Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

[AP SCOOP] Space Shuttle Columbia Will Be Visible In San Francisco Area (6AM Pacific)
nasa

Posted on 02/01/2003 5:38:08 AM PST by leadpenny

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 361-371 next last
To: leadpenny
The beauty and genius of FreeRepublic is what others contribute and share.

What warm thoughts and words. As a true hero type, you give credit to others.

May I say... THANK YOU for serving our country in Viet Nam. YOU are one of my heroes, leadpenny. I'm sure you were a brave young man... flying helicopters low and close to trees. Thank you.

The memorial service is at NASA/Johnson Space Center on Tuesday. President Bush and his wife will be attending. I'll be there in your stead, also. The space program will endure. BTW, just talked to a NASA pilot friend of mine. He's leaving for North Texas in the morning. He can't say why he's going there but we can use our imagination.

241 posted on 02/02/2003 8:41:52 PM PST by Gracey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: anymouse; John Jamieson
Can either of you answer this question for FWI? We need someone who works/ed in Mission Control.


To: Freedom'sWorthIt; Gracey

1. You mentioned, LP, about these 80 degree turns - and that you did not recall such turns on previous Shuttle returns you have watched. Can you or Gracey elaborate on why these turns were needed on this mission and not on others? (if that is true) - or link me to a thread or a post that has such explanations?


What I thought I heard from the NASA spokesman as the shuttle crossed California was that the Columbia had begun the first of four steep turns to dissipate speed and altitude. At one point I thought I heard him say the shuttle would have been in an 80 degree bank. That seemed a little steep to me. During the NASA briefing in the afternoon there was mention of 57 degree banks during the S turns. I may have misunderstood. Maybe Gracey can answer this but most of the recoveries I have seen came up to Kennedy from the SW and the speed/altitude losing turns seemed to happen closer in than where Columbia was doing her turns yesterday.

236 posted on 02/02/2003 6:44 PM PST by leadpenny

242 posted on 02/02/2003 8:48:03 PM PST by Gracey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick; Matchett-PI
Usually my MCI's are about babies, so I'll be interested to see how it works out in global events.

Great comment!

243 posted on 02/02/2003 9:04:07 PM PST by the_doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
Bump for Archives.

Sorry for the Families left behind.
244 posted on 02/02/2003 9:38:45 PM PST by Kay Soze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
I am a now and again poster here and a reader almost always, though my life at home has caused me periods of absense from the computer from time to time. It's always great to come home again though, for my conservative heart longs to be with like folks, particularly since I'm in liberal land USA here in NYC!

I had not known you before this thread leadpenny and thus was unaware of your helicopter pilot service in Viet Nam. I thank you from the bottom of my heart for your service to our country. I was in grade school, high school and the start of college throughout the VN War years. As a grade school child I remember seeing on the evening news with Walter Cronkite (My mom knew NOTHING of politics and in those days there was no cable of course!)and heard the large numbers of body bags coming home everyday. It left a strong impression on me but not as strong as when it hit close to home. One of my closest friends who went to school with me and lived on my block had a Dad in Nam. He didn't make it back. I remember clearly the day we found out. I was at her house playing with her when her mom came in and told her. I lost touch with that friend after grade school, when we moved away. But, many years later I went to "The Wall" in D.C. and found her Dad's name. I remember clearly feeling the lettering of his name under my fingers as I felt the granite. I am 46 today, and I can still feel that cool ingraving to this day. I now have a photo of his name on that Wall in a collage of photos on our livingroom wall.

Again, I thank you for your service.

245 posted on 02/02/2003 9:46:54 PM PST by WomanofStandard (Praying for those left behind, may God meet you in your time of sorrow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
from the SW and the speed/altitude losing turns seemed to happen closer in than where Columbia was doing her turns yesterday.

I've seen one landing in person at KSC and many on TV. The Orbiter seems to make it's final turn, while losing much altitude, just as you mentioned...from the SW.

The only thing I've heard from NASA officials today was that the Orbiter was correcting itself to compensate for the yawing or pitching caused by the left wing leading edge problem.

246 posted on 02/02/2003 9:57:52 PM PST by Gracey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: Gracey
OH, of course the landing direction depends on the direction of the wind. I'm sure they land INTO the wind and don't land when there is a heavy crosswind, as there is only one LONG runway.
247 posted on 02/02/2003 10:00:56 PM PST by Gracey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: Gracey
I suspect the 80 degrees or 57 degrees depends on which axis you measure it from. This is 3d geometry. We have always used similar wiggles to do "energy management" (scrub off speed).
248 posted on 02/02/2003 10:40:36 PM PST by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: 1john2 3and4
In re: 79

I'm in Saudi Arabia. There were not crowd reactions, but all newspapers, Arabic and English, gave major front page coverage to the disaster, including photos. Editorials were consistently offering condolences and made no effort to score political points. All mentioned the Israeli astronaut as well.

Today, the papers are running stories on the different astronauts, with major focus on Kalpana Chawla as there's a large Indian expat community here.

I don't know what lesson you intend for us to take from Saudi reaction, but if it's what I think it is, you're pretty damn presumptious.
249 posted on 02/03/2003 12:16:10 AM PST by Juke2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny; winodog
Along with half of FR, I followed your insightful reporting yesterday and today also.

Did you catch Larry King last night, Saturday, when he had on a pilot who watched the shuttle fly overheard from out west somewhere? He insisted that he and some other pilots who witnessed the fly-over all believed the shuttle was flying much lower than 200,000'.

Early reports on FR gave conflicting altitudes also.

Plus, if they were only 16 minutes to touchdown, wouldn't they be much lower in the sky prior to landing?

And it's been reported they were going 12,500 mph over Dallas, due to land in 16 minutes. But it's only about 1,200 miles from Dallas to KSC. At that rate of speed, they'd be landing in seven or eight minutes. So were they going too fast at that point, "out of control," or has the speed been misreported?

Also, given they had already entered the atmosphere around 5:45 am, as you, Leadpenny reported, they must have been flying lower to result in any intact body parts being recovered. Especially given that the debris was generally found directly beneath the flight path.

And finally, have we heard anything about the exact communications with MC 15 minutes before the final "Roger, bu..."?

Such a tragic puzzle.

250 posted on 02/03/2003 12:44:53 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
Did you catch Larry King last night, Saturday, when he had on a pilot who watched the shuttle fly overheard from out west somewhere? He insisted that he and some other pilots who witnessed the fly-over all believed the shuttle was flying much lower than 200,000'.

Both the telemetry from the shuttle and the ground-based radar would have noticed if the shuttle were off its glidepath. No one from NASA has mentioned that when they gave the list of anomalous readings or indications, so...

Plus, if they were only 16 minutes to touchdown, wouldn't they be much lower in the sky prior to landing?

The shuttle "flies like a brick", and has a very steep glidepath. It drops pretty fast while flying in for a landing, so 16 minutes from touchdown it'd still be pretty darn high.

And it's been reported they were going 12,500 mph over Dallas, due to land in 16 minutes. But it's only about 1,200 miles from Dallas to KSC. At that rate of speed, they'd be landing in seven or eight minutes. So were they going too fast at that point, "out of control," or has the speed been misreported?

That sounds about right -- remember, they're at 12,500mph at that point, but *decelerating* rapidly. Yes, they'd overfly KSC in 8 minutes if they didn't slow down at all, but they *are* slowing down.

In fact, doing the math in my head, I believe that for a constant deceleration from speed X to zero over a given time period, you'll travel half as far as you would have in the same time if you didn't decelerate, so yeah, 8 minutes to KSC at 12,500 should work out to exactly 16 minutes to KSC if you're smoothly decelerating so that you're at "zero" speed on touchdown.

Also, given they had already entered the atmosphere around 5:45 am, as you, Leadpenny reported, they must have been flying lower to result in any intact body parts being recovered. Especially given that the debris was generally found directly beneath the flight path.

How do you figure that?

251 posted on 02/03/2003 12:58:50 AM PST by Dan Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; Dan Day
NASA TV reported that they had entered the Earth's atomsphere, I assume, around 8:45.

As for eyewitnesses thinking it was lower than what was being reported, it's the first I've heard of that.

The Shuttle always seems too high and fast but that "flying brick" effect seems to give it the right profile. Also, I believe they had decided on RWY 33 just before all went wrong. The plan was to do a right 270, which would have killed off a lot of speed and altitude.
252 posted on 02/03/2003 1:18:55 AM PST by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: Dan Day
no one from NASA has mentioned...

There's probably lots NASA hasn't mentioned.

Did you hear the pilots on Larry King?

How do you figure that?

What? That body parts wouldn't be "intact" after supposedly falling 230,000'? That's 45 miles up...post explosion.

253 posted on 02/03/2003 1:21:23 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
atmosphere

sorry
254 posted on 02/03/2003 1:22:01 AM PST by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
After I heard about the height I was suprised. It did seen Columbia was at about the same height as airplanes fly but I was a long ways from the Columbia so I cannot put much into that.
I just thought at the time that was normal.
255 posted on 02/03/2003 5:26:32 AM PST by winodog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
bump
256 posted on 02/03/2003 5:32:39 AM PST by marajade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
As for eyewitnesses thinking it was lower than what was being reported, it's the first I've heard of that.

I mentioned something about that on another thread. Normally it's too high as it passes over Dallas for us to hear a sonic boom. The last time I saw the shuttle landing approach was at night, around 10:00 pm. The next morning the vapor trail / ionized air / whatever that marked its path was still visible, it had not yet dissipated. Columbia's trail was gone within 30-45(?) minutes after it passed over.

It is difficult to guess the height, but since the trail was gone and we heard the booms, that tells me that it was far lower than normal once it got to this area.

257 posted on 02/03/2003 5:43:13 AM PST by ken in texas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

Once again, this thread has been noted by the mainstream media!
258 posted on 02/03/2003 5:47:14 AM PST by Timesink (They're the Dissociated Press)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
Your thread is getting more publicity.

See an online shuttle enthusiasts' blog on FreeRepublic, which tracked the re-entry of the Columbia before during and after the incident: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/833885/posts   

From this thread.

259 posted on 02/03/2003 5:52:36 AM PST by McGruff (Columbia did not return safely to Earth; yet we can pray that all are safely home.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76
As I write this, the Shuttle should be re-entering the atmosphere of the planet "Earth."

Talk about, "eerie." After listening to Jay Barbree of NBC News at the Cape, it seems like the recently released internal memo indicates that all of the NASA Ground Controllers were holding there breath as the shuttle re-entered the Earth's atmosphere. When I made the subsequent semi-flippant remark, "We can only hope," I wonder how many of the controllers were thinking just that?

260 posted on 02/03/2003 6:20:18 AM PST by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 361-371 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson