Air Force imagery confirms Columbia wing damaged

Spaceflightnow.com ^ | 02/07/03 | CRAIG COVAULT

[Poohbah]

If NASA's claiming the USAF doesn't have hi-res cameras that's plain BS! They had the AF specifically take ground based photos of an EARLY shuttle launch that was thought to have tile damage. They rolled the shuttle over to present a good target to the camera and saw enough to allay their fears. And that was in the early 1980's.

Poohbah had me convinced it would be nearly impossible to capture images with enough resolution to see the damage. I believed him.

IIRC from the mission in question (the first flight of Columbia), they were looking for gross discrepancies--namely, they were afraid that whole tiles MISSING--as opposed to simple tile damage, which could be significantly smaller and most likely below the camera's resolution limits.

[norton]

Regarding angles -
I've only seen shuttle landings from the landing site (Edwards) so can't address way-high maneuvers but even in the last minutes and down in heavy air the thing points all over the place as it burns off momentum and altitude. I'd lay more concern on the attitude thrusters firing as that would suggest it was already out of control.
Re speed -
When the foam hit the wing the bird was not moving all that fast, something about inertia, force needed to start (lift) a heavy object, etc. Seriously doubt it'd torque the wing OR dislodge a tile except in freak happenstance. Do not know make up of the foam but it's surely not what comes in your sterio carton.
Re images -
I'm pretty sure we have not given up ability to photograph in near space simply because that's where ICBMs come from. I do remember clear shots of orbiters as they came into California during earlier flights.
Also, FOX is showing amateur video of something coming off the shuttle far west of the last transmission.
And,
My boss watched it come over So Cal and immediately decided it was breaking up at that time. That was straight middle aged human vision - not rocket science.

[Vic3O3]

I always thought the good engineer's motto was underpromise & overdeliver. NASA's (re: shuttle flight schedule)seems to be overpromise & underdeliver!

While yes, my projected launch cycle is based on history (that's all we have!) if NASA was going to ever speed it up, you'd think that in 22 years they'd have managed it!

Since they never have sped it up, my lifetime figure is more accurate (being based on actual launch #s) than their projected one!

[Cold Heat]

No, news to me????

[Brett66]

I also was wondering how true the "we couldn't have done a thing" mantra was. The Progress resuply vessel was ready to go in Russia. Maybe a last minute change in payloads and trajectory could have sent this to the Columbia for resupply. Maybe that would have given them enough time until another shuttle could get up there. I also heard that the payload on the Columbia might have physically obstructed the airlock, so the astronauts could not have gotten out to do an EVA to look at damage or retrieve supplies. If this was the case, it isn't very good planning on their part. In the future they should have the little inspector cams on board to check for damage. NASA could also have some agreements with Russia in place for an emergency redirection of any rockets they have to provide emergency support for such a contingency. They could even have a couple of modules sitting around ready to go on top of a Russian,Ariane,Delta,Titan or Atlas booster just in case.

[r9etb]

Quite a coincidence! One should never underestimate the incompetence of bureaucrats, but that coincidence does suggest we should be thinking of sabotage in addition to incompetence.

You're being silly.

I've seen many instances where chains of odd coincidences have contributed to problems, and hindered the solution to them. It's not bureaucrats, and it's not sabotage. It just happens. There are so many people in the chain, the odds are that something is going to happen that is, in retrospect, important to something else that happened.

[Cold Heat]

No docking collar! No way to do it with a short tether and a suit.

[CyberAnt]

"the tank debris event at launch played a key role in the root cause of the accident"

If this event is proven true - I predict the envirowhackos WILL BE PUT OUT OF BUSINESS. To protect the environment at the cost of 7 people is waaaaaaay too high a price to pay.

I cannot believe that the amount of Freon previously used for the shuttle was significant enough to cause damage to the environment.

[DoughtyOne]

If the astronaut were to exit the crew cabin, turn right and go over the side in front of the open payload bay door, he could see the leading edge of the wing without coming near the brittle tiles. That would seem to be within the limits of the teather. I don't know how long it is, but it must give some traveling distance or it wouldn't be worth the bother.

[Riley]

I suppose the question I should ask is, who the hell ever thought that the Russians never had any losses? I'm still not convinced that Yuri Gagarin made it back alive... course, I never did trust teh old Soviet Union to ever be truthful, so call me a skeptic... ;0)

You may get a kick out of this then:

http://www.lostcosmonauts.com/

[Brett66]

Yeah, it looks like Columbia was SOL on this one. I hope NASA seriously rethinks not having the EVA option on future flights.

[Chad Fairbanks]

Thanks!

[r9etb]

Wouldn't this have been visible by the astronauts? I would think that the leading edge would have been visually inspected as SOP.

There are no windows that can see it.

Think about looking out an airplane window at something behind, below, and close to the fuselage and you'll get some idea of the difficulty. In addition, the cargo bay doors would have been open, and blocking the view even further.

Best chance would probably have been through the crew hatch window, but I think the angle would be too steep.

[tubebender]

Press conference on NASA TV channel NOW

[Cold Heat]

I can almost guarantee that they will! The politicians will need to fork over some money.

[r9etb]

Take something that large and as hard as a brick......slam it into ceramic tiling at that speed..........and you have damage, folks. Severe damage.

The foam was much lighter, and much more brittle, than a single brick that is about a tenth the size of the chunk that fell off, and it hit a glancing blow. I don't think it's a valid comparison.

[1Old Pro]

I guess you are probably right. It would seem to me that they would want to be able to visually inspect something so critical.

Hugh knew!

[lonestar]

A source within local law enforcement circles said this week that even though NASA and others want to collect all debris and parts to aid in the investigation the the search is also continuing for two boxes that had military and defense applications.

This on local news close to the debris search.

[r9etb]

The video you are referring to was an out of focus condition where the shape of the video camera iris formed the shape of the bright object.

Don't leave out the fact that the out-of-focus shape just happened to look exactly like the ass-end of a Space Shuttle. The iris explanation doesn't address that little fact.

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

There were two EVA suits onboard. I have read that there is a disagreement as to whether an EVA could have been performed through the hatch in the tunnel leading to the SpaceHab. Maybe it could.

Even if a tethered EVA could have been performed there was no way that the underside of the orbiter could have been examined. No handholds on the fuselage or wing in order to pull onesself along and remain stationary. Had they had an MMU onboard, which they didn't, then they should have tried that option.

Seems as though NASA has gotten complacent along with most of the public about the Shuttle. After reviewing quite a few of the flight synopses one can see that there is a certain amount of damage to the tiles that occurs on every single flight. Should the fleet have been grounded until a better insulating system was developed and a zero tolerance policy been adapted? From now on a "worst case" mindset should probably be adopted on every flight. Limit the size of the crew. Always carry enough fuel and a docking collar to get to the ISS. Always carry at least one MMU and an EVA suit for each crewmember. The possibility that the leading edge of the port wing was damaged wasn't thought of until the telemetry data from reentry was gone over and they still haven't determined with certainty that that did in fact occur. Based on previous experience with the ET shedding insulation the conclusion was reached that damage serious enough to cause a problem had not occurred.

The decision to leave the orbiter and tanks exposed to nearly two weeks of rain while on the pad will be looked at. Should a cocoon encasing the whole pad be developed that can be opened/removed prior to fueling and launch. Did water penetrate the insulation during the rain and then freeze as it ascended causing it to fracture and dislodge. A high speed computer should be examining every frame of video shot in real time of the launch so a decision to execute a TAL can be made before the Shuttle reaches orbit. Should the decision to abort be made by a computer and not the launch director. Is the idea of a reusable spacecraft and all the safety measures that would have to be in place to virtually guarantee that there would be no danger of a loss too cost prohibitive to make it worthwhile. Should everyone at NASA be fired and should the space program be privatized.