Michoud External Tanks May Hold Clue About Columbia Accident

Nasa, Michoud ^ | 2/4/2003 | Joseph Ranos

[tophat9000]

bookmark bump

[BurbankKarl]

Wow, thanks for clearing everything up. Can you create a winning strategy for the upcoming war...and perhaps design a fuel-cell vehicle before you leave work today?

[SirAllen]

I agree the external tank is the most likely suspect. If NASA screwed up anywhere it was the use of an older model that they had previously had a problem with, last October if I'm not mistaken.

However, not using all their resources to inspect the damage to the wing, and suppressing any kind of engineering analysis of the potential damage, was NOT wrong on the part of NASA. There was absolutely nothing they could do, no matter what the Monday morning quarterbacks are saying. If they discovered a serious problem on the wing beforehand it would have made this horrible situation 10 times worse than it already is. Imagine this scenario, uh crew, the shuttle is severely damaged and will not make it back on reentry, you only have a week of life support left, there's no way we can get to you, you can either die from lack of life support or die reentering. A horrendous situation. It was the right call, because in this situation it was definitely better to not know.

[John from Manhattan]

Sonar5 states: I am absolutely serious about this and have spent all morning researching this.

I'm sorry, but stating that you have spent "all morning" researching this topic (given its complexities) doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

[umgud]

Speaking entirely as a laymen, some things are obvious. I agree with you that for the future they need to make changes to solve the fuel tank insulation issue.

Having said that, I also believe everybody is aware that the heat shielding system on the shuttle is fragile and may be the only thing that separates successful reentries from disasters. In regard to inspecting the tiles while in space, I gotta believe there is a way to do this, even though there may not be a realistic way of repairing them.

If Saturday morning, the newscasts had instead reported that we had an emergency in space due to damaged tiles and that NASA was exploring ways to rescue the crew............... I just have to believe that we can find a way in space to inspect this system and make contingencies to get the crews home.

[Sonar5]

John, That really meant about 8 hours, and another 7-8 hours since then.

[Sonar5]

How about something constructive to say instead.

This is relevent information, if you honestly take the time to read through the links. Then you can draw your own conclusions.

IMHO, It will take someone more than 2 hours just to go through the links verifying what I wrote.

Then, I will appreciate your views on it.

Thanks for responding though.

Regards,
Joe

http://http://home.attbi.com/~Sonar5/Shuttle/memorial-sts-107.jpg

[Avid Coug]

Where I question NASA's planning on this trip was their decision to not take any jetpacks or other equipment along that would allow the astronauts to inspect or work on the exterior of the shuttle. Given the criticality of the tiles, and their proven tendency to occasionally fall off, I would think that you would always want to maintain the ability for inflight repairs to the exterior.

[Sonar5]

Hi John,

Further clarifcation. I began this Monday Morning. That reference is a quote from a discussion I was having on another board while compiling different data, even from other people as well.

I can see how the reference taken out of context can be confusing. So I apologize for phrasing it that way. That statement was made yesterday late afternoon.

Total Time approximately 12-15 hours.

Regards,
Joe

[GalaxieFiveHundred]

Unfortunately for those who want to tie up an objective matter subjectively, you're probably very close to what transpired. If the variables of the situation were in fact constants that could not have been corrected or changed, what good would it have been to play out a week of sheer madness for all involved.

Extreme moral and ethical situation? Regretfully yes, but life plays a fierce hand with those who dare to challenge the boundaries of greatness.

[BureaucratusMaximus]

Why even bother with this? The BBers will just come in here, tell you that you don't have all the facts, and insist that you tolerate the level of incompetence that presently exists.

(Nice job BTW)

[GovernmentShrinker]

Awesome work. But, no rest for the weary :)

Can you put dates on that list of mission numbers/tank numbers, and explain the tank numbers? ET-113 appears to have been used twice (but none of the other tank numbers on your list were) -- is this a model number, or an item serial number? If the latter, are these things reusable, or not?

[Lael]

or find a way to reduce or eliminate that ice, and then we can fly again

For what it is worth, I estimate that the BLOCK of ICE, clearly visible as white BEFORE it struck the left wing, as weighing AT LEAST 20 pounds, and more probably 30 pounds, and storing much energy in the form of compression.

The white cloud after impact is NOT insulation, but something MUCH WORSE...FLASH Sublimation of ice crystals with a SHOCK WAVE directed into the interior of the wing.

[Lael]

or find a way to reduce or eliminate that ice, and then we can fly again

For what it is worth, I estimate that the BLOCK of ICE, clearly visible as white BEFORE it struck the left wing, as weighing AT LEAST 20 pounds, and more probably 30 pounds, and storing much energy in the form of compression.

The white cloud after impact is NOT insulation, but something MUCH WORSE...FLASH Sublimation of ice crystals with a SHOCK WAVE directed into the interior of the wing.

[FReepaholic]

>>... Why did they even use a LWT, since the newer SLWT have been used since 1998...<<<

The orbiters,SSME's, SRB's and ET all had to have major performance/weight upgrades in order to reach the inclination of the ISS

In the case of the ET's, they were made lighter.

Columbia had not been modified and was too heavy for a mission to the ISS.

I don't know if the LWT was able to be used on an ISS mission, but I can guess that NASA did not choose to use the SLWT for this one because it was not an ISS mission.

Just a guess.

[GovernmentShrinker]

ping

[Nephi]

Good work.

America needs to exchange our culture of vilifying whistleblowers with a culture of lionizing whistleblowers.

While the astronauts knew the risks when they enlisted, there is no need to send them into Somalia without bullets.

[Sonar5]

Hi,

Thanks for catching that no one else has, not even me.

ET Stands for External Tank Number, so Yes the Mfg. Michoud numbers each one different. They are not reusable and burn up in the atmosphere on re-entry usually over an Ocean.

Whereas STS stands for the Mission Number.

STS-113 Had an ET of 116. The Et's are assigned a mission so they will not always be in chronological order.

STS-107 ET-93

STS-113 ET-116

STS-112 ET-115

STS-111 ET-113

STS-110 ET-114

STS-109 ET-112

STS-108 ET-111

STS-105 ET-110

STS-104 ET-109

Mission dates are available here in PDF Format. Start at the bottom and work backwards, Its quicker.

Michoud Shuttle Flight ET Info:
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/michoud/et/shuttle_flight_info.pdf

Michoud has the best info as the Shuttle Press Kit info is wrong, as was confirmed by my emails to Michoud.

Michoud lists ET dates and Missions in the above file.

Thanks,
Joe