Harold W. Gehman Jr., is planning to release a subsequent version, Rev. 15, which is supposed to be completed on Monday. As the names imply, neither is considered final.
NASA is working with the data from the 32 seconds that follow the last spoken transmission from the shuttle crew. In that conversation, a ground controller in Houston tells Col. Rick D. Husband, the flight commander, who is at the controls, that technicians on the ground see the sensor readings indicating that the tires have lost pressure. Colonel Husband replies with the word "Roger" and an additional syllable, which sounds like "uh" or "buh." Data transmission continues for another 5 seconds, then ceases for 25, then picks up for 2 more seconds.
While the new interpretation seems to show that the shuttle was well on its way to breakup earlier than previously believed, investigators say the loss of voice and data communications itself was not ominous. Such losses are common on shuttle re-entries, and this loss might have occurred because the Columbia was using a relay satellite behind it, over the Indian Ocean, and its vertical tail might have come between the transmitter and the satellite.
The two-second burst is the last data investigators will have to work with unless they recover computing devices from the wreckage that might have stored and preserved sensor readings. The shuttle does not carry a crash-hardened data recorder, as civilian airplanes do.
But there is another potential source of information: the condition and location of various pieces of debris. Investigators looking at radar data and analyzing winds at various altitudes at the time of the breakup are still hopeful of finding debris as far west as Nevada, and they say that knowing just what parts those were would be helpful. But they have not reported finding any debris west of Texas.
Another scrap of mysterious information from the shuttle's final seconds concerns its autopilot. The data received by NASA showed that the signal to disengage the autopilot had been given. The autopilot could have tried to disengage itself because it could no longer carry out its instructions, or a crew member could have tried to turn it off. But that command had not yet been carried out by the flight systems when communication was broken for the last time.
Under the conditions of a normal return to earth, the shuttle flies on autopilot until it is traveling more slowly than the speed of sound. But pilots train to take the shuttle all the way down in case the autopilot malfunctions, and so it is possible one of the pilots was trying to take control of the yawing craft in its final moments.
It is relatively easy for the autopilot to be turned off by accident, which in fact happened just minutes before the problems with the Columbia started to become apparent. In the recovered segment of flight deck video of the waning minutes of the flight released by NASA, Colonel Husband is heard to exclaim, "Oh, shoot," and to tell mission control that "we bumped the stick earlier," briefly disengaging the autopilot. He quickly and calmly corrected the error.
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: nasa; spaceshuttle
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
1
posted on
03/09/2003 8:41:48 PM PST
by
TLBSHOW
To: Jael; fooman; Fred Mertz; aristeides
more on the space shuttle, and Matt Drudge says he is real close to saying Nasa has been doing a cover up.
2
posted on
03/09/2003 8:45:03 PM PST
by
TLBSHOW
(God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
To: bvw
ping
3
posted on
03/10/2003 5:22:04 AM PST
by
TLBSHOW
(God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
To: TLBSHOW
The new information shows the shuttle pivoting like a skidding car on its bulletlike path through the sky, its nose veering left at 20 degrees per second. That rate of skid, or yaw, was the fastest the shuttle's instruments could measure, so the actual rate could have been higher. At 20 degrees per second, the shuttle would have been in a slow pirouette, completing a circle every 18 seconds. Well, at least this illustrates that the "video camera aperture" video does NOT show the shuttle flying steadily (not rotating) with a 90-degree yaw to the right.
To: TLBSHOW
The Bones McCoy thread group on FR is doing a fantastic job of staying on top of this. Looks like like the "boot" -- made of carbon composite strips that shields the connection of the wing to the fuselage was an early point of fatal failure. I suspect that the falling external insulation-damaged heat tiles in proximity to the landing door allowed hot plasma entry and the mechanical expansion due to structural frame heating allowed the boot's carbon strips to pop out -- and that very quickly resulted in complete loss of wing.
5
posted on
03/10/2003 5:31:20 AM PST
by
bvw
To: Cloud William
Well, at least this illustrates that the "video camera aperture" video does NOT show the shuttle flying steadily (not rotating) with a 90-degree yaw to the right. It also shoots down the folks who said that the Shuttle COULDN'T HAVE BEEN flying sideways.
6
posted on
03/10/2003 6:42:40 AM PST
by
r9etb
To: TLBSHOW; fooman; Fred Mertz; aristeides
Gentleman, this is one thing I would of much rather of been wrong about.
"more on the space shuttle, and Matt Drudge says he is real close to saying Nasa has been doing a cover up."
7
posted on
03/10/2003 9:55:28 AM PST
by
Jael
To: TLBSHOW; fooman; Fred Mertz; aristeides
I've seen "new tidbits" like the below pop up in the past two days. Subtle way of trying to perhaps bring pilot error into the equation?
"It is relatively easy for the autopilot to be turned off by accident, which in fact happened just minutes before the problems with the Columbia started to become apparent. In the recovered segment of flight deck video of the waning minutes of the flight released by NASA, Colonel Husband is heard to exclaim, "Oh, shoot," and to tell mission control that "we bumped the stick earlier," briefly disengaging the autopilot. He quickly and calmly corrected the error."
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/10/national/nationalspecial/10SHUT.html?ex=1047877200&en=097ed8d003968de7&ei=5006&partner=ALTAVISTA1
Hawley pointed out that even before Columbia started re-entering the atmosphere, commander Rick Husband accidentally bumped the stick but quickly corrected for it.
Minutes later, "there is some evidence that the stick may have been bumped" again, Hawley said.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/tech/2003/mar/09/030906225.html
8
posted on
03/10/2003 10:05:40 AM PST
by
Jael
To: Jael; TLBSHOW; bvw; Joe Hadenuf; MrConfettiMan; DoughtyOne
Subtle way of trying to perhaps bring pilot error into the equation? I wouldn't doubt it for a minute. Dead men tell no lies. I caught the essence of this news article early this morning on the drive to work. I wish I had time to follow it more closely, but I don't. Please continue to ping me as you deem fit.
Thanks!
To: Fred Mertz
You got it Fred!
10
posted on
03/10/2003 6:28:53 PM PST
by
TLBSHOW
(God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
To: Fred Mertz
Fred, I had some of the same thoughts. If it were that, I think we would have seen some pretty strong evidence that it was the precursor just prior to the end. Don't forget that debris was coming off the shuttle long before they lost contact. That would seem to preclude our suspicions. I could be wrong though.
11
posted on
03/10/2003 7:23:48 PM PST
by
DoughtyOne
(Are you going Freeps Ahoy! Don't miss the boat. Er ship...)
To: Jael
You may wish to address my comments in number 11.
12
posted on
03/10/2003 7:24:54 PM PST
by
DoughtyOne
(Are you going Freeps Ahoy! Don't miss the boat. Er ship...)
To: DoughtyOne
Do you get the same feeling? I mean, all of a sudden NASA is leaking about pilots "accidently" hitting the stick.
That kinda smells to me.
What do you think?
13
posted on
03/10/2003 10:12:31 PM PST
by
Jael
To: Fred Mertz
Good to hear from you.
This bringing the pilot bumping the stick up business is making me furious.
Where are all the nay sayers now?
They claimed to be so supportive of the astronauts and NASA, yet we do not here their voices crying out against what appears to be an attempt to point a finger at Rick Husband.
On another note, we are getting busy here too. Baseball season just started. First game this Friday. :-)
14
posted on
03/10/2003 10:18:21 PM PST
by
Jael
To: Jael
Does it really make sense that NASA would design a spacecraft such that a slight accidental push against the stick could bring it down? If so (and not that I believe it), this is an engineering error of huge magnitude. I hope NASA doesn't think they can get away with this by doing so.
15
posted on
03/10/2003 10:25:12 PM PST
by
LPStar
To: TLBSHOW
What is the nature of the alleged coverup?
16
posted on
03/10/2003 10:25:25 PM PST
by
LPStar
To: Jael
As I watched that video tape last week, I was somewhat taken aback by the casual festive atmosphere in the last moments before failure registered. I didn't look at the time dimension on that video, but it's quite possible that during part of it, parts were falling off the shuttle. The video is being shot. One of the forward crew was drinking something. The level of banter was somewhat disconcerting to the uninitiated, meaning myself.
I tend to doubt crew involvement in turning off auto-pilot was a contributing factor. I say this because telemetry would have documented that IMO. It didn't so we don't seem to have that as a problem.
Look, I don't really know, I'm just going with my gutt like everyone else.
17
posted on
03/10/2003 10:30:38 PM PST
by
DoughtyOne
(Are you going Freeps Ahoy! Don't miss the boat. Er ship...)
To: DoughtyOne
I'm so sorry, I wasn't disagreeing with you!! I just didn't understand what you meant. :-)I believe that we are on the same page about this. :-)
18
posted on
03/10/2003 11:25:50 PM PST
by
Jael
To: LPStar
I am very much in agreement with you. But I am afraid that NASA is floating a few trial ballons out there about "knocking the stick."
That would be a shame for them to do so.
19
posted on
03/10/2003 11:26:53 PM PST
by
Jael
To: Jael
No problem. BTW, addressing your main concern, I'm not sure how you reveal all the information without this appearing as you have noted. I suppose it looks like trial balloons to a certain degree, but I doubt it means much. Time will tell on that. Take care.
20
posted on
03/10/2003 11:35:21 PM PST
by
DoughtyOne
(Are you going Freeps Ahoy! Don't miss the boat. Er ship...)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 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