Replies

I'm not quite sure why some people are having such difficulty with the concept that NASA screwed up big time.

This is not a perfect world and people will make mistakes.

It was an accident,not intentional, however,a decison was made by NASA brass that any possible tile damage sustained on lift off was inconsequential.

It was the wrong decison.

To say nothing could have been done is to try to avoid blame.

NASA will eventually have to admit they screwed up, and the "nothing could have been done" remark is ridiculous and insulting.

If the shuttle was up there now and NASA knew that the tiles were damaged enough to cause a possible burn up on re-entry, do you think they would have just stood around saying "nothing can be done"?

The reality is they would have tried everyhting in the book to get them back safely.

I am not accusing NASA of malice- only perhaps lack of judgement.

1). We hear there was no way for any of seven(!) people on board to space-walk out to the damaged area because a) none of them was trained to do so, and b) because no effort had been made to lay in supplies (such as tiles) to deal with such an eventuality, even though this exact same problem had manifested itself on Columbia in 1997, and had produced numerous warnings that some plan needed to be put in place. This is careless management in my view.

2). Please correct me if you can prove I am wrong on this, but I have also heard from numerous sources that no attempt was made to utilize satellite resources to photograph the damage and assess it in a responsible manner. Not for sixteen days. Forgive me for sensing a pattern.

3). The idea that NASA has not invested in a practical crew-ejection system (say, a tile insulated, parachute-equipped, detatchable cabin section) in the seventeen years(!) since the Challenger disaster does not inspire great confidence in the judgement of NASA's leadership.

4). You've no doubt seen (or heard) the stories about NASA's "new and improved" method of adhering the "foam" (hard as concrete, apparently) to the Main Booster Rocket. It is more "environmentally friendly" than the old method which was favored by the more cautious elements within NASA. I haven't researched this in great detail, but Roger Hedgecock (Rush's substitute teacher today) sounded as though he had, and was appalled at such a decision.

5). Had two of these issues been addressed more responsibly, this situation might not have arisen. Had the other two been dealt with differently during the mission itself, I'm sure there would have been hope for those folks. Atlantis could have mounted a rescue mission (cargo-bay to cargo-bay?) within a week. IF all resources had been utilized to gather information.

I don't take any pleasure in "piling on" the administrators who screwed this program up. God knows they're going through hell. But it does seem that the truth must be faced.

It also seems that accusing me of implying that NASA deliberately caused this tragedy is infantile and counter-productive. Have a nice day.