NASA: Gases Breached Shuttle Wing in 2000

Associated Press ^ | 7/8/03 | TED BRIDIS

[meema]

bump to read later

[Fred Mertz]

Thanks for the ping, MCM. Looks like NASA is quietly trying to sweep this under the rug. I don't blame them for that.

[KevinDavis]

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

[Jhoffa_]

TLBSHOW and Jael are banned.

[XBob]

what crap - "First of all I don't think the NASA Director made any such statements the day of the disaster. The Shuttle Flight Director was highly skeptical that the foam incident was the "root cause." But I think you will find that the analysis that was done did indicate some damage was likely to have ocurred."

We have an engineering/science project here - not a clinton political lying press conference. He stood up there plain as day and dismissed the foam as a cause in the very first press conference.

[Fred Mertz]

I know. But they can lurk and read anyways.

[XBob]

40 - "Ever since Challenger, the Shuttle should have been used only for military missions. Risking lives for "science" missions where many of the "experiments" would be considered lame in a 7th grade science fair is criminal."

LOL - how true - lame even for a 7th grade science fair - I really liked the 'perfume scent from space' experiment.

[Jhoffa_]

Well, yes.. I suppose that's true.

I hated to see TLB go.

He made me REALLY mad sometimes, but the one thing I can say about him is I always got the impression that he was trying his best.

No hidden agendas or motivations or anything like that.

I can't however, honestly say the same thing about some of his detractors.

I liked Jael also. I dunno what problems others had with her, but she was nice to me.

[Fred Mertz]

I spent a day with TLB in late May. He is perfectly normal and has a beautiful family and home.

[Jhoffa_]

That's good. I am glad he's happy.

Our squabbles mainly centered around American Muslims and a difference of opinion as to what should or should not be done to them, post 9/11.

Pretty small stuff actually, far as FR goes.

[DoughtyOne]

TBLSHOW came back a few days ago. Has he been excommunicated again? LOL Heathen. I like the guy too, but the way he would sometimes push the Bushbots, just for the fun of it, led me to believe he'd be toast sooner or later. It's one thing to point out their errors, it's another to jump up on down on their seething bodies.

[Jhoffa_]

Yeah.. He did torque them up pretty good sometimes.

As a general rule, he wasn't particularly nasty about it though..

I watched allot of those threads without comment and the venom to venom ratio was about 50 to 1 against.

[DoughtyOne]

I have mixed emotions about the venom. On the one hand I laugh at the Bushbots. On the other hand I think they do more harm to Bush than they can possibly imagine.

Driving people off this forum isn't going to make them vote for Bush. In fact that's so obvious that there are times when I wonder if the most fervent aren't actually democrats trying to creat divisions amongst conservatives. Observers aren't going to think more of Bush or his supporters after some of these exchanges.

Of course the Bushbots think that only works on way. If you criticize Bush at all you're a disrupter. No, a healthy process sees reasoned criticism as a integral part of growth.

I don't see growth. I see support at any cost. That's terribly destructive IMO.

I'm not the only person to contemplate if some of our most ardent Bushbots are Dembots. I've had some surprising people broach this subject with me. Some of them were ardent Bush supporters.

On a number of occasions I've had people attack me out of the blue here when I didn't even slam Bush. When they did so they referenced my actions three years ago. Some of these people weren't even around then.

Some of the Bush detractors were indeed trouble makers. Others have been folks who simply don't see conservatism as a second path to socialism.

This is an interesting topic that hardly ever gets discussed in an adult manner.

Thanks for the comments.

[Jhoffa_]

Driving people off this forum isn't going to make them vote for Bush.

No, it isn't. But I don't think their goal is to convert anyone. It much more closely resembles a religious cult defending it's leader than it does any political campaign I ever saw. It's largely emotional.

In fact that's so obvious that there are times when I wonder if the most fervent aren't actually democrats trying to creat divisions amongst conservatives.

I sometimes wonder if there are paid operatives who have joined, trying to quash dissent and prevent it from spreading.

Of course the Bushbots think that only works on way. If you criticize Bush at all you're a disrupter.

Exactly.

I don't know about you but, I was outraged at the Democrats "Rose Garden" performance.

I suppose there's an equally large absense of objectivity on our side of the fence as well.

I hate to admit that, because I am fully convinced in my mind that Conservatism is objective, workable and inherently morally superior to other political ideologies.

Regardless however, that does seem to be the case. There's just no getting away from it.

When you have self proclaimed "Conservatives" supporting Un-Constitutional endeavors, what else can you say?

[DoughtyOne]

I agree with you completely. I too am amazed at what people who call themselves Conservatives are willing to sign on to.

[The_Victor]

Uh, yeah. The only action by NASA Safety mentioned in the article was a call for "fleetwide improvements in the installation of sealant materials". This clearly was not a fix for the engineering flaw. I stand by "did nothing."

[The_Victor]

It also means they don't seem to have a database of all incidents that is quickly searchable. This type of information should have been quickly accessable by any of the astronauts and engineers responsible for the safety of the shuttles.

Actually, NASA does have a lessons learned database, but it is populated with trivial safety issues (slipped on the stairs, trip hazards, etc...). IMHO, NASA safety has in fact obscured real safety (flight safety through good engineering processes) in favor of trivial safety (signs in the stairwells instructing employees how to use the stairs safely).

[ironman]

One of my criticism of FR is that I see a tendency to stretch the facts, or people are a little loose with their wording. Maybe it's just an interpretation of words. For example, dismissed vs. highly skeptical, or "did nothing" when in fact a lot was done (maybe not enough, or the wrong things "done.") I stand by my previous statements. The shuttle flight director did not totally dismiss the foam incident as the root cause. IIRC, he said they would certainly re-look at the analysis to 'see if they missed something.'

[DoughtyOne]

With all due respect, what else could he say after dismissing the threat prior to mission failure? Yes, we're going to look at everything, even the foam strike even though it's very doubtful that was a contributing factor. No offense, but that's dismissing the issue. He had to play down the issue or allow NASA to look incredibly stupid for allowing this issue to be downplayed during the mission.