BREAKING: NBC News finds Jan 30 NASA Memo showing serious concern about tile damage!

NBC News | February 3, 2003 | Jay Barbree

[Timesink]

Developing. Watch MSNBC for latest. Internal memo shows some engineers believe there was up to a 7 1/2-inch gash from the foam breakoff at launch. Memo was serious enough to go out to all NASA centers two days before disaster.

[Howlin]

you have a hard time making friends don't you?

Actually, I don't. And I sure don't have as many people as you do calling me dumb.

Now let's show everybody how smart YOU are:

You said: You think it wasn't heated up to 3000 degrees and not on fire?

And I said: So why don't they all burn up then, Todd? Because they ALL come in at 3000 degrees when the hit maximum entry. How do you explain that fact?

Still waiting for an answer.

Got one? Or are you going to dodge this one too because you don't know?

[TomServo]

I simply don't believe this thread. Incredible.

[KantianBurke]

So Bill Nelson and others asert that the Columbia shuttle could not have sustained 14 days in space from launch to reentry? According to NASA's webpage the craft was scheduled to stay aloft for 17 days (Jan 16 - Feb 1).

http://www.nasa.gov/columbia/mission/index.html

Your sources are therefore wrong when they claim nothing could have been done. IF NASA had erred on the side of caution and acted they could have been saved. They did not and therefore liable.

[Chad Fairbanks]

It doesn't take a genius to figue out that US spy satellites could have taken photos of the underside of the craft.

Prove it. It is YOUR assertion, so PROVE it. I see no way it could be done...

An aviation expert on NPR said as much this morning.

Oh, well, gee... if it was an aviation 'expert' on NPR, then by gooly it proves you right... I mean, it was on the Radio so it MUST be true, right????

And stop with the petty insults please, they are so jackass like.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

[Howlin]

Your sources are therefore wrong when they claim nothing could have been done.

They're not MY sources; they're all over TV.

But I'm sure you're right. Being a computer astronaut and all.

Perhaps YOU should contact NASA, too.

[justshe]

Well....if it helps....the rocket scientists WERE on TV today.....and they are doing everything possible to investigate, gather data and analyze that data. To second guess that investigation, and make uninformed charges of NASA being complict in the deaths of 7 astronauts is ludicrous. No, it is worse....it exposes the emotionalism of some who WANT to pin a failure on SOMEONE, so they engage in a witch hunt without adequate data to support their claims.

Gather data, investigate, analyze....and THEN let's see where we are. Take the emotionalism out of this...and approach this logically. That is my hope.

[Fred Mertz]

NASA buried its head in the sand on this.

NASA is an organization, like FR is. I agree that some people in NASA must have had their heads in the sand on QA safety requirements.

So do too many freepers. They lap up the few crumbs that NASA tosses their way and seem to be satisfied, yet indignant if anyone expresses skepticism. Well, like you, I am very skeptical. Seven fine people are dead and I don't buy that it was an accident.

I'm not saying that it was a sinister plot, but I'd like to get at the root of the problem.

[Howlin]

[TomServo]

LOL!!! You get me goin' every time. :-)

[dogbyte12]

You are gifted my man. You have no learned scholarly opinion on anything. You can't conjugate a verb, construct a sentence, put together a coherent logical thought except when you cut and paste your way to oblivion, but you have a gift.

The shuck and jive ratty rat, slam weeper bit you do, that turns every thread you enter into a dialogue about you is amazing. I have seen you actually write full and complete paragraphs when you choose to do so, so I know it is (mostly) an act geared towards getting you attention.

What people don't seem to realize is that "conservatism" isn't your issue. Todd is the issue. How can Todd best get attention.

This could be a Indy Car board and you would be on here saying "FoRD bad engines, LOL, weepy litle twerps. Chevy rules but good!"

I congradulate you on getting what you want. After all, I too, like a moth drawn to flame, have given you the attention that you so desperately seek. Enjoy it Todd.

Keep Slaming them bought Gud!

[KantianBurke]

Seeing as you only respond with childish insults and flames to a simple and logistically feasible plan, I'll consider my query answered. Levelheaded and rational readers of this thread will evidently get something out this exchange unlike dogmatic yourself. Goodnight.

[woodyinscc]

"
Didn't mean to snap! It's been a long day of Whack-a-Mole, if you get my drift!

Your not kidding! You are just going to have to learn not to pick on people who are "smaller" than you

[Howlin]

Don't let Todd see you talking to me; he will think you're a friend of mine and he says I have a hard time making friends! (See #777)

[KantianBurke]

definetly. your post should be copied and pasted onto every thread that pertains to the Columbia tragedy.

[Howlin]

Seeing as you only respond with childish insults and flames to a simple and logistically feasible plan,

No, I gave you facts at the beginning and you ridiculed them and, of course, had to insinuate that we're all naieve if we don't agree with you all.

You got the answers you deserved.

[Chad Fairbanks]

Once it had been determined the shuttle was in danger, Atlantis could have been sent up within a week. Once up in space, the ship could have sided up parellel to the Columbia, a member of Atlantis could have space walked out to the Columbia with a bag containing 7 space suits and (assuming Columbia had an airlock) then led the crew members out one by one. From there Atlantis could have flown back to earth. As NASA did not pursue this or any other line of action they must bear the burden of responsibilty for the deaths. If what I just proposed is impossible I'll step back of course.

Whether they had an airlock is irrelevent... by the time we got another shuttle up, they would have suffocated (i.e. run out of oxygen)... there is NO way that NASA would risk launching a second shuttle in that short of a time period - to do so would have the potential for even MORE losses (rushing through safety checks, checklists, etc...)... in the time it would take to do it it safely, the stranded astronauts would be long dead...

Losing one crew is bad enough - to lose TWO crews? Not worth the price. No way.

[TLBSHOW]

bttt

[VRWC For Truth]

Not to mention the fact that they were lucky no one on the ground was killed. Not only were they risking the astronauts lives, but those on the ground too.

[justshe]

This is going no where.

I see a witch hunt on one side--all emotion w/o facts.

I see those who want a logical progression of the investigtion on the another side.

Hard to have an honest debate between the two sides, imo.

Those who want a 'hanging' will use whatever they can to justify their argument. You cannot argue with a lynch mob. You can only walk away.

Hope the lynch mob is proud of themselves. Because they are a disgrace to the rest of us. We are truly ashamed to be even periphally linked to them.

[Howlin]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/834846/posts?page=781#781