Freeper Breaks Foam Problem Story at FR First!!!

Freerepublic ^ | 4/1/03 | Freepers

[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....)

[Jael]

No problem at all. :-)

[Jael]

There was a story in the Birmingham News yesterday that said "Freon is implicated in the destruction of the ozone layer" or something to that effect. Just printed as fact.

That's the problem here. Thanks again for that lik.

[Jael]

One article mentioned the freon as if it were a culprit in and of itself. Said it was "a very volatile gas".

[backhoe]

Just printed as fact.

That is the heart of the problem- the media in this country ( and I include the "propaganda arm"- the entertainment media... in that definition ) has a pre-adjusted template of things they consider good, bad, and simply so far out of bounds that they won't even mention it.

My participation in the Freon War predates my appearance on the web, consequently I don't have a lot of links to it- it was a done deal by the time I got here.

But to sum up, the Wall Street Journal was the only paper of national stature to point out that there were an equal, if not greater, number of scientists, researchers, and academics who looked at the same data the anti-Freon crowd did, and reached opposite conclusions.

Indeed, the late Dixie Lee Ray ( former WA state Governor ) wrote columns debunking the Freon-is-harmful/evil myth... and found little interest by publications, outside of the Journal. The press had their preconceived point of view, and were not even interested in exposing the public to any dissent.

[Tunehead54]

One article mentioned the freon as if it were a culprit in and of itself. Said it was "a very volatile gas".

---

Freon is an inert gas. I do not believe its explosive unless air as explosive if compressed and released suddenly. Freon when compressed and then allowed to expand makes AC work. Why its useful in foam I do not know - all I do know is that they changed the foam insulation formula to be more environmentally friendly - and perhaps less effective in its adhesion and insulatory qualities. FTEM.