Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Space shuttle Columbia appears lost

This is topic Space shuttle Columbia appears lost in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=001722

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 02-01-2003, 09:26 AM:

This morning at 8:01 (CST), Space shuttle Columbia appears to have broken up on reentry. Trails of debris are seen in the sky. (Turn on any news channel).

Posted by Bob Maar (Member # 763) on 02-01-2003, 09:30 AM:

I will not be posting Jokes during this time of sorrow for our nation and our space program. Please keep all of the astronauts and their families in your thoughts and prayers.

May God bless each and every one of them.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 02-01-2003, 09:35 AM:

CNN: Columbia shuttle breaks up over Texas

Seven astronauts aboard space shuttle
Saturday, February 1, 2003 Posted: 10:25 AM EST (1525 GMT)

JOHNSON SPACE CENTER, Houston, Texas (CNN) -- The space shuttle Columbia, with seven astronauts aboard, broke up as it descended over central Texas Saturday toward a planned landing at Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

Residents as far east as Shreveport, Louisiana, reported seeing and feeling an apparent explosion.

Search-and-rescue teams from the Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas, area were alerted and area residents were urged to stay away from any possible debris from the shuttle, which may be hazardous, said NASA public affairs officer James Hartfield.

President Bush was being briefed at Camp David, Maryland, and was expected to return to the White House by noon. The administration was preparing to convene a "domestic event" conference among all domestic and military agencies that may be involved in the next step.

An administration official said the shuttle's altitude -- over 200,000 feet -- made it "highly unlikely" that the shuttle fell victim to a terrorist act.

NASA officials said they last had contact with the shuttle about 9 a.m. EST, and it had been expected to touch down at about 9:16 a.m. EST.

Video of the shuttle tracking over Dallas showed multiple vapor trails, but NASA spokesman Kyle Herring said it was too early to determine the source.

Steve Petrovich, a police officer in Palestine, Texas, said he heard "a rumble and boom" at about 8 a.m. CDT (9 a.m. EST).

Jim Hubbs of New Boston, Texas, said he heard police discussing over a police scanner "a smoking object going southeast" that disappeared in the Bowie County area near the Arkansas state line.

Amy Townsend of Carthage, said she heard a loud boom that shook her house. She said there were two or three loud noises that lasted about a minute and that she saw a cloud of smoke outside her house.

Don Farmer of Lufkin, outside of Dallas, said he heard loud noises that lasted for 10 to 15 seconds. The noise sounded like dynamite exploding, and he thought it was an aircraft breaking the sound barrier.

Dozens of people, including several officers, reported seeing "a ball of fire," Bowie County Sheriff's office dispatcher Jodine Langford said.

"They saw it go out and then break into pieces," she said.

Officials said no tracking data were available.

Israel's first astronaut, Ilan Ramon, was among the seven-person crew.

There was no official reaction from the Israeli government, but a Defense Ministry spokeswoman said, "Like everyone else, we are feeling terrible, hoping the slightest hope that still remains at this stage will become a reality."

Shuttle commander Rick D. Husband, pilot William C. McCool, payload commander Michael P. Anderson, mission specialists David M. Brown, Kalpana Chawla and Laurel Clark were also on board.

Columbia is the oldest of NASA's shuttle fleet, first launched in 1981. It was on its 28th mission.

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 02-01-2003, 09:36 AM:

Florida Today newspaper reports that the shuttle did break up on re-entry and the 7-member crew has apparently been killed.

NASA has put out a warning for all people within 100 miles of Dallas to watch out for falling debris.

WOR-710/New York is airing ABC coverage as I post this. A man who lives north of Dallas told ABC that he saw what looked like a meteor racing through the sky when he went out to walk his dog. He then heard four loud explosions (the sonic boom) and 2-3 minutes later a huge fireball erupted.

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 02-01-2003, 10:22 AM:

Fox News said this was the 88th mission since the Challenger disaster. 16, 17 years now. Doesn't seem like it's been that long. Terrible, tragic news.

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 02-01-2003, 10:36 AM:

Living here in Florida, we see the shuttle go up just by looking at the sky towards Kennedy Space Center. But for the first time ever in the 13 years I've lived here, when Endeavour launched in November, my friends and I actually went to the space center to see the launch. It was at night, and the shuttle lit up the sky in a way I've never seen before. The rumble roared through the sky and you could feel it inside you as it took off. Truly spectacular!!

I watched Columbia lift off as I was on my way to class that morning. It's hard to believe when you're standing there watching it get smaller and smaller and seeing the tiny dot disappear, that we're actually sending people in to space.

This is indeed a very sad and tragic time, especially for those of us living near the Space Coast. [Frown]

=TMP=

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 02-01-2003, 10:42 AM:

I was in Chemistry class when I heard the news of the Challenger disaster in 1986.

This morning, I found out from some idiot client here for a theater rental who was ranting on an on about terrorists blowing up the space shuttle. Some people need to get a grip on reality and have a little respect for the heroes of this and other nations.

The following emergency notice has been posted on NASA's web site:

NASA STATEMENT ON LOSS OF COMMUNICATIONS WITH COLUMBIA
A Space Shuttle contingency has been declared in Mission Control, Houston, as a result of the loss of communication with the Space Shuttle Columbia at approximately 9 a.m. EST Saturday as it descended toward a landing at the Kennedy Space Center, Fla. It was scheduled to touchdown at 9:16 a.m. EST.

Communication and tracking of the shuttle was lost at 9 a.m. EST at an altitude of about 203,000 feet in the area above north central Texas. At the time communications were lost. The shuttle was traveling approximately 12,500 miles per hour (Mach 18). No communication and tracking information were received in Mission Control after that time.

Search and rescue teams in the Dallas-Fort Worth and in portions of East Texas have been alerted. Any debris that is located in the area that may be related to the Space Shuttle contingency should be avoided and may be hazardous as a result of toxic propellants used aboard the shuttle. The location of any possible debris should immediately be reported to local authorities.

Flight controllers in Mission Control have secured all information, notes and data pertinent to today's entry and landing by Space Shuttle Columbia and continue to methodically proceed through contingency plans.

News media covering the Space Shuttle should stay tuned to NASA Television, which is broadcast on AMC-2, transponder 9C, C-Band, located at 85 degrees West longitude. The frequency is 3880.0 MHz. Polarization is vertical and audio is monaural at 6.8 MHz. Reporters can also go to any NASA center newsroom to monitor the situation.

New information, including the times and locations of press briefings, will be posted to this page.

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 02-01-2003, 11:03 AM:

This is sick: Columbia Debris on eBay

Posted by Brad Haven (Member # 954) on 02-01-2003, 11:13 AM:

that ebay item looks more like a garden hose attachment!

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 02-01-2003, 11:17 AM:

David,
What's worse, the schmuck that put the bid up or the shcmucks that are bidding on it?

I can't believe that someone would pray on peoples naivity with what appears to be a piece of shit most likely found in any common industrial sector.

Indeed, as sad tragedy this is. 7 lives and millions of dollars lost. And, in all likelyhood, the space program will suffer setbacks as they did when the Challenger exploded after takeoff in '86. A scene I will never forget.... 9th grade Health class watching it on live television.

My sympathy goes out to all affected by the tragedy.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 02-01-2003, 11:17 AM:

It appears that eBay officials have removed the item. I hope the FBI is knocking on that asshole's front door right about now.

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 02-01-2003, 11:45 AM:

The Associated Press has confirmed that the crew is dead.

NASA has called a press conference for 1 PM New York time.

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 02-01-2003, 11:47 AM:

Yes, the ebay's gone, mercifully.

I lived in Houston when the Challenger disaster occurred. I was going out to service a theatre when it happened. Everyone drove around with their headlights on for a couple of months afterward (this was before DRLs).

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 02-01-2003, 11:59 AM:

I wonder what the payload was that they were bringing back if any. If that payload breaks loose during reentry can spell catastrophy. That is also the shuttle they had the most problems with maintaining the heat shield squares. In the beginning they would fall off on reentry.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-01-2003, 12:13 PM:

Very sad news, indeed!

Hopefully, NASA will at least be able to get information from this disaster that will help to improve the safety of space travel in the future.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 02-01-2003, 12:18 PM:

Another tragic and sad day in America. My heartfelt sympathy to the families of the heroic seven and to NASA.

-Claude

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 02-01-2003, 12:48 PM:

Just watched the news conference in BBC News 24. A sad day; my sympathies to all involved.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-01-2003, 12:57 PM:

Indeed a sad day. I wonder why they were still using such an old shuttle?
Again, this is sad day. NASA is wanting ANY and ALL video anyone has of the reentry.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-01-2003, 01:02 PM:

The incident gives me the same stomach twisting feeling of sorrow I felt when the Challenger distaster happened.

Radar reports have speculated pieces of the shuttle may have broken away across a field covering parts of New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, much of central Texas and even as far away as the Gulf of Mexico. It appears much of the wreckage came down near Nacogdoches, TX.

I'm not sure I understand why officials are saying the parts of the shuttle are "toxic" in their warnings to the public. Is it from radiation exposure in space? At any rate, it is important for every piece of material to be identified along with details about where it was found. With enough information, NASA investigators might be able to piece together what happened and prevent it in the future.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 02-01-2003, 01:07 PM:

It is indeed a sad day.

According to the news article I read, there were reports that on January 16, shortly after Columbia took off, a piece of insulating foam on its external fuel tank came off and was believed to have hit the left wing on the shuttle.

However, the engineers concluded that any damage to the wing was considered minor and posed no safety hazard.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 02-01-2003, 01:09 PM:

The shuttle Columbia was overhauled two years ago and has flown missions since then.

Since my theater is still playing Space Station, Apollo 13, Destiny in Space and L5: First City in Space, I threw together these powerpoint slides (2.1 MB) to add to our pre-show slide program.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 02-01-2003, 01:11 PM:

The 'rocket fuel" used is incredibly toxic. I don't know exactly how it works, but if breathed, will coat your lungs and you will suffocate.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-01-2003, 01:27 PM:

There is already some speculation that the left wing may have come off....Don't know where news people are getting this exactly, but they have their ways I guess. Although the wing may have come off the craft that still does not say thats what happened. It was also said that NASA normally have telescopes, and long range tracking cameras along its landing route, so some footage explaining what may have actually caused it might be forthcomming. Indeed a very tragic day for the world...Personally I hope they build a replacement for it like they did for Challenger.

Joe, age means nothing on an airframe if it is properly maintained. Many Douglas DC-3's are up there flying around right now as I am typing this....they were built and starting flying on Dec 15, 1935! The shuttles were flight certified for 100 flights, this was only the 28th flight for Columbia.
Mark

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-01-2003, 01:28 PM:

We should just build a new shuttle instead of just overhauling older ones. I know shuttles cost more than a Honda Civic, but c'mon. Of course the old shuttle isn't necessarily what caused this to happen. But I still would like to see brand new shuttles.

I think it would be an absolute honor to die in the Space Program. So I am proud of the astronauts as well as saddened.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 02-01-2003, 01:34 PM:

Joe, if the external fuel tank lost a chunk of foam insulation which could have hit the shuttle's wing, a new shuttle would have probably suffered the same fate.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-01-2003, 01:35 PM:

I can't exactly remember how long they are wanting to keep flying them, I want to say in to the late 2020's sometime.
Mark

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 02-01-2003, 01:35 PM:

TIME science correspondent Jeffrey Kluger suggests here that the most likely cause of the structural breakup is aerodynamics. Since the shuttle is basically a glider during re-entry, entry angle is critical in maintaining control of the craft at that speed.

The shuttles are designed to be able to fly up to 100 missions each. This was Columbia's 28th mission.

There is no external fuel tank on the shuttle once it reaches orbit. At re-entry, there would have been minimal fuel remaining in the tanks for the main engine, with some fuel remaining in the tanks for the maneuvering engines.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 02-01-2003, 01:39 PM:

Adam, with possible wing damage, the aerodynamics are compromised. How bad it would be compromised naturally depends on how severe the damage was. If one of the fuel tank's insulation panels hit the wing, the force of the impact could have caused undetectable internal structure damage of the wing.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 02-01-2003, 01:43 PM:

Damage to the wings may have been caused by flying debris during the launch. Heat shield tiles fly off all the time during launch. The Space Shuttle Human Space Flight page is apparently overloaded this morning, so I have no idea what was involved in this mission and whether or not there was a spacewalk that would have involved the inspection of the shuttle's exterior. I think it was just another delivery to the International Space Station and some research experiments.

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 02-01-2003, 02:23 PM:

Adam wrote:

quote:

Since my theater is still playing Space Station, Apollo 13, Destiny in Space and L5: First City in Space, I threw together these powerpoint slides (2.1 MB) to add to our pre-show slide program.

The first time I went to the IMAX in Bradford was just after the previous shuttle disaster. At the time they were showing "The Dream is Alive", and before each screening there was a tribute item, presented using a bank of medium format slide projectors in the lower projection room which existed before the re-building.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 02-01-2003, 02:46 PM:

The BBC Radio Four news at 1300 today was speculating about terrorism by about the third sentence (the Israeli astronaut being the hook to hang this on). I'd expected more than tabloid journalism from the BBC.

Posted by Matthew Bailey (Member # 601) on 02-01-2003, 02:58 PM:

The reason Nasa does not want anyone to touch any debris is because it may be contaminated with nitrogen tetroxide (n2o4)
which is a propellant for the shuttle reaction control & maneuvering engines. Pleas see http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~draymond/space/n2o4.htm

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-01-2003, 02:59 PM:

Here's the web site for STS-107:
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/missions/sts-107/mission-sts-107.html

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 02-01-2003, 03:27 PM:

As I was diving to work today, I cannot describe the scowl I had on my face as I thought about some low-life savage putting some wreckage parts of the shuttle on ebay for sale. I certainly hope those rumors were false. I cannot comprehend how anybody would do something like that. To me, a person who would do something like that has achieved a new low in our society. The actual words I have in mind are words that I cannot publish on this forum or thread.

This tragedy with the loss of our crew is bad enough, and I am in sorrow about it. This hits home a little harder to me than it does to so some folks, as one of the crew members CDR William McCool of the shuttle was stationed at NAS Whidbey Island, which is practically in my back yard, and flew over my home hundreds of times while he was doing FMLP training.

My condolences go out to the families of the entire crew of the shuttle.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-01-2003, 03:45 PM:

quote:
Joe, if the external fuel tank lost a chunk of foam insulation which could have hit the shuttle's wing, a new shuttle would have probably suffered the same fate.

You're right Paul, what was I thinking? It would be absolutely STUPID to design a new shuttle.

Anyway I clearly said that the shuttle's age was not necessarily the cause. Then I said I wanted to see new shuttles anyway. Please read my entire post next time before replying to it. I have been wanting that for a looooong time (new shuttles). The space shuttle is old technology. Especially when that technology improves exponentially throughout the years.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 02-01-2003, 04:00 PM:

Columbia was the only shuttle that could not go to the international space station because it did not have the docking capabilities that the other three do. Therefor this shuttle was used for only conducting scientific experiments and satelite retreavals and launches from orbit. It's next mission was to work on the hubble telescope in 2004. All evidence at this time is pointing to the left wing. If for some reason any deviation in the wings occures will throw off the computer guidence system causeing the shuttle to change course putting it in a catastrophic situation going at 12,000 miles per hour.

Posted by Gerard S. Cohen (Member # 994) on 02-01-2003, 05:20 PM:

The seven astronauts who died on Columbia were some of the best trained, intelligent, capable people on the planet, filled with courage, the persuit of knowledge, and the willingness to work hard and take great risks in the persuit of their dreams.

We know about the lives of the Americans aboard, since some are repeat voyagers, and their stories have been told, and will be repeated in the media.

But for the first time an Israeli citizen, Israeli Air Force Col. Ilan Ramon, was aboard to conduct scientific experiments. He gave his country a great emotional lift after 28 months of bloody conflict with the Palestinians, where Israelis have endured suicide bombings and other terrorist attacks.
Ramon, the son of Holocaust survivors, was a decorated veteran of two Israeli wars for survival. He was one of the leading pilots who destroyed Iraq's nuclear weapons facility in a successful pre-emptive strike. His mother and grandmother survived the Auschwitz death camp, and his father was a Zionist who fought for Israel's statehood in the 1940's. He had been training in the US since 1997 for the Columbia Shuttle mission.
Israel is in mourning for a hero.

[ 02-01-2003, 10:15 PM: Message edited by: Gerard S. Cohen ]

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 02-01-2003, 06:09 PM:

The only problem with building a new shuttle is no one wants to pay for it. In fact, Congress seems to feel they've spent enough money, and wants the shuttle fleet to continue to "deliver" without additional expense. So NASA is forced to not only continue using older hardware, but to maintain schedules (research, experiments, etc.) I'm not saying it's right, but there's heavy pressure to keep things going. Remember how long the shuttle fleet kept using magnetic core memories? They didn't get rid of them until the late 1980's.

There will probably be the usual "we found poor workmanship, faulty procedures" issues, just like with the Apollo fire and the Challanger explosion. Only this time, they can't ground the fleet for two years because there's people up in the space station.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-01-2003, 07:09 PM:

Space station personnel can return via a Soyuz capsule if need be. In fact there is one parked up there.

The argument for or against building another shuttle is best based on science and how far along we are with designs for a next-generation space vehicle. If that's too far off and there is sufficent need for another shuttle then by all means build one. But if the remaining fleet along with expendable rockets can handle the load until something new comes along then it may not be necessary. It has always been expected that there would be losses due to the laws of probability weighed against the enormous complexity of the whole STS system.

BTW, is there an out of state backup for Film-Tech?

Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 02-01-2003, 08:06 PM:

Just as sick: some excuse for a human lifeform (I won't post the link to his items-for-sale page because to do so would be extremely tasteless) put up for sale on eBay quickly-produced CDs of pre-disaster STS-107 images culled from NASA's Web site; hundreds of discs, each listed individually with the Buy it Now option. Needless to say, a contingent of eBayers took advantage of Buy it Now and "bought" his discs outright, only to turn around and leave scathing negative feedback and not actually buy the discs. Never have I seen a feedback page with nothing but complaints! That idiot deserved every neg he got even though the "buyers" probably violated eBay rules with their behavior (IMHO, worth the risk).

My condolences to the families affected by the disaster...as for the above-mentioned idiot (and clowns like him), it's time to crank up the heat in Hell for him...

(Update 6:15 PST: All of the idiot's auctions were shut down and he is no longer a registered user. Hallelujah!)

(Another update, 8:35 PM PST: That yahoo took his wares over to Yahoo Auctions. Pray the Yahoo folks have the brains to kick his backside out into outer space! [Mad]

)

[ 02-01-2003, 10:40 PM: Message edited by: Jon Miller ]

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 02-01-2003, 08:23 PM:

Not to dwell on a few eBay scumbags, but the seller in that auction for "Columbia debris" that eBay quickly cancelled was in Germany. From what I've heard, all the debris is believed to have fallen in the Texas & Louisiana areas. In any case, the "bidders" had sabotaged the auction by bidding it up to $99M before eBay pulled it.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-01-2003, 09:58 PM:

This is what bothered me most about this disaster:

When the WTC was blown up, almost immediately, we had people saying, "We'll rebuild it... better than before!" Now that the space shuttle has blown up, we have people doubting the efficacy of the space program.

I have sympathy for both WTC victims and their famileis as I do for shuttle victims and their families. The difference is that shuttle astronauts volunteered, full-well knowing the risk that they might not come back in one piece.

Pisses me off!

Posted by Mathew Molloy (Member # 666) on 02-01-2003, 10:09 PM:

The media had an interesting fact to go along with this tragedy. For insurance purposes NASA had to estimate that one out of eighty-eight missions would result in a catastophic event. This was the eighty-eighth mission since that day the Challanger was lost.

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 02-01-2003, 10:21 PM:

It was with great sadness I heard about this event today. I wasn't able to catch a broadcast about it and only heard about it later in the day.

From the time I was in first grade, I was fascinated with space and had dreamed of someday being an astronaut. On show and tell day I would bring in an 8mm projector and NASA films of Gemini to show the other students. Well, childhood dreams oftentimes never pan out, but I always felt I lived the dreams through the brave souls who journeyed past our great atmospheric border. For me, the best way to remember them is to celebrate the fact that they helped contribute to mankind's growth from his petty bickers on earth to a (hopefully) new enlightened era of cooperation and advancement of human achievement. They are the true pioneers of the 21st century and will be remembered as such.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 02-01-2003, 10:25 PM:

I never and probably never will understand why some scumbags can be that rottin' that they try to capitalize on someone's misfortune?

Posted by Jean-Michel Grin (Member # 1360) on 02-01-2003, 10:30 PM:

It's a sad new; all my sympathy goes to the heroe's familly.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 02-02-2003, 01:23 AM:

Please delete

[ 02-02-2003, 07:03 PM: Message edited by: Paul G. Thompson ]

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 02-02-2003, 01:36 AM:

I am believing that the whole incident as stated below is the way that the final cause will come to. I believe that these seven fine astronauts were spending 16 days in a flying caufin and didn't even know it. I hope they have that special place in heaven for these fine people. May god bless all there families.

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) - Investigators trying to figure out what destroyed space shuttle Columbia immediately focused on the left wing and the possibility that its thermal tiles were damaged far more seriously than NASA realized by a piece of debris during liftoff.

Just a little over a minute into Columbia's launch Jan. 16, a chunk of insulating foam peeled away from the external fuel tank and smacked into the ship's left wing.

On Saturday, that same wing started exhibiting sensor failures and other problems 23 minutes before Columbia was scheduled to touch down. With just 16 minutes remaining before landing, the shuttle disintegrated over Texas.

Just a day earlier, on Friday, NASA's lead flight director, Leroy Cain, had declared the launch-day incident to be absolutely no reason for concern. An extensive engineering analysis had concluded that any damage to Columbia's thermal tiles would be minor.

``As we look at that now in hindsight ... we can't discount that there might be a connection,'' shuttle manager Ron Dittemore said on Saturday, hours after the tragedy. ``But we have to caution you and ourselves that we can't rush to judgment on it because there are a lot of things in this business that look like the smoking gun but turn out not even to be close.''

The shuttle has more than 20,000 thermal tiles to protect it from the extreme heat of re-entry into the atmosphere. The black, white or gray tiles are made of a carbon composite or silica-glass fibers and are attached to the shuttle with silicone adhesive.

If a spaceship has loose, damaged or missing tiles, that can change the aerodynamics of the ship and warp or melt the underlying aluminum airframe, causing nearby tiles to peel off in a chain reaction.

If the tiles start stripping off in large numbers or in crucial spots, a spacecraft can overheat, break up and plunge to Earth in a shower of hot metal, much like Russia's Mir space station did in 2001.

Dittemore said that the disaster could have been caused instead by a structural failure of some sort. He did not elaborate.

As for other possibilities, however, NASA said that until the problems with the wing were noticed, everything else appeared to be performing fine.

NASA officials said, for example, that the shuttle was in the proper position when it re-entered the atmosphere on autopilot. Re-entry at too steep an angle can cause a spaceship to burn up.

Law enforcement authorities said was no indication of terrorism; at an altitude of 39 miles, the shuttle was out of range of any surface-to-air missile, one senior government official said.

If the liftoff damage was to blame, the shuttle and its crew of seven may well have been doomed from the very start of the mission.

Dittemore said there was nothing that the astronauts could have done in orbit to fix damaged thermal tiles and nothing that flight controllers could have done to safely bring home a severely scarred shuttle, given the extreme temperatures of re-entry.

The shuttle broke apart while being exposed to the peak temperature of 3,000 degrees on the leading edge of the wings, while traveling at 12,500 mph, or 18 times the speed of sound.

A California Institute of Technology astronomer Anthony Beasley, reported seeing a trail of fiery debris behind the shuttle over California, with one piece clearly backing away and giving off its own light before slowly fading and falling. Dittemore was unaware of the sighting and did not want to speculate on it.

If thermal tiles were being ripped off the wing, that would have created drag and the shuttle would have started tilting from the ideal angle of attack. That could have caused the ship to overheat and disintegrate.

Dittemore said that even if the astronauts had gone out on an emergency spacewalk, there was no way a spacewalker could have safely checked under the wings, which bear the brunt of heat re-entry and have reinforced protection.

Even if they did find damage, there was nothing the crew could have done to fix it, he said.

``There's nothing that we can do about tile damage once we get to orbit,'' Dittemore said. ``We can't minimize the heating to the point that it would somehow not require a tile. So once you get to orbit, you're there and you have your tile insulation and that's all you have for protection on the way home from the extreme thermal heating during re-entry.''

The shuttle was not equipped with its 50-foot robot arm because it was not needed during this laboratory research mission, and so the astronauts did not have the option of using the arm's cameras to get a look at the damage.

NASA did not request help in trying to observe the damaged area with ground telescopes or satellites, in part because it did not believe the pictures would be useful, Dittemore.

Long-distance pictures did not help flight controllers when they wanted to see the tail of space shuttle Discovery during John Glenn's flight in 1998; the door for the drag-chute compartment had fallen off seconds after liftoff.

It was the second time in just four months that a piece of fuel-tank foam came off during a shuttle liftoff. In October, Atlantis lost a piece of foam that ended up striking the aft skirt of one of its solid-fuel booster rockets. At the time, the damage was thought to be superficial.

Dittemore said this second occurrence ``is certainly a signal to our team that something has changed.''

Posted by Mark Maxwell (Member # 1355) on 02-02-2003, 01:56 AM:

I've actually been down here in Nacogdoches for a few days. Whoever approved me to be amember and read my info when I applied here might know I'm from here and come down alot to see my twin and hang out at a theater I used to work at. I went out with friends last night and stayed up too late, so I slept through the blast. Everyone I've talked to said the sound and the shaking lasted about a minute and a half. Two hours after it happened a fleet of helicopters flew overhead and woke me up. I could tell something was going on. At that time my brother's roomate ran in and asked if I heard them. Then he tol be the shuttle blew up. Right then I figured out what was going on because this town is in the path of entry. The whole mood of Nacogdoches today has been sobering. In one sad sence it's exiting because this is a small town and you see a few clipps of it on CNN. Butt when you go to the different places that wreckage has landed, It's totally quiet, even though there are a couple of hundred people there. All you hear are the reporters. This might sound stupid to some of you, but when you see this piece of wreckage that just looks the size of a beat up car hood, the reality of what happened sets in. The National Guard is everywhere keeping lookout on fragments that might have come from Columbia. We had 2 F-16's in the air, reports say that ther is an intact tank with a circumference of three feet that crashed at the airport here. My brother is a manager at the Wall-Mart in Lufkin, Tx. 20 miles south of here and they thought the roof was about to come down because the shockwave was that bad. I called my parents to let them know we were fine and they expressed what I and everyone in Nac. was hoping. Hopefully it was quick and they didn't have time to be scared. Heros die, but they are never forgotten.

Posted by Daniel Boisson (Member # 1027) on 02-02-2003, 04:32 AM:

That's just a terrible thing to happen. These astronausts were doing a very noble thing, knowing the risks involved.

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 02-02-2003, 06:26 AM:

This is very sad... Hasnt our country suffered enough. I feel for the families, friends, and co workers of these brave persons and even though I am not religious I will say a prayer for them.

Posted by Hillary Charles (Member # 769) on 02-02-2003, 08:41 AM:

As the news changes to stories of recovery of pieces of the shuttle and remains of the heroes, my shock is turning into profound sorrow. Between these brave souls and those who would profit from the tragedy, we see among the best and the worst of what humanity has to offer.

This is a blatant reminder how dangerous space travel is. Everyone who has ever strapped themselves into a space vehicle deserve our respect and admiration. And these seven, as with others who've given their lives in space exploration, should and will never be forgotten. My sympathies to all those touched by this event.

When the Columbia first launched, ushering in the STS program, we didn't have a VCR, so I used our Super-8 movie camera to film it off the tv screen. I could never have imagined then how the story of Columbia would end. A sad day, indeed.

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 02-02-2003, 11:36 AM:

Florida Today and the Houston Chronicle have full online coverage -- links to video, on-scene reports, etc.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 02-03-2003, 05:36 AM:

NASA condemns attempts to sell bits of Columbia debris on eBay.

Posted by Will Morrow (Member # 792) on 02-05-2003, 04:14 PM:

An earlier post said 1/88 spaceflights would end in a catastrophic event, but on NPR, someone affiliated with NASA said it was 1/430 give or take on that 430...but thats right in the ballpark.

Anyone know of sources for this information? 1/88 just sounds made up, for the purpose of hype, with this being the 88th launch. I feel that type of hype takes away from the spirit of these individuals, and their accomplishments.

I have an idea...I follow orders really well...they can send a mere projectionist into space...like myself...that hasn't accomplished that much...and have reall smart, successful people direct me on what to do. Then, if something goes wrong, I will be happy knowing I made it into space...and instead of mourning my loss, we can celebrate my passing with a cool "Space Themed" party.

I know the above may seem poor in taste, but we all handle loss differently. I also realize every human life has its value (save the bung nuggets selling stuff on ebay related to this tragedy).

I am 24 now, and remember sitting in class when Challenger didn't make it out of our atmosphere...I remember that as the first time I ever experienced sorrow, it was also when I decided I no longer wanted to be an astronaut.

After that disaster, my grandma's husband was part of the budget cuts that have plagued NASA. This man lived, ate and drank his work for NASA, and his livelyhood was stipped when he was "laid off" indeffinately.

I have the feeling of this. We either attack space exploration with full force, or we end it altogether. There is no room to ride the fence when lives are stake, as well as the future of mankind.

God Bless the families of those lost, as well as those men and women who still dream of flying into space.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 02-05-2003, 06:31 PM:

Space exploration must continue. We must keep in touch with our universe. Gain more knowledge about what is out there and what could effect our future. There is always going to be risks in what we do no matter what it is. Think about it. These fine astronauts could have lost there lives driving to work. They risked there lives doing what they love to do and they knew the consequences. Remember if it wasn't for space exploration we may not have known how to controle microwaves. Remember that everytime you warm up your hot pockets.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 02-05-2003, 10:23 PM:

Two people have been indicted for stealing debris from the space shuttle Columbia, federal authorities said on Wednesday, giving others who may have picked up pieces until 5 p.m. on Friday to turn them in free of penalty. If convicted, they could face up to 10 years in jail and a $250,000 fine.

The official also said there were 17 investigations concerning people who tried to sell shuttle debris on Internet auction site eBay.

Good!!!! When found guilty, nail their greedy butts to a rain barrel!!!

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-05-2003, 10:32 PM:

Right now it's important that every bit of debris found be left for or given to the appropriate authorities so they can make sense of what happened. But they'll never get it all considering the how widespread it is and in a year or two after this is long solved (hopefully) I don't doubt that people treking the wilderness will pocket some souvenirs. I don't know if it remains subject to government jurisdiction and ownership forever. When the case is closed I can't say I would consider it wrong.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-05-2003, 10:47 PM:

quote:
Will Morrow: I have an idea...I follow orders really well...they can send a mere projectionist into space...like myself...

Maybe you could convince NASA that they need to do research on how film on a platter system behaves in microgravity! [Big Grin]

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 02-05-2003, 10:49 PM:

Steve said:

quote:
When the case is closed I can't say I would consider it wrong.

That depends on what it is. Two incidents come to mind:

One was an old WWII vintage aircraft was supposedly purposely dumped into Lake Washington (Maybe Lake Union) in Seattle, and was retrieved by some aviation collectors several years ago. Even though the plane was striken from the register, the navy contended it was still navy property. A lawsuit was initiated, but in all honesty, I do not know who won.

The other incident involved a coast guard jet that crashed in Colorado. It was discovered by two of my brothers who were climbing mountains in that state. They reported it to the USAF, and their archives indicated it was a plane that crashed sometime in the late '50's or 60's. The air force or coast guard were not interested in the parts scattered around the crash site, and many of them probably still remain there. Apparently, the military concluded their investigation long ago, and from what I understand, if anyone wanted to drag any of that stuff home, they were welcome to do so.

I presume it is politics, and whether any equipment had security classifications.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-05-2003, 10:52 PM:

You'd need more seals on the projector to prevent oil leakage in microgravity; I think xenon would be fine and have extended bulb life due to the more even plasma distribution. But you can forget about using a platter. Reel to reel or giant reels only.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-05-2003, 11:33 PM:

I can just see one of the film reels getting loose....it would spin out of control for eons! Of course space might be a good place for a Pro 35....pretty much already filled with oil, and somewhat sealed up. A service call to replace a bad coupling would only cost billions.....
Mark

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-05-2003, 11:37 PM:

Charge by the mile? Would you? [Big Grin]

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 02-06-2003, 12:43 AM:

The Navy for some reason seems to be particularly anal about claiming found aircraft wrecks. Over the years they've gone to court several times against various aircraft restoration groups wanting to salvage USN aircraft. USAF on the other hand doesn't seem to care as much. Here in the desert southwest there are still quite a few wrecks extant. In the USAFA (nee CAP) we used to go out and repaint the ones in our area in dayglo orange every few years so air search crews wouldn't mistake them for new. Was good ground team training--the new guys got to do some real hiking and orienteering and see what real wrecks look like (which is usually nothing like the way Hollywood portrays them).

The loss of Columbia and her crew brings back painful memories for me. In 1986 I was a spacecraft control shift leader at the Hughes OCC and MCC in El Segundo, CA. Greg Jarvis was a colleague and was aboard Challenger to do experiments regarding fuel slosh behavior in zero G. He wasn't supposed to be on that flight--he had been bumped from his planned flight to give a US senator some orbit time for NASA PR.

I feel bad not only for the Columbia crew and their families, but for the engineering team that did the initial analysis of the foam strike on the left wing tiles. Those guys and gals are taking the brunt of the recrimination now, even though it is likely that nothing could've been done even if they had concluded that the damage was too severe to attempt reentry. The design of this mission simply left them with no viable options for this contingency. I'm sure there will be some new flight rules out of this, but the survivors will be living with those decisions for the rest of their lives. A Living Hell if there ever was one.

Oops. Didn't mean to darken the current tone of this thread. Maybe I should go post some Challenger jokes in Bernard's sick jokes thread... (Hey, it's a coping mechanism--we started hearing those jokes that afternoon.)

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 02-06-2003, 10:48 AM:

A wire story in this morning's newspaper says NASA, after further testing, now believes it's EXTREMELY UNLIKELY that the foam piece that struck the wing could have triggered this event.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 02-06-2003, 11:21 AM:

I wonder how they are testing this. Are they subjecting a shuttle wing and a piece of the same foam to the same stresses of a shuttle launch. I don't think so. They are probably using computer models that are just not the same as real life events. I wouldn't rule anything out at this time. I have not officialy scene a story with this context at this time. If there is such a story sounds like someone trying to cover their asses.

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 02-06-2003, 11:31 AM:

I found that story online: Foam Unlikely Cause

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 02-06-2003, 11:44 AM:

Thanks, for that link David,

I still think there may be some connection to that piece of foam. I mean look at the past shuttle flights that had pieces of foam hit the shuttle. In those cases some damage had occured. They better think hard on the case of the foam because once you rule that out you put nasa management into the failure to maintain safty issues on the shuttle it's self. That is the other high possability in the investigation. That has also been reenterated over the years.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 02-06-2003, 12:54 PM:

Darryl, I fully agree

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 02-06-2003, 01:32 PM:

Isn't the liquid fuel tank also often covered by ice that forms on the cold surface? (Which is why they need insulation). Ice IS really hard and heavy, and could cause damage.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-06-2003, 03:05 PM:

I don't know how they can properly model for the way the adhesives hold the tile to the felt pad and the pads to the ship with any degree of accuracy. They may be correct that the insulation, even possibly being ice laden from the rain, might have only done minimal damage to the tiles. But I don't think they can rule out the idea that a couple of lost tiles could create such turbulance that it would work its way under the remaining tiles and cause a number of them to peel away, ultimately dooming the ship.

Or was it the brittle rivets that Harland and Wolf used?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-06-2003, 03:20 PM:

I too think it was the tank insulation piece that caused it. I also think that NASA knew fom the damage that they may not make it back after seeing the video footage. But kept it to themselves and just possibly the crew. The way that piece shatters with more apparent debris comming out from under the wing is all too obvious to anyone with 2 cents worth of knowledge. Take a baseball for instance. Weighs less lots less than the 2 lbs that insulation weighed, and pitchers can throw a ball as fast as about 85 to 90 mph. Take that 2 lb piece of insulation at Mach 2 and lets see how much damage it does....
BTW Steve, It wasn;t so much the rivits that were brittle, but the actual cast iron hull of the Titanic. And the freezing temperatures in the north Atlantic made the cast iron hull plates even more brittle.
Mark

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 02-06-2003, 04:36 PM:

I don't think NASA wants us to know....if you think about it, anything can be distorted enough to make anyone believe.

Trouble is, NASA is on the hot seat right now, and if it was indeed a case of tile damage, they would have some very nasty egg smeared in their faces...

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 02-07-2003, 02:20 AM:

I read in this mornings paper that they think it could have been a piece of space junk or a pebble size piece of debrit. The pebbles size debrit has hit the shuttles before. They have had to replace the windshields. I don't know about space junk though. I remember watching something on discovery or one of those type channels that talked about space junk and the fact that NASA knows where it is and they fly the shuttle in a certain pattern to avoid it. Sounds like they are trying to blow smoke away from the smoking gun so to speak.