Australian astronomer's 'extraordinary account' of mishap

Austrailian Associated Press/World Net Daily ^ | 02 Feb. 03 | Staff Writer

[txradioguy]

Australian astronomer's 'extraordinary account' of mishap February 2 2003

An Australian astronomer in California could be a key eyewitness to solving the mystery of today's space shuttle disaster.

Anthony Beasley, an Australian working at an observatory north of Los Angeles, said he saw what could be tiles falling off the Columbia as it flew over California and on its way to the scheduled landing in Florida.

Most video footage and eyewitness reports of the shuttle breaking up came from witnesses in the central US state of Texas.

If Beasley is correct, it indicates the shuttle began to disintegrate on the west coast above California.

Beasley telephoned US television network ABC to tell of his sighting.

advertisement

advertisement "After the first few flashes I thought to myself that I knew the shuttle lost tiles as it re-entered and quite possibly that was what was going on," Beasley, speaking live, told ABC news anchor Peter Jennings.

The Australian told how he saw "a couple of flashes" and "things clearly trailing" the shuttle.

"I think that after the particularly bright event I started to wonder whether or not things were happening how they should," Beasley said.

Two US space experts who were listening to Beasley's description said the information was highly valuable.

They said tiles falling off the shuttle would be too small to be picked up by NASA radar.

"This says that something was coming off the shuttle far earlier than what happened over Texas would suggest," former space shuttle astronaut, Norm Thagard, told ABC.

"It leads in the direction that tile loss or some type of structural loss like that was likely to be a cause. But it still doesn't rule out other possibilities."

Former NASA engineer, Jim Oberg, described Beasley's eyewitness report as "an extraordinary account".

"If the left wing is losing tiles you then not only have over-heating in that wing but you have extra drag and it's like flying along and having your wing run into something," Oberg said.

"It could violently turn, twist the nose of the ship to the left and that would be it. That would be the point where it would be torn apart."

[txradioguy]

From this story it sounds like they never had a chance.

[Luis Gonzalez]

BUMP!

[apackof2]

Well it just seems logical to assume that since there has never been an accident during
re-entry that it has to be the heat bearing tiles

[anniegetyourgun]

Also here.

[TomServo]

Already posted here.

[txradioguy]

Seeing an event like this happen and not be able to do anything to warn the people onboard must be akin to see ing a loved one walk infront of a bus and not be able to stop them in time from getting hit. That's a helpless and frustrating feeling.

[LibWhacker]

Doesn't NASA film re-entries with ground-based telescopes in California? Seems kind of strange they'd have to rely on eyewitness accounts.

[PoisedWoman]

What was their altitude over CA? Was there any possibility that they could have pulled up? Probably a question worthy of the DU, but this nontechie wonders whether crew had any alternative to crashing into Earth's atmosphere. They couldn't go back to the space station, right?

[wallyworld23]

The Australian wasn't the only one to see things coming off. Check this report in the L.A. Daily News.

http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200%257E26948%257E1152076,00.html

[Zebra]

Doesn't NASA film re-entries with ground-based telescopes in California? Seems kind of strange they'd have to rely on eyewitness accounts.

I was thinking exactly the same thing. Wouldn't this be even more probable (that NASA wold be tracking re-entry carefully with telescopes) in light of the concern over possible damage to the tiles or carbon carbon on the left wing caused by the falling foam insulation?

[txradioguy]

No...at that point everything is still basically computer controlled. If I understod the explanation right, the pilot would not get manual control of the shuttle until around the 50-60K altitude range. Not sure of the exact altitude over Calif, but they would have had to be still in low eart orbit or just coming out of it, considering they were at 207,000 feet over E. Texas.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

From this story it sounds like they never had a chance.

Not only that, if structural damage to the wing tiles was caused by whatever it was that the launch video showed stiking the left wing, the ship was doomed before it even reached orbit ten days ago. One can only wonder if the damage assessment had been done while Columbia was in orbit, if the crew could have been spared by sending up another orbiter to bring them home.

[Robert A Cook PE]

No, wrong orbit inclination (and height and docking adapters and spacesuits) to get to the space station.

True, they're both up in orbit.... But you can't get from one to the other. Fuel, energy, and orbital dynamics make it impossible.

Once the main engine rockets burn (to slow them down into re-entry), they're committed to go down.

[boris]

Did he have high-quality (telescope) video of the event?

[txradioguy]

If he did, and if NASA and the folks at Vandenburg and Edwards do, we won't see it for awhile. The "experts" are gona be going over it rame by frame, trying to match it to the telemetry data to see if they can tell where it started to go wrong.

[prisoner6]

Just tossing out layman speculation...

The "foam:" that hit the tiles on the left wing wasn't in itself enough to - compromise - the tiles. However what I haven't heard mentioned is the possibility that several tiles may have been loosened by the take off impact.

IOW the tiles themselves and their ceramic coating may have been only mildly damaged, BUT perhaps the impact, take off and re-entry vibration and heat caused the silicone glue holding the tiles to the aluminum wing to loosen. Re-entery heat may have done the rest...a few tiles fall off and there is nothing really to be done.

Kinda like the old pilot adage abut flying at night in a single and the engine blows. Glide in as low as you can then turn on the landing lights and look for a spot to land. If you can't find one...
turn off the lights.

prisoner6

[lodwick]

I believe that they were out of fuel, and I know that they were computer-steered at this point in time.

[txradioguy]

Well from the explanations I heard yesterday, it only takes a few tiles to be knocked off for what they call a "zipper effect to happen". The image of that happening during a 5,000 degree Mach 18 re-entry is scary enough. I heard a report only once yesterday saying that they were having problems with flaps on the left wing when the rolled the shuttle on friday to get it into position for the return yesterday. If that's true then along with tile damage, they could have been slightly off on trajectory for the re-entry. Either way it sounds like the re-entry was trouble from the start. Like I said all day yesterday, I just hope it happened fast and they didn't suffer.

[spokeshave]

So why didn't they take a space walk on the first day in orbit and check the tiles and wing.....?

[txradioguy]

They didn't have the robotic arm and I don't believe they back the suits for it this time. (I'm not sure on that). In any case, they couldn't make the repair and they didn't have enough fuel to nudge them up to the ISS. I heard a guy on George Norrie's program last night, the one that always talks about the NASA pics of the "face" on Mars. He says that NASA was using the CCD Cameras on some spy satellites we have to try and determine if there was any damage but we couldn't So they went ahead with the return. Take that for what it's worth considering the source. I always took what I heard on Coast to Coast AM with a grain of salt anyway.