More Shuttle news.

More Shuttle news.

Post by kd5ob » Sat, 15 Feb 2003 05:18:21



http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/02/13/sprj.colu.shuttle.tire/index...

Analysis is under way to consider the possibility of losing multiple
tiles near the door; a failure of the seal between the door and the body
of the orbiter; or perhaps the loss of a crucial piece of heat
protection at the leading edge of the wing, where the temperature is
highest on re-entry into Earth's atmosphere.

Engineer Robert Daugherty outlined several scenarios in his e-mail to
David Lechner, who worked with the shuttle's mechanical systems. They
were based on possible outcomes of tile damage the orbiter may have
suffered only 80 seconds after it lifted off from Kennedy Space Center
January 16.

"I am admittedly erring way on the side of absolute worst-case scenarios
and I don't really believe things are as bad as I'm getting ready to
make them out," Daugherty wrote in his January 30 e-mail. "But I
certainly believe that to not be ready for a gut-wrenching decision
after seeing instrumentation in the wheel well not be there after entry
is irresponsible."

**********************************************************

Like I said.  Any other time, space flight for NASA has
become like commercial air travel.  A routine thing.

And American's generally ignore shuttle flights anymore.
Space flight is not interesting to them.

And you get enough people thinking in one direction that
the shuttle is mundane and space flight is ordinary such
as with commercial air travel and they all begin to treat it
that way.

So everybody is polarized this way.  And we forget it's extremely
dangerous.

What's unforgivable here is when a castrophic failure occurs,
we hear the space flight is an extremely dangerous line out of NASA.

Well, it is.  And there are some people who are going thru the motions
of concern.  They know something went wrong and they've been talking
about it.  We see (1) E-mail here from one concerned human being.
And you can bet there are probably a hundred or more still floating
around in NASA which were generated on Columbia's 2-3 day in space.
We had an entire Saturday of people on T.V. and an entire week of
NASA individuals on T.V. before management clamped down and stopped it.

And I told you all then about what the NASA guy on CSPAN said on that
Saturday afternoon.  And this is validation for all of that.
Yes.  They knew about it.  So that debates over.  They've just
come out with it.

So now I'm left with the cold feeling of the comments of Jim Richardson,
a person I will not attack or defend but feel Jim Richardson is a
typical American.  And Jim is not alone.  There were at least a
dozen more of you who said the same thing Jim did right here on
C.O.L.A.   And as I drove around town the 2 weeks after the incident,
I ran into 30+ more people who said the same thing Jim said.

What they all said was that space flight is a dangerous thing
and our astronauts knew the dangers of mission before they took
it.  That this shouldn't stop space flight.  That space is important
to us.  

Perhaps space is important to us.  But I still say that human life
is more important.  And I have a belief that you can have life and
exploration together.  That exploration need not be that dangerous
anymore.  That we are a democracy.  That we have deemed shuttle
flights as mundane as commercial air travel and therefore we should
abide by the will of the people in that reguard to make space
travel as safe as possible for our astronauts.  

Now what we need to know is, was the commander of the shuttle
informed of this - then - possible danger to his ship?

That's point #1.  

It's an important point because we need to know.
And further we need to know why they didn't have alternatives
for the crew, should such a conversation have taken place.

"There was nothing they could do, what did you want them to do"
is a comment I heard from a dozen people here on C.O.L.A. and
it disgusted me.  When you all made those comments, you seemingly
addressed this issue as if it was okay to have them kill themselves
on re-entry.  There are always alternatives.  

How many times do you see stories about the coal miners?
How many times do you just see a bunch of people standing around
saying, "What do you want us to do about it"   Their not saying
that, their diggin.  Their diggen to get those miners free'd.

This brings us to Point #2 which needs to be addressed to the
nation.

Point #2.  What was your backup plan for these people.  
From the news reports released lately, there didn't seem to be
one.  You were polishing the people into understanding why you
didn't do anything for the crew of Columbia.   Why nothing could
be done.  You must have a backup plan in the future.  

You know we have a coast guard for sailers in distress.  We just
don't let them drown then say "Well, what did you want us to do about
it"  We have highway patrol for our citizens and ambulences.
They have to have a backup plan from here or Russia which would
allow a shuttle crew to escape and return to earth safely should
this kind of incident happen again.  

I have mentioned a cheap thing they could do to start with.
Build a photo taking Xray robot which they leave at ISS and
have it look over every shuttle before departure.  If something
is wrong, have the crew wait for the next shuttle and have the
damange shuttle either repaired or sent back to earth on auto-pilot.
They shuttles have been landing themselves since day #1.  The pilot's
just along for the ride.  

Point #3.  Congress has been having hearings on those tiles and the glue
for those tiles and just generally revolving around a bunch of sillyness
which is leading them now-where in resolving this issue.  

They need to committe to replacing our fleet with 2 more shuttles and
get them all equipped with bailout pods for the crews to ride in during
liftoff and landing.  

OR,

They could just go ahead and finish their committement to the people
for a national aerospace plane.  We abandonded the orient express and
I think they should start that program back up again and get some
competitive bidding going.  Start building smaller vehicles to go
into space which don't use 70's era tiles.  

Being a believer in life after death, Columbia if you can hear
me, I've held your hand and I think the nation hears your cry's
for justice and that day is coming.  I'd also like to appologize
for the opinions of all the people I've met in treating your
deaths as if it were just another mundane thing as we are only
human and we don't really understand what life is all about until
we've lost it.  

--
Even before 9-11 happened, we had this.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/12/13/0249250&mode=thread&tid=172
By 2005, it will become clear that Linux will become a Globally dominate OS.
http://www.debianpals.org/charlieweb/Linux/intro.html

Charlie

 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by Donn Mille » Sat, 15 Feb 2003 16:35:03



> http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/02/13/sprj.colu.shuttle.tire/index...

> Analysis is under way to consider the possibility of losing multiple
> tiles near the door; a failure of the seal between the door and the body
> of the orbiter; or perhaps the loss of a crucial piece of heat
> protection at the leading edge of the wing, where the temperature is
> highest on re-entry into Earth's atmosphere.

About the only thing I'm skeptical of is NASA's claims about the
resolution of the Starfire telescope.  But, regardless, it was an IR
image, which clearly shows the heat streaming from the leading edge as
well as trailing the left wing.

The latest theory that I'm aware of is that the left landing gear door
was puctured, allowing superheated gasses to permeate the aluminum
there, causing a chain reaction that eventually wiped out the left
wing.  Also, don't forget that the AF observed a small object flying
away from the shuttle on it's second day in orbit.  What exactly that
was is speculation.  We simply don't know.

One other theory is that a solar storm contributed to the destruction.
I think I read that the shuttle was being enveloped by radiation from
the solar storm, which started at 8 AM EST.

The only thing is that NASA has access to a lot more info than we do
right now.  The only thing we can do right now is speculate.  Also,
sci.space.shuttle (I think that's the right NG) is a good place to
catch up on the latest theories, crackpots, news, and other info.

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by Anthony Segred » Sat, 15 Feb 2003 17:43:59




>>http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/02/13/sprj.colu.shuttle.tire/index...

>>Analysis is under way to consider the possibility of losing multiple
>>tiles near the door; a failure of the seal between the door and the body
>>of the orbiter; or perhaps the loss of a crucial piece of heat
>>protection at the leading edge of the wing, where the temperature is
>>highest on re-entry into Earth's atmosphere.

> About the only thing I'm skeptical of is NASA's claims about the
> resolution of the Starfire telescope.  But, regardless, it was an IR
> image, which clearly shows the heat streaming from the leading edge as
> well as trailing the left wing.

> The latest theory that I'm aware of is that the left landing gear door
> was puctured, allowing superheated gasses to permeate the aluminum
> there, causing a chain reaction that eventually wiped out the left
> wing.  Also, don't forget that the AF observed a small object flying
> away from the shuttle on it's second day in orbit.  What exactly that
> was is speculation.  We simply don't know.

> One other theory is that a solar storm contributed to the destruction.
> I think I read that the shuttle was being enveloped by radiation from
> the solar storm, which started at 8 AM EST.

> The only thing is that NASA has access to a lot more info than we do
> right now.  The only thing we can do right now is speculate.  Also,
> sci.space.shuttle (I think that's the right NG) is a good place to
> catch up on the latest theories, crackpots, news, and other info.

> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

Maybe I'm naive; and I'll admit that I'm not a Mechanical Engineer.
But, I'm shocked that the Space Shuttle is made of aluminum, not
titanium like the F-14.
 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by paul cook » Sat, 15 Feb 2003 18:44:41



comp.os.linux.advocacy to propose the following:

Quote:> Maybe I'm naive; and I'll admit that I'm not a Mechanical Engineer.
> But, I'm shocked that the Space Shuttle is made of aluminum, not
> titanium like the F-14.

I think you'll find that when the shuttle was designed they didn't have
the capability to machine titanium in large enough pieces...

--
Paul Cooke
  Registered Linux user 273897 Machine registration number 156819
  Linux Counter: Home Page = http://counter.li.org/
  4:40pm  up 14 days,  4:44,  3 users,  load average: 0.00, 0.03, 0.04

 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by Nucleo » Sat, 15 Feb 2003 18:55:31



> Maybe I'm naive; and I'll admit that I'm not a Mechanical Engineer.
> But, I'm shocked that the Space Shuttle is made of aluminum, not
> titanium like the F-14.

How do they compare weight-wise?  I'd think that's the most important
thing.

--

Must...control...fist...of...death!
 -- Alice, Scott Adams

 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by T. Relye » Sat, 15 Feb 2003 19:23:17


http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/02/13/sprj.colu.shuttle.tire/index...

Quote:

>> Analysis is under way to consider the possibility of losing multiple
>> tiles near the door; a failure of the seal between the door and the body
>> of the orbiter; or perhaps the loss of a crucial piece of heat
>> protection at the leading edge of the wing, where the temperature is
>> highest on re-entry into Earth's atmosphere.

> About the only thing I'm skeptical of is NASA's claims about the
> resolution of the Starfire telescope.  But, regardless, it was an IR
> image, which clearly shows the heat streaming from the leading edge as
> well as trailing the left wing.

It turns out that the Starfire telescope was never used.  The image was from
a couple of employees who had hooked up an optical telescope to an old
Macintosh.

http://www.abqtrib.com/archives/news03/021203_news_picture.shtml

"The 3.5-inch telescope has no adaptive optics, it's just a conventional,
off-the-shelf model connected to a digital camera," Garcia said. "Our
people weren't asked by NASA to take the image or track the shuttle. They
just thought it would be neat to look at the shuttle as it flew overhead
and take a picture."  

Todd

 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by Anthony Segred » Sat, 15 Feb 2003 19:51:15




>>Maybe I'm naive; and I'll admit that I'm not a Mechanical Engineer.
>>But, I'm shocked that the Space Shuttle is made of aluminum, not
>>titanium like the F-14.

> How do they compare weight-wise?  I'd think that's the most important
> thing.

As I recall, titanium is much denser, but has a much much higher
strength to weight ratio.

This all goes to show that we shouldn't be operating a system designed a
generation ago. I believe the shuttle's computer system is still the
Apollo system, a one of a kind processor designed in the 60's with no
high level language. A more modern processor should be used and probably
programmed in ADA. Space rated processors are available but are not
man-rated. NASA has an unfortunate tendency to worry about remote risks
while accepting larger known risks, like the o-rings and tiles.

 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by Anthony Segred » Sat, 15 Feb 2003 19:55:15




>>Maybe I'm naive; and I'll admit that I'm not a Mechanical Engineer.
>>But, I'm shocked that the Space Shuttle is made of aluminum, not
>>titanium like the F-14.

> How do they compare weight-wise?  I'd think that's the most important
> thing.

Should have also noted that titanium is more expensive. That's OK for
warplanes but not the national space transportation system? I think they
cost billions apiece anyway. NASA wanted a shuttle (me too) so they did
the best they could under continual Congressional pressure to lower
development cost. At some point they should have given up and told
Congress that it couldn't be done that cheap and still be safe.
 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by Rick » Sat, 15 Feb 2003 20:38:51


On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 03:18:21 GMT, Charlie Ebert

... nothing more than his libelous ranting.

 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by kd5ob » Sun, 16 Feb 2003 05:58:50





>>>Maybe I'm naive; and I'll admit that I'm not a Mechanical Engineer.
>>>But, I'm shocked that the Space Shuttle is made of aluminum, not
>>>titanium like the F-14.

>> How do they compare weight-wise?  I'd think that's the most important
>> thing.

> Should have also noted that titanium is more expensive. That's OK for
> warplanes but not the national space transportation system? I think they
> cost billions apiece anyway. NASA wanted a shuttle (me too) so they did
> the best they could under continual Congressional pressure to lower
> development cost. At some point they should have given up and told
> Congress that it couldn't be done that cheap and still be safe.

They seemed to have an escape mechanism on Apollo.
But other than a bailout, they have nothing on the shuttle to
help them escape.  Their trapped in there.

--
Even before 9-11 happened, we had this.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/12/13/0249250&mode=thread&tid=172
By 2005, it will become clear that Linux will become a Globally dominate OS.
http://www.debianpals.org/charlieweb/Linux/intro.html

Charlie

 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by Rick » Sun, 16 Feb 2003 06:22:35






>>>>Maybe I'm naive; and I'll admit that I'm not a Mechanical Engineer.
>>>>But, I'm shocked that the Space Shuttle is made of aluminum, not
>>>>titanium like the F-14.

>>> How do they compare weight-wise?  I'd think that's the most important
>>> thing.

>> Should have also noted that titanium is more expensive. That's OK for
>> warplanes but not the national space transportation system? I think they
>> cost billions apiece anyway. NASA wanted a shuttle (me too) so they did
>> the best they could under continual Congressional pressure to lower
>> development cost. At some point they should have given up and told
>> Congress that it couldn't be done that cheap and still be safe.

> They seemed to have an escape mechanism on Apollo. But other than a
> bailout, they have nothing on the shuttle to help them escape.  Their
> trapped in there.

There was no bailout mechanism for re-entry for Apollo, Mercury, Gemini or
the Shuttle.

--
Rick

 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by Jim Richardso » Sun, 16 Feb 2003 10:33:16


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 23:22:35 -0500,






>>>>>Maybe I'm naive; and I'll admit that I'm not a Mechanical Engineer.
>>>>>But, I'm shocked that the Space Shuttle is made of aluminum, not
>>>>>titanium like the F-14.

>>>> How do they compare weight-wise?  I'd think that's the most important
>>>> thing.

>>> Should have also noted that titanium is more expensive. That's OK for
>>> warplanes but not the national space transportation system? I think they
>>> cost billions apiece anyway. NASA wanted a shuttle (me too) so they did
>>> the best they could under continual Congressional pressure to lower
>>> development cost. At some point they should have given up and told
>>> Congress that it couldn't be done that cheap and still be safe.

>> They seemed to have an escape mechanism on Apollo. But other than a
>> bailout, they have nothing on the shuttle to help them escape.  Their
>> trapped in there.

> There was no bailout mechanism for re-entry for Apollo, Mercury, Gemini or
> the Shuttle.

I *think* he's referring to the early launch abort rocket stuck up on
the nose of the CM. The shuttle equivilent of that is to drop the main
tank, and lose the SRBs, then coast to a landing at one of the emergency
landing fields.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+TftMd90bcYOAWPYRAsiEAJoDeUTSrX5MwXJIeSBMCZbAA6mGpACdFUGk
cp/WWMvvEv60DPOtt5Vz4YI=
=IIiA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Jim Richardson         http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
A bad day, is when aliens attack, the dog bites you, and your boss tells
 you that the new client wants to make a few changes before delivery.
Linux, super computers, office computers, or home computers, it works.

 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by Mike » Mon, 17 Feb 2003 00:02:21



Quote:> Maybe I'm naive; and I'll admit that I'm not a Mechanical Engineer.
> But, I'm shocked that the Space Shuttle is made of aluminum, not
> titanium like the F-14.

The F-14 is mostly made of aluminum. The F-16, a newer plane (roughly
contemporary with the shuttle), makes significantly less use of titanium
than the F-14 did. The F-18, an even newer plane, makes more use of titanium
than the F-16, but not as much as the F-14. The airframes in all three
planes are pre*ly aluminum.

http://www.veryComputer.com/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_us/f014.html

http://www.veryComputer.com/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_us/f016.html

http://www.veryComputer.com/~jbaugher4/f18_2.html

Lots of other information about military aircraft at:

http://www.veryComputer.com/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_us/

-- Mike --

 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by kd5ob » Mon, 17 Feb 2003 00:58:56



> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 23:22:35 -0500,





>>>>>>Maybe I'm naive; and I'll admit that I'm not a Mechanical Engineer.
>>>>>>But, I'm shocked that the Space Shuttle is made of aluminum, not
>>>>>>titanium like the F-14.

>>>>> How do they compare weight-wise?  I'd think that's the most important
>>>>> thing.

>>>> Should have also noted that titanium is more expensive. That's OK for
>>>> warplanes but not the national space transportation system? I think they
>>>> cost billions apiece anyway. NASA wanted a shuttle (me too) so they did
>>>> the best they could under continual Congressional pressure to lower
>>>> development cost. At some point they should have given up and told
>>>> Congress that it couldn't be done that cheap and still be safe.

>>> They seemed to have an escape mechanism on Apollo. But other than a
>>> bailout, they have nothing on the shuttle to help them escape.  Their
>>> trapped in there.

>> There was no bailout mechanism for re-entry for Apollo, Mercury, Gemini or
>> the Shuttle.

> I *think* he's referring to the early launch abort rocket stuck up on
> the nose of the CM. The shuttle equivilent of that is to drop the main
> tank, and lose the SRBs, then coast to a landing at one of the emergency
> landing fields.

As we found out with Challenger, they have no escape mechanism for
the crew.  There is nothing.

--
Even before 9-11 happened, we had this.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/12/13/0249250&mode=thread&tid=172
By 2005, it will become clear that Linux will become a Globally dominate OS.
http://www.debianpals.org/charlieweb/Linux/intro.html

Charlie

 
 
 

More Shuttle news.

Post by Rick » Mon, 17 Feb 2003 04:14:37




>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1

>> On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 23:22:35 -0500,





>>>>>>>Maybe I'm naive; and I'll admit that I'm not a Mechanical Engineer.
>>>>>>>But, I'm shocked that the Space Shuttle is made of aluminum, not
>>>>>>>titanium like the F-14.

>>>>>> How do they compare weight-wise?  I'd think that's the most
>>>>>> important thing.

>>>>> Should have also noted that titanium is more expensive. That's OK for
>>>>> warplanes but not the national space transportation system? I think
>>>>> they cost billions apiece anyway. NASA wanted a shuttle (me too) so
>>>>> they did the best they could under continual Congressional pressure
>>>>> to lower development cost. At some point they should have given up
>>>>> and told Congress that it couldn't be done that cheap and still be
>>>>> safe.

>>>> They seemed to have an escape mechanism on Apollo. But other than a
>>>> bailout, they have nothing on the shuttle to help them escape.  Their
>>>> trapped in there.

>>> There was no bailout mechanism for re-entry for Apollo, Mercury, Gemini
>>> or the Shuttle.

>> I *think* he's referring to the early launch abort rocket stuck up on
>> the nose of the CM. The shuttle equivilent of that is to drop the main
>> tank, and lose the SRBs, then coast to a landing at one of the emergency
>> landing fields.

> As we found out with Challenger, they have no escape mechanism for the
> crew.  There is nothing.

Unlike you, changes were made in the Shuttle after Challenger. There are
escape mechanisms, but there is NO escape during re-entry, and only very
limited options during launch.

--
Rick

 
 
 

1. More Shuttle news - Engineer warned NASA!

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/02/22/sprj.colu.shuttle.investigat...

*****************************************************************************
The first report, completed five days after Columbia's launch, predicted
that the foam hit the wing at a relative speed of more than 500 miles an
hour and at an angle of less than 20 degrees. The report predicted an
impact near Columbia's left main landing gear -- a well-known Achilles
heel for shuttles.

Randy Avera, a former shuttle structural engineer, told CNN that
"anywhere along the centerline of the underneath of the orbiter ... the
edge of the wings ... are all critical areas."

"These are areas that you do not want to compromise the strength of the
aluminum material below," he said.

Another report that came in the next day, January 24, said there were
actually "three pieces of debris" -- each as long as 20 inches -- and,
once again, engineers predicted that they hit near the left main landing
gear door.

"As an engineer, I consider it a half-complete analysis," Avera said.
"For example, it does not consider [the] scenario of foam hitting
sharp-edge and contacting the tile."

In his January 29 e-mail, Daugherty wrote that the "current 'official'
estimate of damage is 7 by 30 inches by half the depth of the tiles ...
outside their test database."

He then made what in hindsight appears a prophetic statement: "One of
the bigger concerns is that the gouge may cross the main landing gear
door thermal barrier and permit a breach there."

************************************************************************

Well,

That's pretty final.  NASA administration knew.  It's all out now.

They knew about it in detail and they let die anyway.

WHY!  WHY ON GOD'S GOOD EARTH DID THESE PEOPLE DO THIS!!!!

WHY!!!

What kind of a nation have we beocme?  

WHO ARE WE????  This is horrible....

For christ sakes.  Why did they do this?????

--
Even before 9-11 happened, we had this.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/12/13/0249250&mode=thread&tid=172
By 2005, it will become clear that Linux will become a Globally dominate OS.
http://www.debianpals.org/charlieweb/Linux/intro.html

Charlie

2. converting spaces to underscores

3. News, News, News!

4. xdvi problem

5. C news vs. B news and Xenix

6. Port denyed to localhost????

7. NNTP News & Local News

8. ppp

9. Great News/Bad news on the APS Mac

10. help:feeding news to local news server

11. News ain't sending the news

12. 2.4.18-pre8 - Good news and bad news...

13. UUCP-NEWS-MAIL-FAQ: Linux UUCP/News/Mail Frequently Asked Questions