4 ways Columbia could have been saved. From NASA's Kennedy Space Center Home Page

NASA's Kennedy Space Center Home Page ^ | 04 February 03 | Mitchel Tighe

[Mitchel Tighe]

I said diminuative. Try Mitch and this was before my new computer (I've not been here in a few years) that had what I thought was my old PW. Of course, my new computer and Outlook do not have it, ergo, I had to register again.

Actually, now that I think about it, the last time I was here was impeachment

Thanks!

[Screaming_Gerbil]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/835422/posts

Columbia Was Beyond Any Help, Officials Say

Even if flight controllers had known for certain that protective heat tiles on the underside of the space shuttle had sustained severe damage at launching, little or nothing could have been done to address the problem, NASA officials say.

Virtually since the hour Columbia went down, the space agency has been peppered with possible options for repairing the damage or getting the crew down safely. But in each case, officials here and at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida say, the proposed solution would not have worked.

The simplest would have been to abort the mission the moment the damage was discovered. In case of an engine malfunction or other serious problem at launching, a space shuttle can jettison its solid rocket boosters and the external fuel tank, shut down its own engines and glide back down, either returning to the Kennedy Space Center or an emergency landing site in Spain or Morocco.

But no one even knew that a piece of insulation from the external tank had hit the orbiter until a frame-by-frame review of videotape of the launching was undertaken the next day. By then, Columbia was already in orbit, and re-entry would have posed the same danger that it did 16 days later...

[Fred Mertz]

You should respect the poster's serious question.

Do you always talk down to people?

[Positive]

Mitch - FreeperSpace is not a place to be factually inaccurate.

You did good work but your basic premises in re: 80 seconds for Challenger and 83 for Columbia were wrong as far as when mission control was aware of the malfuction/problem.

So you got blasted and it was too late for you to abort...you were already in orbit. Next time go through your pre-flight a little more thoroughly, you will be pleased with the reception a new and factually accurate post gets.

[fatima]

=Gosh that looks like a song Tennessee_Bob,who are you,if we could sing,American Idol-rock,cute girl and guy,heck we would make money honey

[Chad Fairbanks]

Why yes, I do... do you always ask the same questions over and over again because you dont' like the answers you hear?????

[Chad Fairbanks]

Since he's been here before, his problem now is reentry... ;0)

[Mitchel Tighe]

I GET THE HINT!!!!! :)

[Brett66]

If they had a couple of these cams close to the wing it would've helped a lot. Here's a pic of these cams in use:

Why not put these close to each wing on future flights? They would've had a lot better idea of the threat to the shuttle with these cams on board.

[Chad Fairbanks]

Good one Fred... think of that all by yourself, or did you have help??? ;0)

[Diddle E. Squat]

Winnie the Pooh was the first to come out with this theory.

So now its Winnie the Pooh, and Tighe, too.

[coloradan]

In a TAL abort, the vehicle continues on a ballistic trajectory across the Atlantic Ocean to land at a predetermined runway. Landing occurs approximately 45 minutes after launch.

Concorde and for that matter, SR-71, eat your hearts out.

[Diddle E. Squat]

"I really wanna know..."

[Chad Fairbanks]

And yet, I'm doing pretty well for a fool, considering you have yet to prove me wrong on anything that I have posted re: the shuttle... so what does that make YOU????

[Diddle E. Squat]

This is gonna be a good thread...

[Chad Fairbanks]

Yeah - since we are talking music, maybe we need to whip out the Dead Kennedys... to paraphrase, "Let's Lynch The Mission Controller"

[fatima]

Who are you and what does this mean 'Actually, now that I think about it, the last time I was here was impeachment

Thanks!' Who are you and why were you impeachment ,are you Bill undercover as Mitchel Tighe which sounds like a very nice name who signed up today ur are you Bill.
41 posted on 02/05/2003 1:11 AM EST by Mitchel Tighe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]