Computer analysis measures force of blow to shuttle [10 times energy needed to rupture wing]

USA Today ^ | April 30, 2003 | Traci Watson

[RightWhale]

They could have floated a video camera out the payload bay

If the Space Shuttle ever flies again, such an inspection will be part of the walk-around prior to re-emtry. It will be done shortly after achieving orbit so there is time, a week or two, to do something such as launch the rescue vehicle.

[So Cal Rocket]

The impact model was developed many years ago and run (and refined) several hundred times over the life of the shuttle program.

Unfortunately, the experience of the individuals who developed the model and had run the model over and over was lost in the transition to Houston. These models are not just "plug some numbers in the front end and get an answer out the back end", they require substantial engineering analysis along the way to ensure a valid result. The "old" engineers used the exact same model that the "new" engineers used - with vastly different results.

To say there is no correlation between the relocation and the accident is speculative and I will admit that my assertion that there is at least some correlation is also speculative. However, unless the Accident Investigation Board takes a look at the facts of the matter, all we will have to go on is speculation - the AIB is staying away from this issue like it's the Third Rail.

[snopercod]

Interesting letter. Thanks for posting it.

Rockwell designed a helluva a vehicle. I wonder how things would have turned out had the SPC not come along.

[snopercod]

One other thing.

Do you know the nature of the modifications done to the Columbia L.E.S.S. at Palmdale in 1999?

[jlogajan]

There are two NASA's... the old and the new. The New NASA is a series of management failures.

Oh good grief. Read a little history. Read the books written after the Apollo 7 fire. NASA has always been a target of the blamethrowers.

NASA does leading edge missions -- on a huge scale. Failures are going to happen, no matter how many layers of bureaucracy you want to add on.

[tm22721]

Could-a

Would-a

Shoud-a

BUMP

[Banjoguy]

I am not intrested in 'tarring and feathering' anyone. Further I don't need to be preached to regarding the complexity of the shuttle systems.

This accident had nothing to do with complexity and everything to do with a historical bias regarding the foam shedding problem. (Everyone noticed the blase attitude exhibited by Dittemore during the early news conferences when this subject was brought up.)

I totally agree with you that the problem should be researched, and solutions incorporated on future flights.

I am an ardent supporter of the program. Nonetheless, the infrequent but dramatic deaths of officers, pilots, and specialists has appeared to me, to have been uneccessary and preventable.

[oldcomputerguy]

The administrators should be put up on charges for their negligence.

Sounds like a wrongful death case against Dittimore to me. They ignored repeated foam hits in the past and their analysis of this hit wasn't even in the ball park.

[from occupied ga]

As you know Lou .... aluminum flows at a much lower temp that 620 deg.

Huh??? Aluminum melts at 660C Aluminum alloys will melt at a lower temp, but there are very few alloys of anything that flow at lower temps than 620F.

[Moonman62]

Oh good grief. Read a little history. Read the books written after the Apollo 7 fire. NASA has always been a target of the blamethrowers.

NASA does leading edge missions -- on a huge scale. Failures are going to happen, no matter how many layers of bureaucracy you want to add on.

Apollo 7 was a leading edge mission. But the last flight of Columbia wasn't. Columbia's last mission wasn't even necessary. It was just busy work designed to keep NASA's budget intact, as is most of their manned spaceflight program, especially the ISS.

[Moonman62]

The AERcam Sprint was flown and tested in 1997, and AFAIK ignored by NASA ever since. It was probably too low cost and effective.

[RightWhale]

When they are docked to the ISS there is no problem doing a walk-around. But on the solo flight they were hanging out there on their own, might as well have been on Mars. They will have to have all their self-reliance spaceflight tools available, such as EVA, duct tape, and a flaregun to call for assistance.

[ironman]

I do not think that is the solution NASA will go for. They'll want a capability to monitor the wings and underside all during the flight without having to do EVA's.

[texson66]

The AERcam Sprint was flown and tested in 1997, and AFAIK ignored by NASA ever since. It was probably too low cost and effective.

Looks just like the way the working group in the late 80's envisioned it!

[XBob]

http://www.caib.us/images/public_hearings/ph030407/et/Slide18.jpg

thanks for the ping bribriagain

[XBob]

It appears that they have been working very hard to stop the foam shedding problem with foam tearing out chunks of the orbiter insulation tiles, NO???

20 years and they can't seem to figure out, even yet (3 months after it killed 7 people), that the foam should stay on the tank, rather than shed.

[XBob]

there are so many holes in the orbiter insulation from takeoff, on average, how would they know which one(s) to photograph?

[texson66]

Well, I think that the ops approach would have to evolve over time. The crew would have a "map" of the bottom surface of the shuttle before launch. The RPV would "fly" along the surface of the bottom of the shutttle and other areas and provide a post launch "map" which a computer and/or operator could compare and identify any major changes.

If major damage was found, the lack of repair on-orbit technology would require that the shuttle be capable of reaching the ISS or return in a crew recovery capsule carried on board or already in orbit for just such an emergency. (Commerical airliners must carry additional fuel to reach alternate airports if the primary is unavailable.)In other words, a lot more $$$

[NormsRevenge]

Bump it Up!

[XBob]

38 - "The RPV would "fly" along the surface of the bottom of the shutttle and other areas and provide a post launch "map" which a computer and/or operator could compare and identify any major changes."

Good idea. Perhaps they could use sonor/radar/infrared in that little flying robot to survey the whole orbiter for damage.

But at this point, NASA won't even survey the tanks for foam voids, or declare the foam to be a problem to be fixed, so how can we expect them to think that far ahead?