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

Skip to comments.

Freeper Breaks Foam Problem Story at FR First!!!
Freerepublic ^ | 4/1/03 | Freepers

Posted on 02/04/2003 9:32:29 PM PST by Jael

Freeper Enlightiator broke the foam story here on Freerepublic many long hous before the media ever touched it. Please read his gracious post regarding his scoop.

Also hat's off to leadpenny for the original Columbia observation thread.

In Memory of The COlumbia

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/833885/posts?q=1&&page=51

[ Browse | Search | Topics | Post Article | My Comments ]

#368: Astronauts doomed from the start  ^
To: Jael; Prov1322; Lancey Howard; McGruff; kattracks

All the credit goes to the guy who found out first!!! Enlightiator!!! I just did a few more google searches and got a tad more information. The original link at the NASA site no longer works. (The one that documents the problems with the foam breaking off and hitting the tiles.)

Thanks for the credit Jael, that was admirable on your part to take the time to link to my original post, but you did the most thorough job. Giving credit for "first source" isn't something the mass media often does, especially when they get their story ideas from sites like FreeRepublic!

I consider the Greg Katnik NASA article finding a group effort, starting with Prov1322's initial post Very close-up, slo-mo of the Columbia launch debris. which caught my attention and started my initial research (flash video no longer up unfortunately), through the far more excellent detailed posts you have made in this thread. [By the way, I have discovered that the reason you couldn't reach my link to NASA engineer Greg Katnick's article "Working on a Tile Damage Mystery (in which significant tile damage due to external tank insulation debris was found on Columbia's flight STS-87 in late 1997) was because I accidently linked to his bio instead of the article, which you fortunately managed to find again yourself and post in this thread. Interestingly, I first found the alternate link you posted in this thread, http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/2121/used_news.htm, but searched a little more to find the "official" nasa link. We must both use Google.]

So, WE Freepers broke this story about Katnick's NASA article first, on 2/1/2003 on Freerepublic at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/834139/posts?page=54#54.

As best as I can tell, this did not make the major news until the following two articles:

* Orlando Sentinel's Bob Shaw and Michael Cabbage wrote the article Foam chunks a problem since 1981. This was posted at www.orlandosentinel.com on Monday, 2/3/2003, however the same article with the title Fuel-tank insulation capable of causing `incredible damage' is at www.centredaily.com, a PA newspaper, with the post date 2/2/2003.

* John Kelly's 2/3/2003 Florida Today article NASA's debris experts have been working on foam issue for years . This was posted at Freerepublic by McGruff at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/835049/posts.

Since that time, a Google news search shows Katnik's name all over the place, this story is really spreading. On 2/4/2003, The NY Times James Glanz and Edward Wong's article " '97 Report Warned of Foam Damaging Tiles-Absence of Freon Led to Detachment of Foam" also fell in line to make Greg Katnik a bit famous, as kattracks posted a link to at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/835505/posts.

But remember, we posted it here at FreeRepublic first!.

In my original post, I noted that Katnick had written an article. It was on a NASA educational site for students, and its obvious its the same source the big guys used -did they get it from FreeRepublic, or did they do their own search?; The news guys turned it into a "report," and the Orlando Sentinel provided this clarification just yesterday, 1/4/2003:

NASA worker: '97 damage report was 'embellished' by writer, By Anthony Colarossi, Sentinel Staff Writer. Posted February 4, 2003

The NASA engineer credited with writing a sharply critical 1997 report about damage to heat-resistant tiles on the space shuttle Columbia said Monday that the report had actually been ghostwritten by another NASA writer.

But Greg Katnik, a shuttle engineer who led the team that inspected the Columbia in December 1997, stood by the accuracy of the report. The report said more than 300 of the shuttle's fragile tiles had been damaged by foam insulation that fell off its external fuel tank during liftoff from Kennedy Space Center.

The report, which summarized a formal 76-page inspection analysis that Katnik had submitted to NASA, also said that more than 100 of Columbia's tiles had to be replaced and called the damage to the shuttle "significant."

But Katnik, a 20-year employee of Kennedy Space Center, said his formal analysis had been summarized and "embellished" by a NASA writer for NASA Quest, an agency-run Web site aimed at schoolchildren.

"I don't write that way either for kids or adults," he said. "I think he [the writer] was trying to make it dramatic for the kids.

"It wasn't meant to sound that dire," he added.

Katnik pointed to passages on the Web site describing a "massive" loss of insulating foam from the external fuel tank.

He said the NASA ghostwriter had accurately summarized the facts in his report -- which was not filed until February 1998 -- but had made the language more conversational. For example, his conclusion that the number of damaged tiles was "out of family" was changed to read, "the extent of the damage at the conclusion of this mission was not 'normal.' "

He said the NASA writer had turned his customarily "dry" technical language into something "that is more or less a detective story." It was intended to be an example of "how engineering is used to detect and fix a problem," he said.

The report was first cited in a story in Monday's Orlando Sentinel. The newspaper's attempts to reach him for comment Sunday had been unsuccessful.

On Monday, after receiving numerous calls from reporters, Katnik was given clearance by his NASA supervisors to answer questions.

Anthony Colarossi can be reached at acolarossi@orlandosentinel.com or 407-420-6218


368 posted on 02/04/2003 10:35 PM CST by Enlightiator (Still researching....)


TOPICS: Announcements; Culture/Society; Free Republic; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: columbia; foam; frscoop; michaeldobbs; sts107
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-85 next last

1 posted on 02/04/2003 9:32:29 PM PST by Jael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; leadpenny; Prov1322; Lancey Howard; McGruff; kattracks; Enlightiator; Howlin; ...
Freepers are the best. :-)
2 posted on 02/04/2003 9:37:20 PM PST by Jael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jael
Did you catch the reply during the news conference this morning/afternoon about their installing more 'environmentally friendly' foam due to EPA regulations or some such?

Course, it'll be covered up and never make national news or anything.

3 posted on 02/04/2003 9:38:54 PM PST by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John W; aristeides; Jael; MrConfettiMan; DoughtyOne; CharacterCounts; TLBSHOW; yonif; mewzilla; ...
Freeper breaks foam issue story. :-)
4 posted on 02/04/2003 9:40:53 PM PST by Jael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes
Yes, I did notice that. They keep focusing on the tiles, but only a few are breaking the enviroment foam issue. (While still discussing the foam itself.)

NASA was probably pressured by the EPA to do it. (Just a guess.)

5 posted on 02/04/2003 9:43:03 PM PST by Jael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jael
My $.02 worth says ice, not foam.
6 posted on 02/04/2003 9:46:14 PM PST by unspun (Hey, let's go to Mars! It has neat rocks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes
The formula was changed around 1996/1997 to make it more "environmentally friendly." I'm sure that no consideration was given to manned space flight safety when this happened.

The fact that the spray on foam insulation (SOFI) formula was changed should be questioned, but it won't be. It's doubtful that you'll ever see anything about this on the evening news.

7 posted on 02/04/2003 9:47:44 PM PST by davisfh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jael
Thanks for the ping!
The memory of our astronauts and the integrity of the space program demand that no stone can be left unturned. Congratulations to Free Republic and to the great people here who continue to make it work.
8 posted on 02/04/2003 9:50:24 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jael
Who are you, and how did I end up on your ping list? :0)
9 posted on 02/04/2003 9:50:26 PM PST by Chad Fairbanks ('I WISH, at some point, that you would address those damned armadillos in your trousers." - JustShe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jael
Wow! Way to go!!!
10 posted on 02/04/2003 9:55:17 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jael
By the way, I maintain that the most pertinent part of this story is the environment-friendly lunacy that lead to the production of an inferior, more dangerous foam insulation.

Yeah, point blank, I want to know if NASA was forced by the Clinton EPA in 1997 (or thereabouts) to produce the foam without benefit of freon in its production. I want to know if the environmental extremists and their Democrat sponsors bear responsibility for the horrible deaths of seven astronauts.

11 posted on 02/04/2003 10:01:27 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
Yeah, point blank, I want to know if NASA was forced by the Clinton EPA in 1997 (or thereabouts) to produce the foam without benefit of freon in its production.

Good question.

12 posted on 02/04/2003 10:42:15 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
The lead story on the national newsfeed (I think from ABC) on the radio was the change in the foam production in 1997.

They did not give any more details.

They did mention that records of this were being impounded but I don't think it mentioned who was doing the impounding.

13 posted on 02/04/2003 11:12:32 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jael; Black Agnes
FYI
14 posted on 02/04/2003 11:14:15 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: unspun
My $.02 worth says ice, not foam.

It amounts to the same thing if the new "enviro friendly" foam provided less insulation than the original foam. Then you'd be more likely to have ice form on it. Both the thermal and the structural qualities of the foam are important here. Degrading either would be problematic.

15 posted on 02/04/2003 11:42:24 PM PST by JohnBovenmyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ken H; Jael
The lead story on the national newsfeed (I think from ABC) on the radio was the change in the foam production in 1997. They did mention that records of this were being impounded but I don't think it mentioned who was doing the impounding.

First I heard about this.
This is very interesting.

16 posted on 02/04/2003 11:55:46 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
Very interesting. The Thot Plickens.

Course, if it's the EPA doing the impounding, they'll lose or shred them or otherwise destroy them like they did under Carol Browner.

17 posted on 02/05/2003 12:01:18 AM PST by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Jael
Sounds like FreeRepublic News Service FRNS!
18 posted on 02/05/2003 12:04:52 AM PST by zeaal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
Thanks!!

Just also want to add how much I respect you for everything you did to document the Clinton years. What a resource.
19 posted on 02/05/2003 12:08:30 AM PST by Jael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: zeaal
Did you see this one? It's heartbreaking.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/833885/posts
20 posted on 02/05/2003 12:09:15 AM PST by Jael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard; Ken H
Hmm, interesting.

I did hear that NASA has asked the lab who did some foam testing a while back not to release the results.

21 posted on 02/05/2003 12:11:16 AM PST by Jael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: davisfh
I agree. They will focus on the tile issue and mention it was foam that damaged it, but I doubt we will ever see complete coverage of the whole issue.

22 posted on 02/05/2003 12:13:28 AM PST by Jael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Howdy.

I think that there was ice and foam. ;-)

I think NASA has already said they could tell it was the foam. It came from the left joint where the fuel tank is joined to the Shuttle.

23 posted on 02/05/2003 12:14:47 AM PST by Jael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Chad Fairbanks
Hi there. I don't really have a ping list per se. But I did clip some names from a few of the other threads regarding the Shuttle to ping to this. I didn't keep it, so unless we cross paths again, you'll probably never hear from me. :-)

I'm Jael. Homeschool mom of a great 11 year old here in the Deep South. :-)
24 posted on 02/05/2003 12:17:07 AM PST by Jael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jael
bttt
25 posted on 02/05/2003 12:18:29 AM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes
Did you catch the reply during the news conference this morning/afternoon about their installing more 'environmentally friendly' foam due to EPA regulations or some such?

Man, if somebody is responsible for such a decision without properly testing the foam first, he better not cross my path, or else I just might kick his @$$!

26 posted on 02/05/2003 12:19:25 AM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (February 14, 2003, a.k.a. "Black Friday")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

there was a guy on another site that was talking about it the day of the launch, and for some reason everyone was trashing him. I'm not sure where he first got the info though.
27 posted on 02/05/2003 12:26:15 AM PST by KneelBeforeZod (Deus Lo Volt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
The memory of our astronauts and the integrity of the space program demand that no stone can be left unturned.

Demand all you want. The only ones that will know the truth are Freepers and a few others. The public will be fed a crock of Clintons and they'll buy it. Just like so many other lies about other disasters. You think the EPA will take any heat for this? Do you think any enviromentalists will have a finger pointed at them? Watch how a lie is fabricated and put forward as a fact. It's a learning process and as much as it makes you sick you'll expect it because that is the way things work. I didn't write the book but I've learned from it.
28 posted on 02/05/2003 12:39:34 AM PST by jwh_Denver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jael
The woodpeckers caused it.
29 posted on 02/05/2003 1:22:12 AM PST by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chad Fairbanks
PING ME! PING ME!
30 posted on 02/05/2003 1:29:27 AM PST by dasboot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jael
Sorry Chad.....PING ME!
31 posted on 02/05/2003 1:30:16 AM PST by dasboot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jael; All
I have a little about the demonization of Freon gas here:

Scams, Scalawags, and an all-too-gullible Public...famous frauds sold to America

32 posted on 02/05/2003 1:46:47 AM PST by backhoe (The 1990's will be remembered as "The Decade of Fraud(s)..." ( Clintons, Dot-Bombs, Oslo... ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backhoe
ping
33 posted on 02/05/2003 1:47:43 AM PST by SeeRushToldU_So ( Something witty, etc, etc....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Jael
I keep my screen on FreeRepublic all day. This is the best place to read it first !
34 posted on 02/05/2003 5:35:10 AM PST by kassie (God Bless and Protect Our Military)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jael
Just checking - I'm on too many ping lists as it is, so I like to nip stuff in the bud ;0)
35 posted on 02/05/2003 7:19:17 AM PST by Chad Fairbanks ('I WISH, at some point, that you would address those damned armadillos in your trousers." - JustShe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Jael; fooman
Has anyone seen liftoff video from the flight two flights prior to STS-107? Where there was another event where material hit the orbiter?

I'm hearing things......

36 posted on 02/05/2003 7:20:38 AM PST by isthisnickcool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: isthisnickcool
I am not aware of another event, but if there is one do tell.
37 posted on 02/05/2003 7:24:45 AM PST by fooman (PC Kills!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: fooman
I have heard this A.M. that STS-105 came back with obvious damage that may have been caused by the "foam/ice" or something else and that people were calling for grounding the orbiters.

I cannot find any video but there are some photos here. It's hard to compare the "before and after" flight images. The orbiter looks very "pock marked" to me but it could be photographic variables. Note that in some of the photos they are making videos of the orbiter so I'm sure NASA has detailed data on this and other missions.

Some people seem to think that Ron Dittmore's days are numbered and that a lot of heads are going to roll as more facts come out.

Houston, we've got a problem........

38 posted on 02/05/2003 8:31:03 AM PST by isthisnickcool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: isthisnickcool
Thanks for the info. Its these kind of contribution that make this place great.
39 posted on 02/05/2003 8:39:45 AM PST by fooman (PC Kills!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
Typically, the EPA will force a MANUFACTURER to change formulations. I think that NASA simply ordered the stuff from manufacturer XYZ who was under EPA scrutiny and had to change the formula.

The fact that the manufacturer advised NASA of the difficulty doesn't change anything--NASA cannot or would not appeal for an exception to EPA "thought" on the matter.
40 posted on 02/05/2003 9:45:36 AM PST by ninenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
That's the beauty of this. NOBODY is "responsible," because the EPA regs FORCED the manufacturer of the foam to comply with EPA, and NASA was under no obligation to appeal the EPA regs as they applied to the foam.

This whole thing shows you why bureaucrats are generally bad news. Congress doesn't have to take responsibility for bureaucrat's decisions; the President won't take responsibility; and NOBODY can successfully appeal without enormous expense.

So you just give up and plod on.
41 posted on 02/05/2003 9:50:23 AM PST by ninenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: isthisnickcool
Would you ping me if you hear or see anything regarding that?
42 posted on 02/05/2003 9:52:55 AM PST by Jael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Jael; isthisnickcool
Ping me too. Jael, did you watch the news conference this morning on NASA TV and the reporter from Huntsville's question about the foam and EPA requirements and the weasely way it was answered? Apparently the 'answer' re: EPA regs and this foam breakoff is going to be...'that's old news, let's move on'. Amazing. The guy actually said that it was a long time ago, there had been no problems since that had impacted the shuttle or its safety in this particular manner.

I'm sure the Watergate(tm) class shredders are working overtime at Michoud and NASA today.

43 posted on 02/05/2003 10:00:41 AM PST by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Jael
NASA was probably pressured by the EPA to do it. (Just a guess.)

It may be simpler than that. It may have been a matter of compliance with regulatory law. Even if the regs entertained exemptions (and I assume that an exception could have been made under the regs), we would need more info as to what NASA knew about the adhesion problems.

44 posted on 02/05/2003 10:30:33 AM PST by the_doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Black Agnes; Jael; fooman
I just heard a little more from inside.

I heard that on STS-105 they had a chunk come off of the external tank and wack one of the SRB's. After they recovered the SRB they found a very large dent at the point of impact.

45 posted on 02/05/2003 10:30:47 AM PST by isthisnickcool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: isthisnickcool
Hmmmm

Did you hear during the news conference that one of the astronauts (David Hall?) emailed his brother about their taking pics of the underside of the left wing during the mission. If this is true then NASA/AF did try to take pics of the damage. What did they know and when did they know it? Wonder how many bird cages will be lined with the shredded papers when they're done...

46 posted on 02/05/2003 10:33:15 AM PST by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: ninenot
uh huh
47 posted on 02/05/2003 10:35:27 AM PST by fooman (PC Kills!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: isthisnickcool
With the tape of stuff falling off over cali, we should get some info soon
48 posted on 02/05/2003 10:39:32 AM PST by fooman (PC Kills!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Chad Fairbanks
Who are you, and how did I end up on your ping list?

Let's just hope he didn't ping Arthur McGowan. :)

49 posted on 02/05/2003 10:40:14 AM PST by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: isthisnickcool
YOU are doing an EXCELLENT JOB!!!!!
50 posted on 02/05/2003 10:43:05 AM PST by Jael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-85 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