Debris Falls Off Shuttle After Launch

Sky News ^ | July 4, 2006

[Publius6961]

why are we still taking this thing into orbit, spending time repeating old experiments on the space station and generally burning money just to show that we can?

You're right.
We need more socialized health care.

That's the ticket.

[alecqss]

Here is from the horses' mouth itself (http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/people/journals/space/katnik/sts87-12-23.html): "During the STS-87 mission, there was a change made on the external tank. Because of NASA's goal to use environmentally friendly products, a new method of "foaming" the external tank had been used for this mission and the STS-86 mission. It is suspected that large amounts of foam separated from the external tank and impacted the orbiter. This caused significant damage to the protective tiles of the orbiter. Foam cause damage to a ceramic tile?! That seems unlikely, however when that foam is combined with a flight velocity between speeds of MACH two to MACH four, it becomes a projectile with incredible damage potential. The big question? At what phase of the flight did it happen and what changes need to be made to correct this for future missions? I will explain the entire process."

[Central Scrutiniser]

[Central Scrutiniser]

Sometimes, when they launch at Vandenberg we can see it in Phoenix.

Its very low on the horizon though, and mostly the ionized vapour trail.

I watched a launch last week from Vandenberg cross right over us, but I was in Carlsbad, California for that.

[burzum]

Yeah, that was also covered in the CAIB report. The huge losses, which show up as a spike on the graph in appendix F.5, were reduced to the same level as before by helping to degas the foam better.

It was still NASA's choice to launch though. NASA designs a space program, not the EPA. If the EPA was interfering too much, NASA could have canceled all launches and I'm sure Congress would have given them a waiver. They chose not to.

[alecqss]

That's the problem with the eco-nuts.

Clearly asbestos and freon are harmful. However, the amount used in production is so minuscule that it would have no effect on the environment. After all we are not building thousands of shuttles every year... Why not to ban gasoline immediately - after all "chemicals known to cause cancer could be found in and around" any gas station.

Replacing, for bogus environmental concerns, working technology by the one that probably, in a few years, will be no worse than the existing one is unreasonable. Forcing its immediate use due is irresponsible, to say the least.

[alecqss]

Nope, there would no waiver from the Congress.
There will be (and there was!) a management replacements. So, the new management will work "responsibly".

If NASA brass "canceled all launches" it would be criminal prosecution and jail terms for sabotage.

[burzum]

If NASA brass "canceled all launches" it would be criminal prosecution and jail terms for sabotage.

We are not North Korea. The worst that would happen would be the Administrator would be fired (under Clinton). I believe GWB would listen to the Administrator of NASA if he said it was unsafe. With a Republican Congress and/or President for much of the last 25 years, NASA had every opportunity to do what was necessary. Republicans would not hang an Administrator for questioning safety.

[pctech]

Exactly. Here we got a case of where they got something that will work but they are trying to reinvent the wheel.

[alecqss]

We are also not Cuba, so what?

So, you would say it's unsafe and a huge number of "scientists" and "engineers" would tell that it is safe. And you stopped a government-mandated program...

Do you have any example of anything like that ever successfully tried?

[El Gato]

But apparently strong enough to rip them off the tank

The "ripping off" could be due to the boundary layer turbulence, but once free of the tank, and a little away from it, the foam would be in "free" air, until it hit the shuttle, if it did.

There's also the possibility of other mechanisms, vibration from the pumps or engines (although both are well away from the external tank. Still the lines might vibrate. In fact such vibrations of feed lines has been a problem since the first liquid fueled rockets.

[TAdams8591]

How wonderful to see Discovery take off on JUly 4. Gave me goose bumps. The astronauts are incredibly brave.

Prayers for a safe mission and their safe return.

[El Gato]

Was Admiral Rickover ever married?

Twice. From Wikipedia

His first wife, Ruth Masters Rickover (1903-1972) is buried with him and the name of his second wife, Eleonore A. Bednowicz Rickover, whom he met and married while she was serving as a Commander in the Navy Nurse Corps, is also inscribed on his gravestone. He was survived by Robert Rickover, his sole son by his first wife,

[Stallone]

Here's my thought on the entire concept itself.

Since the shuttle is covered with a skin, the solid rocket boosters are covered, and even the astronauts, is it really FRICKING ROCKET SCIENCE to cover the exposed styrofoam with a thin coating, skin, etc. that will give the insulation compression strength and pressure adhesion to the body itself?

Why the hell do we expect EXPOSED styrofoam to be an aerodynamically stable substrate?

Even a STUCCO house has a layer of parging over the styrofoam.

Is NASA that FRICKING STUPID?

[alecqss]

My point is political. Namely, EPA and eco-groups should carry a responsibility for their actions as anyone else. Period.

It's not NASA fault just because NASA's management was not brave enough to withstand a political pressure. They were not brave enough, alright, but that's beside the point.

Very fine scientists and very skilled managers could be total cowards when it comes to political pressure, especially in a "politically correct" context. Can you imagine all the howling from the powerful eco-groups and the consequences to a person who would decide to stand in a way of "saving the planet"!

The EPA decision forced NASA into changes that increase risk of a disaster. What for? The benefit to the environment was so small, that it was pretty much negated by the pollution resulted from the Columbia catastrophe.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

It could all be fixed if the friggin NASA people would go against the Greenies and go BACK to manufacturing the foam the old way.

No kidding. I can't figure out why they don't go back to the old foam and tell the Watermelons to go to h311 and file suit against the US Government....if they feel they can win. Which they won't.

[clintonh8r]

Three minutes after launch, they weren't in Florida anymore

Case dismissed!

[catpuppy]

That's the ticket.

No, what we need is a space program with a mission, not a space program boring holes in the sky while it tries to convince the public and Congress that it is doing useful work over and over and over and ...