Shuttle Foam Test Yields Hole in Wing (Produces vs Yields)

AP ^ | 07/07/2003 | MARCIA DUNN, AP Aerospace Writer

[justlurking]

Tell me this is true!

Doubtful.

http://www.snopes.com/science/cannon.htm

[snopercod]

Wait a minute you guys. It was bonesmccoy and XBob (as well as many others) that had this nailed from the first. My function was to play devil's advocate and look for alternative scenarios. This latest evidence seems to be a Q.E.D. moment. (Of course somebody will probably speculate that the test was rigged..hehee) Here is bone's epic thread: (FReepers rule!)

Observation on TPS damage on Orbiter

[mvpel]

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/q0025.shtml

A graph on this page shows the shuttle's velocity at 81 seconds into the flight at around 2,000 to 2,500 feet per second, or 1,360 to 1,704 miles per hour.

[KevinDavis]

Thank you very much EPA.....

Space Ping! This is the space ping list! Let me know if you want on or off this list!

[snopercod]

How the heck did you find that? I'm impressed.

Previous posts indicated that NASA was given an exemption, but obviously that is not the case. They were given an exemption for the blowing agent on flight-hardware only. Cleaners, solvents, and adhesives were not exempted. Neither were test articles...

Nice work.

[snopercod]

...and another thing. The bureaucrat who wrote that should be tracked down and charged with manslauter.

[fnord]

Do you have the math to show a 500 mph relative speed?

Seems high to me, I'd expect a lot lower

[fnord]

it's not the speed which is important, but the acceleration

[Atchafalaya]

I seem to remember very early after the disaster that a relative velocity of something like 80 mph was mentioned. I don't know for sure if that is true, but I seem to recall that was what the engineers were tossing out.

[XBob]

thanks for the ping and acknowledgements SC.

I want to toss this out for evaluation again. I ran the film of todays test. It is very clear, and very clearly, not where the foam impacted.

Everyone has seemed to ignore the fact that the original impact point of the foam was not on the leading edge RCC, but down on the more central part of the wing, on the thermal tiles, near the wheel well - not the RCC.

This is plain as day from the original films we have been using since the beginning.

In addition, the weight of the foam chunk magically went from 2.5 lbs to 1.5 lbs, with no explanation.


I really would like to see some tests with the proper weight and size of the chunk, and the proper location of the impact.


I am about to the point, where I won't trust anything coming out from the investigation board.

[DoughtyOne]

Two things stuck out in yesterday's test. Location wasn't dead on, and tiles were not affixed.

Both will leave us demanding more tests for anything conclusive. And after all, does anyone really think this was about anything other than stalling?

What investigation that involved our federal government has been run professionally in the last decade?

[NormsRevenge]

I'm with you on this whole testing scenario... and the board.

imho, these tests, while having some limited value, are and never can be an accurate reflection of what occurred that launch day.

When they showed a clip of test #7, I almost laughed at what they were doing. They said the angle that they shot the foam allowed them to more accurately imitate the rolling effect the chunk(s) of foam took that day.

CAIB, just issue the report and get on with the "process".

[NormsRevenge]

[mvpel]

The foam has a very high surface area to mass ratio, so it wouldn't be surprising that with the shuttle travelling at as high as 1,700 miles per hour that the foam would slow down by about a third of that by the time it reached the wing. Ever thrown a styrofoam cup out a car window at highway speeds?

[XBob]

51 - " tiles were not affixed"

the RCC panels (there are 22 on each wing leading edge) on the leading edges are the 'tiles'. There are no additional insulating tiles on them, by design. However, the 'chunk' hit numbers of feet back, not on the RCC, but back by the wheel well, where there are tiles. We have had film of the impact point since day 1.

[Carry_Okie]

I am about to the point, where I won't trust anything coming out from the investigation board.

Remember all the weaseling by NASA and Morton/Thiokol after the Challenger accident? They had to bring in Feynman to bring out the obvious.

[plain talk]

Yes they assumed. Nobody would have believe this foam would cause that much damage. Despite all the new testing I still confess I have a hard time believing it even now.

[computermechanic]

I think this was the last test and was perhaps only supposed to identify what the maximum amount of damage that the lightest possible piece of foam from the bipod area could do... a fatal amount of damage, easily.

Very probably, the actual shuttle damage could have been seen from a military satellite. We hear about being able to read a newspaper headline from satellites, and you wouldn't even have to look thru any atmosphere to image the shuttle! The AMOS telescope on the ground could probably see the damage from this last test.

[DoughtyOne]

Bob, what you said may have been quite clear to everyone else, but being the slow guy that I am, I'd sure appreciate it if you could explain that a little more clearly.

[Fred Mertz]

Like you said from the beginning, TLB, this mission was doomed from takeoff.