Skip to comments.
NASA officials put off chance for spy agency photo of Columbia
Florida Today ^
| March 15, 2003
| Todd Halvorson and Larry Wheeler
Posted on 07/26/2003 2:05:02 PM PDT by snopercod
Edited on 05/07/2004 6:04:10 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
A top NASA official disclosed Friday he turned down an offer from a U.S. spy agency to use a secret satellite to photograph suspected damage to the shuttle Columbia while in orbit.
It was the first acknowledgement by a NASA official that talk of damage to the doomed shuttle reached the top echelons of the space agency.
(Excerpt) Read more at floridatoday.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: Florida; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: columbia; nasa; shuttle
This is an old article, but never posted here AFAIK.
What I find interesting is that the original request for the photos came from a United Space Alliance contractor at Kennedy Space Center. The "Ministry of Truth" in Houston has been busy covering up that fact.
1
posted on
07/26/2003 2:05:02 PM PDT
by
snopercod
To: bonesmccoy; XBob; wirestripper; NormsRevenge; tubebender; anymouse
flag
2
posted on
07/26/2003 2:07:31 PM PDT
by
snopercod
To: snopercod
No Firings MEANS ===> NO ACCOUNTABILITY
3
posted on
07/26/2003 2:12:58 PM PDT
by
Diogenesis
(If you mess with one of us, you mess with all of us)
To: Diogenesis
they used Teal Amber or Teal Blue space surveillance cameras (ground-based) to look over Columbia on her maiden launch in 1981 ... I asked why they didn't when they knew about the foam ... I'm sure they would have had to possibly scrub their mission or parts of it, but it would have been worth it ... I think one of these cameras is in Hawaii and the other is at Beale AFB or Buckly AFB or on the East Coast ... I'll have to look it up on FAS.org again ...
4
posted on
07/26/2003 2:30:49 PM PDT
by
Bobby777
To: snopercod; leadpenny
5
posted on
07/26/2003 2:30:52 PM PDT
by
Dog
To: snopercod
If
amateurs with
off-the-shelf equipment can
get space station pics
like this one, just think
what clear pics the black ops types
can get with "active
imaging" and all
the other tricks those guys have.
If NASA
really
declined black ops help,
then the NASA officials
are
worse than we think...
To: snopercod
>>...Gehman said. "Obviously both sides were at fault in our opinion."...<<
Is he referring to NASA and the DOD?
I don't think the DOD is at fault for anything. Sounds to me that they were ready, willing and able to provide support.
7
posted on
07/26/2003 3:01:05 PM PDT
by
FReepaholic
(My other tag line is hilarious.)
To: tscislaw
The people on the shuttle were in danger and the NASA folks knew it, they ordered them down while they kept their fingers crossed and then when the shuttle was destroyed they lied.
To: snopercod
Bureaucratic paralysis is a interesting thing to observe.
Unfortunately, this time it led to fatal consequences.
It is likely true that there was little that could be done without putting more lives at risk. Perhaps this is the missing link in this scenario that nobody has the balls to speak about.(except for the guy that resigned, Dittmore.sp)
Now that his cohorts have had their say, I find that he was probably more truthful in his answers. The rest of them are lying like rugs and omitting facts.
9
posted on
07/26/2003 4:57:59 PM PDT
by
Cold Heat
(Negotiate!! .............(((Blam!.)))........... "Now who else wants to negotiate?")
To: theFIRMbss
If NASA really declined black ops help, then the NASA officials are worse than we think... Yup. Whenever government f-s up, you can count on what gets released to the public is only a fraction of the total scope of the f-up.
NASA literally could not be bothered to try to save lives. The shame of this cannot be overstated.
10
posted on
07/26/2003 7:10:57 PM PDT
by
eno_
To: Diogenesis
....and a NASA team had already determined the shuttle was in no danger.
There is your no accountability right there.
I believe the term a few years ago was
"No Controlling Authority"
11
posted on
07/26/2003 7:17:59 PM PDT
by
Delta 21
(God Bless America)
To: snopercod
Another good question. Why didn't they try that shocking foam-through-the-wing test before using it on the space shuttle? Didn't they know that the foam could flake off? Hasn't experience shown that seemingly innocuous things travelling at high speeds can become deadly projectiles?
To: Gritty-Kitty
by it's very nature the shuttle was never intended to take impacts ... it was designed, rather its tiles, to dissipate heat efficiently ... reportedly, you can punch a tile with your fist and damage it quite a bit ... and once heat gets through (at those temperatures) to the frame, well you've got trouble ...
but, especially since Challenger (1986), launch tapes are reviewed as soon as possible to evaluate the launch (Challenger can be seen with significant black smoke coming out of one of the solid booster seams) ... of course, with Challenger, by the time the launch tapes would be reviewed (multiple high-speed cameras at multiple angles) it was too late anyway ...
13
posted on
07/27/2003 1:08:44 AM PDT
by
Bobby777
To: snopercod
2 - I really love the NASA incident reporting system:
"It was the first acknowledgement by a NASA official that talk of damage to the doomed shuttle reached the top echelons of the space agency. "
14
posted on
07/27/2003 4:46:27 AM PDT
by
XBob
To: Gritty-Kitty
Didn't they know that the foam could flake off?It didn't used to be much of a problem until NASA decided to brown-nose AlGore and switch to "enviornmentally-friendly" (e.g. astronaut-killing) solvents, adhesives, and blowing agents.
To: snopercod
Does Eisenhower's edict of separation of military and space enter into this?
16
posted on
07/27/2003 3:25:14 PM PDT
by
ex-snook
(American jobs need BALANCED TRADE. We buy from you, you buy from us.)
To: sgtbono2002
To: snopercod
makes you sick... don't it?
head in sand = good day.
18
posted on
07/27/2003 5:16:26 PM PDT
by
bonesmccoy
(Defeat the terrorists... Vaccinate!)
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