• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

NASA was warned of impending disaster concerning re-entry for years!! Link inside!!

I don't think age is a factor in the disaster if something clipped and damaged the insulating foam and or tiles.
 
no sh!t. accedents happen. its only a matter of time. probibilty says its gonna happen. we just cant say exactly when
 
There is always someone who says that something could happen and nobody listens, unfortunately the "worst case scenario" happened this time and now he is right. 🙁 If nothing had happened, he would still be a voice unheard.....

Speed
 
Every space mission has risks associated with it. If we start treating them too seriously, nothing is ever going to take off from the ground.
 
isn't there an escape mechanism for a space shuttle? Shouldn't the astronauts be able to escape a catastrophic disaster by ejecting from the larger aircraft via an escape pod (that makes-up the front of the aircraft but is detachable)?

Or am I just dreaming?
 
Why couldnt nassa just be catious damnit. Have them dock atg the ISS and wait for a replacement part. Or at least do a Space Walk to see what the hell happened. There was that Soyoz that lifted off the day after the accident. Why couldnt a replacemnt tile be sent up along with what it was carrying. JEEZ
 
Originally posted by: Munchies
Why couldnt nassa just be catious damnit. Have them dock atg the ISS and wait for a replacement part. Or at least do a Space Walk to see what the hell happened. There was that Soyoz that lifted off the day after the accident. Why couldnt a replacemnt tile be sent up along with what it was carrying. JEEZ
Click to expand...

Not exactly possible to repair one of those things in space.
 
Originally posted by: Dari
isn't there an escape mechanism for a space shuttle? Shouldn't the astronauts be able to escape a catastrophic disaster by ejecting from the larger aircraft via an escape pod (that makes-up the front of the aircraft but is detachable)?

Or am I just dreaming?
Click to expand...

Currently, there isn't any "escape module" from the shuttle, it was deemed to expensive 🙁
 
Originally posted by: Zim Hosein
Originally posted by: Dari
isn't there an escape mechanism for a space shuttle? Shouldn't the astronauts be able to escape a catastrophic disaster by ejecting from the larger aircraft via an escape pod (that makes-up the front of the aircraft but is detachable)?

Or am I just dreaming?
Click to expand...

Currently, there isn't any "escape module" from the shuttle, it was deemed to expensive 🙁
Click to expand...

that sucks.:|
 
Originally posted by: Munchies
Why couldnt nassa just be catious damnit. Have them dock atg the ISS and wait for a replacement part. Or at least do a Space Walk to see what the hell happened. There was that Soyoz that lifted off the day after the accident. Why couldnt a replacemnt tile be sent up along with what it was carrying. JEEZ
Click to expand...

It was explained the the crew of the shuttle does not not have the capability to perform "spacewalks" to look under the spacecraft because there is nothing to hold on to therefore, if there was a problem the only way to detect it would have been through earth based telescopes. My personal opinion is that they should have aborted the mission when debris was seen coming off during launch (but then again I don't work for NASA and am far from a "rocket scientist").

 
Originally posted by: Munchies
Why couldnt nassa just be catious damnit. Have them dock atg the ISS and wait for a replacement part. Or at least do a Space Walk to see what the hell happened. There was that Soyoz that lifted off the day after the accident. Why couldnt a replacemnt tile be sent up along with what it was carrying. JEEZ
Click to expand...
They didn't (and still don't, and never will) know the extent of the damage caused by the insulation.

They couldn't have done a spacewalk because they had no spacesuits.

They evaluated the situation a few days after the launch and decided that the insulation hit the shuttle at the wrong angle to do serious damage to the tiles.

They can't replace them in space; each tile is custom made for that specific spot.

Columbia can't dock with the ISS; it doesn't have the proper docking hatch, it's too heavy, and it couldn't reach the orbit the station is at.

And it's NASA, not 'nassa'.
 
Originally posted by: speed01
Originally posted by: Munchies
Why couldnt nassa just be catious damnit. Have them dock atg the ISS and wait for a replacement part. Or at least do a Space Walk to see what the hell happened. There was that Soyoz that lifted off the day after the accident. Why couldnt a replacemnt tile be sent up along with what it was carrying. JEEZ
Click to expand...

It was explained the the crew of the shuttle does not not have the capability to perform "spacewalks" to look under the spacecraft because there is nothing to hold on to therefore, if there was a problem the only way to detect it would have been through earth based telescopes. My personal opinion is that they should have aborted the mission when debris was seen coming off during launch (but then again I don't work for NASA and am far from a "rocket scientist").
Click to expand...

Very interesting point speed01, do you or anyone know if it's possible to "abort" at the stage where debris was seen coming off?
 
Originally posted by: Zim Hosein
Originally posted by: speed01
Originally posted by: Munchies Why couldnt nassa just be catious damnit. Have them dock atg the ISS and wait for a replacement part. Or at least do a Space Walk to see what the hell happened. There was that Soyoz that lifted off the day after the accident. Why couldnt a replacemnt tile be sent up along with what it was carrying. JEEZ
Click to expand...
It was explained the the crew of the shuttle does not not have the capability to perform "spacewalks" to look under the spacecraft because there is nothing to hold on to therefore, if there was a problem the only way to detect it would have been through earth based telescopes. My personal opinion is that they should have aborted the mission when debris was seen coming off during launch (but then again I don't work for NASA and am far from a "rocket scientist").
Click to expand...
Very interesting point speed01, do you or anyone know if it's possible to "abort" at the stage where debris was seen coming off?
Click to expand...

AFAIK once those chemical boosters ignite, you are outta there and you ain't stopping at least until they drop off. I could be wrong, though.
 
There is no way to protect a crew @ 200K+ ft and Mach 18. Once they make orbit they are committed to riding it down.
There is no fixing it on orbit. There is no practical "escape module" that doesn't include the same tiles that failed on this flight.
The individual in the article sounds like he's taking a post-retirement swipe at NASA.
Up until the time the orbiter make orbit they can abort the flight by simply jettisoning the SRB's and fuel tank and landing in Spain.
The possible cause of the accident wasn't discovered until two days after they lifted off. Way to late to do anything about it other than hope.

 
Originally posted by: speed01
Originally posted by: Munchies
Why couldnt nassa just be catious damnit. Have them dock atg the ISS and wait for a replacement part. Or at least do a Space Walk to see what the hell happened. There was that Soyoz that lifted off the day after the accident. Why couldnt a replacemnt tile be sent up along with what it was carrying. JEEZ
Click to expand...

It was explained the the crew of the shuttle does not not have the capability to perform "spacewalks" to look under the spacecraft because there is nothing to hold on to therefore, if there was a problem the only way to detect it would have been through earth based telescopes. My personal opinion is that they should have aborted the mission when debris was seen coming off during launch (but then again I don't work for NASA and am far from a "rocket scientist").
Click to expand...

Not to be an ass, but you do know the orbiter's bottom faces away from the earth while in space right? Telescope wouldn't do jack.
 
AFAIK you can't abort. If you cut the mission short you still would have had to re-enter. It wouldn't surprise me if that insulation had nothing to do with the accident.
 
I thought after Challenger they remodded each shuttle with an escape system (the whole "flight deck" area ejects)?
 
Originally posted by: Zim Hosein
Originally posted by: speed01
Originally posted by: Munchies
Why couldnt nassa just be catious damnit. Have them dock atg the ISS and wait for a replacement part. Or at least do a Space Walk to see what the hell happened. There was that Soyoz that lifted off the day after the accident. Why couldnt a replacemnt tile be sent up along with what it was carrying. JEEZ
Click to expand...

It was explained the the crew of the shuttle does not not have the capability to perform "spacewalks" to look under the spacecraft because there is nothing to hold on to therefore, if there was a problem the only way to detect it would have been through earth based telescopes. My personal opinion is that they should have aborted the mission when debris was seen coming off during launch (but then again I don't work for NASA and am far from a "rocket scientist").
Click to expand...

Very interesting point speed01, do you or anyone know if it's possible to "abort" at the stage where debris was seen coming off?
Click to expand...

I would think that since the launch is computer controlled, there would be some kind of override to abort the launch in the case of emergency (especially after the Challenger catastrophy). I recall reading somewhere that the launch can be aborted up to a certain point (and I don't know exactly where I read it so don't ask for a link) so there logically would be a failsafe for just such situations.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top