Skip to comments.
NASA Identifies Foam Flaw That Killed Astronauts
Reuters via Yahoo ^
| 8/13/04
| Broward Liston
Posted on 08/13/2004 3:36:38 PM PDT by ZGuy
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-69 next last
To: skinkinthegrass
On one of the threads here on FR concerning the "foam", IIRC , there were some Freepers who stated that the reason the "foam" composite was changed on the tanks, was due to the complaints from the "Save-The-(fill in your favorite sea creature here)."
They complained that after the tanks completed their tasks, and fell back into the ocean to be retrieved later, the "creatures of the sea", who mistook it for a food scorce, were dying because of it's "toxic" properties.
So NASA tried to come up with a substitute, and what they are using now was the substitute.
IIRC,( and if any Freepers can check this to see if I got it wrong),the tank that was used on the ill-fated was the FIRST application of the material. THAT tank was to be used on a previous shuttle flight, but that flight was canceled, the tank was "unused", so it was "returned to inventory."
The tank(the one with the FIRST attempt at applying the "new" insulation,) was brought out of "storage" because the other tanks were already with other shuttles getting prepared for future launches, so it was put into use on the mission that ended in such tragedy.
It's not like I have ever been wrong about something before,(at least according to my wife,)but IMHO, what I posted here was (seared....seared I tell you) close to what I remember freepers explaining about the "foam".
41
posted on
08/13/2004 6:04:53 PM PDT
by
musicman
To: ZGuy
Recertification is now the biggest obstacle for the tank program. New standards require that no foam pieces heavier than about half an ounce can come off the tank during the first 135 seconds of flight. That is much smaller than the divots that have routinely popped off. So, then, like, what are they gonna do? Wrap the environmentally-friendly foam with environmentally-friendly chicken wire to hold it all in place?
42
posted on
08/13/2004 6:05:18 PM PDT
by
solitas
(THEY can report all they want - I"LL download what I want, and I'LL decide for ME.)
To: RightWhale
Just build the "space elevator" and be done with it. I know, we don't have the nanotube technology yet. Oh well.
43
posted on
08/13/2004 6:06:33 PM PDT
by
Lawgvr1955
(Kerry: Gruber from McHale's Navy TV - Always after a Purple Heart)
To: ChefKeith
So it takes nasa over a year to figure out what FReepers told them during take off... Some of FR knew. The NASA-bots were quite aggressive and profane in defending NASA's denial.
To: Darksheare
They're going out of their way to try and say it's not the fault of the extreme left envirocommies. Ridiculous.
45
posted on
08/13/2004 6:14:14 PM PDT
by
kenth
To: Budge
46
posted on
08/13/2004 6:16:08 PM PDT
by
sweetliberty
("A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but a fool's heart to the left." (Eccl. 10:2))
To: ZGuy
The fault apparently was not with the chemical makeup of the foam, which insulates the tanks and prevents ice from forming on the outside when 500,000 gallons of supercold liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen are pumped aboard hours before liftoff.I'm not sure how true this is. Apparently, the conpound was changed from the original formula to satisfy environmental whining. Foam shearing off has been an issue ever since.
47
posted on
08/13/2004 6:17:16 PM PDT
by
ovrtaxt
(*www.fairtax.org* Hate the IRS? Vote for Bush!)
To: Lawgvr1955
Just build the "space elevator" and be done with it. I know, we don't have the nanotube technology yet. Oh well.There are more problems with that than just the material science. The top of the structure will oscillate and there is also the huge electric potential this would generate. We ran some back of the envelope numbers and hit some snags right off the top.
To: First_Salute; bonesmccoy; XBob; wirestripper; computermechanic; anymouse; tubebender
Thanks for the ping.
IMHO, the real problem was the banning of the solvents formerly used to prep the area for bonding and replacing them with the "environmentally-friendly" ones.
This was discussed heavily on bones' thread, which I can't seem to locate at the moment. Also, bones has been banned.
49
posted on
08/13/2004 6:25:05 PM PDT
by
snopercod
(Has anybody noticed that Iraq is using Saddam's "God is Great" flag again?)
To: RadioAstronomer
If the space elevator cable breaks below the midpoint, would the resulting falling cable debris be as catastrophic as some have described?
50
posted on
08/13/2004 6:34:34 PM PDT
by
Lawgvr1955
(Kerry: Gruber from McHale's Navy TV - Always after a Purple Heart)
To: kenth
51
posted on
08/13/2004 6:35:22 PM PDT
by
Darksheare
(I'll bayonet your snowmen and beat you down with a chinese yo-yo!!)
To: snopercod
I think they were using Halon to prep the tanks for those spot repairs after moving the tanks to Florida. They may have been using it on the bare tank at Micoud also? That's what I heard during the early press conferences...
52
posted on
08/13/2004 6:44:29 PM PDT
by
tubebender
(If I had known I would live this long I would have taken better care of myself...)
To: Lawgvr1955
Okay. We should start with a small pilot project. Maybe a couple bridges--to Cuba, across the Formosa Strait, across the Bering Strait, across the Strait of Gibralter-- would iron out some of the kinks.
53
posted on
08/13/2004 7:52:50 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Withdraw from the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty and establish property rights)
To: Thud; KevinDavis
thanks for the ping, Thud.
Ping Kevin
54
posted on
08/13/2004 10:03:30 PM PDT
by
XBob
(Free-traitors steal our jobs for their profit.)
To: tubebender; snopercod
we discussed this problem years ago, and I personally posted several pictures of possible patches which may have detached.
I am very glad they are finally getting around to solving the problem, after only 20+ years.
55
posted on
08/13/2004 10:08:54 PM PDT
by
XBob
(Free-traitors steal our jobs for their profit.)
To: Doe Eyes
...CFC free foam....
I don't think it's CFC free. I thought it had LESS pollutants in it. The plan was for 3rd gen foams which were pollution free.
56
posted on
08/13/2004 10:09:40 PM PDT
by
Joe_October
(Saddam supported Terrorists. Al Qaeda are Terrorists. I can't find the link.)
To: ken in texas
It sure does. Thanks for the ping.
I see the folks over on the "Observation" thread have seen it also.
To: dead
Hippies killed the astronauts
One of my fave punk 7"ers...
To: JeffersonRepublic.com
The old tanks are too heavy to allow the shuttle to reach the space station and carry cargo. They need to design a new spaceship to carry humans. Maybe Burt Rutan will help them. ..w/o doubt.."lets' soar w/ the eagles and not slide w/ the slugs"..onward and upward. :/
59
posted on
08/14/2004 4:32:29 AM PDT
by
skinkinthegrass
(Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :)
To: RadioAstronomer
Maybe Burt Rutan will help them... Unfortunately the technology he used is not scalable to orbit. ...Hmm, Hadn't heard that before. Make sense though...Burt Rutan's effort have typically been efficient (weight/strength/$$$$) use of technology @ hand.
60
posted on
08/14/2004 4:41:12 AM PDT
by
skinkinthegrass
(Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-69 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