NASA Could have aborted the flight before it reached orbit!

NASA Website ^ | 02/03/03 | self

[Preech1]

According to NASA's own websites, the shuttle has 25 minutes to abort a launch before the shuttle enters orbit. Had NASA considered the damage to the wing to be a danger to the crew, they could possibly have saved the lives of the 7 astronauts and we would today be speaking of that dramatic event rather than mourning their deaths.

I am in no way blaming NASA for the deaths of these crew members, but instead I am trying to answer the MANY posters who have said the crew was doomed from the start.

While it is true that the crew was doomed once they attained orbit, there was a 25 minute window after launch in which the shuttle could have aborted the mission.

Here's how I see it. The main reason for the break-up appears to be structural failure due to the combined factors of a damaged wing and the heat and stress of re-entry. Had the shuttle aborted the flight at launch, there would still have been a risk with the damaged wing, but speed and re-entry heating would not have factored in. It would have been a bumpy landing to be sure, but they would have landed.

I only write this article to suggest that NASA consider this possibility in future flights. We can do nothing about the past.

May the souls of the Columbia Rest in Peace.

[Preech1]

Please see link before Flaming me.

[Howlin]

Since they didn't now about this until the next day, how would you suggest they abort within the necessary time limit?

[ContemptofCourt]

NASA did not know of any potential damage until the day after launch when it was reviewing the launch tapes....

[Trust but Verify]

Why bother with such a minor detail. Some people will NOT listen.

[Trust but Verify]

Isn't this getting tiring? Good Lord.

[Preech1]

As I said in the article, I am only suggesting caution for future flights. Many saw the insulation fall at launch, next time they may decide to abort.

[Keith in Iowa]

When did they find out about the foam coming off & hitting the wing? Was it within the time frame to abort? If so, your observation has some merit. Otherwise, it's mindless, Mondy morning arm-chair engineer/rocket scientist quaterbacking.

[Preech1]

As I said, I am only answering those who said it was doomed as soon as it lifted off the pad.

[Fred Mertz]

NASA did not know of any potential damage until the day after launch when it was reviewing the launch tapes....

Assuming NASA is reporting the truth....

[Ravenstar]

Preech1,

Consider all the facts first, just when do you think that data was seen? I will posit not until after they reached Orbit Which is 8 1/2 minutes after they left. When the main engines shutdown they are in orbit albeit a lower one that they circularize with an OMS burn about 45 minutes later. Your scenario does not hold water.(look at my profile if you doubt my work)

Ravenstar

[Frank_Discussion]

Don't need to see the link. It's obvious that you aren't listening to the NASA team when they discuss the timeline of events.

The mission team didn't even know that debris from the External Tank insulation struck Columbia until they reviewed the tapes the next day. All indications at launch time seem to have been as they should be, so no abort condition was perceived.

Furthermore, there are very good reasons not to nail down the insulation as the culprit, based on the Challenger investigation. First impressions were wrong during that time.

[scooter2]

Isn't this getting tiring? Good Lord.

I aggree. I also question the 25 minute window. From the time of lift-off, it does not take the shutlle 25 minutes to enter orbit. It's more like 8 minutes.

[anobjectivist]

Not really much you can do. Abort the launch? I don't know what exactly the process for that action may be, but I don't know if the astronauts on board would have to dump from the shuttle at that altitude and use parachutes or if they would try to steer it to a landing. That's assuming action is taken immediately. The shuttle is accelerating so fast that the shuttle could very well be out of the atmosphere before they even determined whether or not the shuttle was critically damaged. Anyways, it wasn't noticed in time and action was not taken when it was noticed.

[Howlin]

You still didn't answer the question. Since they already HAVE cameras on the shuttle at liftoff, how do YOU suggest that they decide within 25 minutes?

[Preech1]

See post 8. I do not doubt your credentials, I am only engaging in discussion about things to consider for future flights.

[Howlin]

The problem is that if you don't knock every single erroneous thread or post down, before long it gets to be fact.

Apparently some on here aren't interested in facts.

[Preech1]

Click on the link to see the process.

[Catspaw]

So, Fred, NASA'S lying and they intentionally killed the Columbia astronauts?

[RedWing9]

I am in no way blaming NASA for the deaths of these crew members

Are you sure???

Had the shuttle aborted the flight at launch

Looks like it to me.

[1rudeboy]

As I said, I am only answering those who said it was doomed as soon as it lifted off the pad.

Not a good answer, although I suppose that one could argue that the "moment of doom" is fluid in the sense that Columbia was doomed as soon as the insulation was manufactured, or the shuttle program was funded, or that butterfly flapped its wings in Africa (for all you chaos-theory fans).