Radiation in a spacecraft is
equivalent to
8 chest X-rays every day.
-
Nov. 2000 160 nations voted in UN, U.S. abstaining, to reaffirm the Outer Space Treaty, basic intl law on space
enacted in 1967 to keep war out of space.
- Holes in the coverage
Nov. 2000 M.Ciarrocca Extra
Meteor shower reports abound along East Coast
7.23.01 Reuters
Philadelphia Reports of a possible meteor shower flooded police & govt telephone
lines along the U.S. East Coast on Monday, authorities said. The sightings of what some described as a fast-
moving meteor prompted evening rush-hour motorists to pull off suburban highways west of Philadelphia. Pilots in
flight issued reports of similar sightings to federal aviation officials in Pennsylvania, Delaware and Maryland.
Authorities said eyewitness accounts came from upstate New York to Virginia.
"People say they saw what was perhaps a meteor shower, but there's nothing we can confirm," said FAA
spokeswoman Arlene Salac. A Reuters reporter saw a tapered object shaped like a trumpet bell falling diagonally
through the western sky near West Chester, PA 20 miles from Philadelphia, at about 6:20 pm. The object emitted a
lustrous rainbow of colors, ranging from bright yellow on its downward-pointing flared end to light green and finally
rust-colored red at the upward-pointing tapered end.
Others reported seeing a triangular object or a fireball shooting through the sky.
People living near Montoursville, Pennsylvania, a rural community 130 miles northwest of Philadelphia, reported
hearing a loud explosion after seeing the unidentified object. A state police dispatcher said one woman reported
that the blast broke windows in her home. There were also unconfirmed reports of people finding debris on the
ground.
"It was a ball of fire," Mark Barbour of Syracuse, New York, told CNN. "It looked like something you would
see from the movies." The National Weather Service reported no natural phenomena that could account for such a
sight.
PA police were investigating the possibility of a part falling from a plane from Philadelphia Intl Airport, which
sometimes guides flights across the city's western suburbs. But sightings were later reported southward through
Delaware, Maryland, Washington and into Virginia. There were no reports of aviation emergencies, apart from the
nonfatal crash of a single-engine plane in Calvert, Maryland, near the state's border with PA & DE. "We
have no idea what it was, whether it was a meteor or what," said National Weather Service spokesman Curtis Carey.
Russian spaceship maker fights bankruptcy
7.31.07 CNN
Moscow Russia's main producer of spacecraft is to be put into emergency administration to fight off bankruptcy, Russia's Interfax news agency quoted the company's chief as saying on Tuesday. The Energia Rocket and Space Corporation is the main Russian contractor for the international space station and also makes satellites and rockets. It was unclear if Russia's space program would be affected.
"We intend to introduce emergency administration for the corporation, because the financial idealism that existed here has led not to flights to the moon, but to bankruptcy," Interfax quoted company chairman Vitaly Lopota as saying.
In April, Nikolai Sevastianov, who headed Energia at the time, told the Vedomosti daily the company was working on a new space transport system that could eventually lead to the industrial development of the moon.
Russia mulls mothballing space station
9.27.02 Reuters
Moscow Manned missions to the international space station may have to be suspended because
Russia cannot afford to build new craft to carry crews there, a Russian space official said Thursday. "The situation
is desperate," Russian section of ISS dir. Valery Ryumin said by telephone. Ryumin, also a top designer for rocket-
builder Energiya which supplies the Soyuz craft said the co. had no money beyond next year to build the vehicles.
"It takes 2 years to build the spaceship. Unless we place an order today, we will have nothing to fly on in 2004," he
said.
A key member of the 16-nation space station program, Russia has undertaken to provide Soyuz capsules.
Designed to carry 3 people, they remain docked to the orbiting outpost for months at a time and can be used for
emergency rescues. It is intended for use on a single mission. Ryumin said that without Soyuz, U.S. crews would
not be able to use the space station as their shuttle craft were designed to remain at the station for a maximum of 3
weeks. The U.S. program also had no alternative provision for rescue missions. "That is why the issue has been
raised of suspending permanent manned missions at the
station," he said.
Ryumin said he had sent a letter to his U.S. counterpart explaining Russia's concerns. He suggested that the
publicity given to Russia's financial difficulties might prompt the government to stump up more funds. "Perhaps the
govt will choose to avoid an international scandal," he said. "But I will tell you frankly that I have almost given up
hope."
Russian rocket throws lifeline to space station
8.29.03 Reuters
Baikonur, Kazakhstan Russia
threw a supply lifeline to a 2 man U.S.-Russian space crew in orbit on Friday, but dropped a heavy hint to U.S. that
it would like some financial help to keep its program going. The Progress rocket, Earth's only supply link now to the
Intl Space Station, was taking food, water, films and a satellite phone to American Edward Lu & Russia's Yuri
Malenchenko who have manned the outpost since late April.
But Russian space officials said they would welcome some financial input from U.S. to help them handle the costly
burden of supplying the $95 billion ISS single-handedly. Russia has borne the brunt of manned flights &
supplies to the 16-nation ISS since the U.S. space Shuttle Columbia disintegrated in February killing 7 &
grounding the 3 remaining Shuttles.
"This is becoming a very costly business for Russia," RKK Energia head Yuri Semyonov, Russia's lead participant
in the ISS, told Reuters in Baikonur after a spectacular lift-off. "We will try to reach an agreement with the
Americans, but there are annoying legal hiccups," he said without elaborating. "Today, we are trying to convey this
problem to Pres. Putin & Bush. We do hope to find their understanding."
Russia's Rossiya TV channel said the Progress would deliver some comedy films, CDs and fresh fruit as well as a
satellite telephone which it said would enable the crew to get in touch with rescuers on their Oct. 2003 landing.
The previous 3 member U.S.-Russian ISS crew landed hundreds of miles off target in the endless Kazakh steppe
last May due to a technical glitch.
A Mission Control spokesman outside Moscow said the Progress M-48 launch took place without a hitch at 5:48
a.m. Moscow time (9:48 p.m. EDT 8.28.03). It was expected to dock with the ISS at 7:45 a.m. Moscow time on
Sunday (11:45 p.m. EDT 08.30.03).
NASA officials have estimated that next March or April is the soonest the Shuttle can fly again. Earlier this week, an
investigation into the disaster published a damning report on safety standards at U.S. space agency NASA whose
Shuttles had long ferried astronauts to and from the space station.
The Progress was also ferrying scientific equipt for experiments by Spain's Pedro Duque, who will go up with U.S.
astronaut Mike Foale and Russia's Alexander Kaleri in Oct. 2003. Duque will return to Earth a week later with Lu
& Malenchenko at the end of their 6 month stint in space.
Russian cosmonaut Malenchenko achieved a first earlier this month when he married his earth-bound fiancee by
video link.
End of U.S. manned spaceflight looms ever closer
U.S. manned space pgm has at best only a few more years of missions left in it, until its cost, complexity and
design flaws results in another failure that grounds all US manned launches until a new transport system is
designed & built.
7.10.03 Jeffrey F. Bell Space Daily
Honolulu Once again, NASA has proposed to develop a replacement for the troubled Space Shuttle.
This year's project goes by the ungrammatical moniker "Orbital Space Plane". An interim version of OSP called the
CRV (Crew Rescue Vehicle) to be developed by 2010 will take over the International Space Station lifeboat task
now done by Soyuz.
An improved OSP called the CTV (Crew Transfer Vehicle) will assume the ISS crew exchange task now done by
Shuttle in 2012. To minimize development costs, the OSP will be launched on one of the new EELV family of
expendable boosters, Delta 4 or Atlas V.
OSP is the latest of many "Shuttle replacement" programs that have all failed dismally. A close look at
OSP shows that this program is also doomed to failure due to fundamental technical defects. It's no
surprise that such usually reliable NASA boosters as "Space Coast" Congressman Dave Weldon and
aerospace lobbyist Lori Garver have publicly attacked OSP.
Most critics have focused on the suspiciously low development costs, or the embarrassing gap between 2006
& 2010 in which no ISS lifeboat is planned. In fact, the basic concept of the program is so stupid that every
knowledgeable person involved in it must be perfectly aware that it will never fly.
The basic problem is that the OSP, as currently defined, must carry such heavy mass penalties in the form of
wings, wheels, and various escape systems that its performance will not be much better than the Dyna-Soar design
of 40 years ago. Because it cannot carry any of the supplies needed to sustain its passengers once they arrive at
the ISS, it will not reduce the number or expense of Shuttle missions needed to support the International Space
Station, and will not provide "assured access to space" as NASA claims.
Instead OSP will force NASA to simultaneously fly 2 very expensive man-rated vehicles at a time when it is
financially unable to support even one, and will double the risk of long stand-downs in ISS operations due to lack of
either replacement crewmen or the supplies needed to keep them alive.
NASA's finances in disarray; auditor leaves
5.14.04 Reuters
NYC / Wash.D.C. As NASA sets course for the moon & Mars, the space agency's finances are
in disarray, with significant errors in its last financial statements and inadequate documentation for $565 billion
posted to its accounts, its former auditor reported. NASA's chief for internal financial management said the problem
stemmed from a rough transition from 10 different internal accounting programs to a new integrated one, but audit
firm PriceWaterhouseCoopers noted basic accounting errors and a breakdown in NASA's financial controls.
PriceWaterhouseCoopers & NASA parted ways earlier this year, according to NASA inspector general Robert
Cobb. PriceWaterhouseCoopers declined to comment, but a source familiar with the situation said the audit firm
opted out of the contract because it was unhappy with the relationship.
In a scathing report on NASA's 9.30.03 financial statement, which got scant attention at its release but was detailed
in a cover story in the May issue of CFO Magazine, the audit firm accused the space agency of one of the cardinal
sins of the accounting world: failing to record its own costs properly.
The same report said the transition to the new accounting program triggered a series of blunders that made
completing the NASA audit impossible. There were hundreds of millions of dollars of "unreconciled" funds and a $2
billion difference between what NASA said it had and what was actually in its accounts, which are held by the
Treasury Dept, PriceWaterhouseCoopers said in its report.
"The documentation NASA provided in support of its 9.30.03 financial statements was not adequate to support
$565 billion in adjustments to various financial statement accounts," the auditor wrote in 1.20.04 report to NASA
inspector general Cobb. It also noted "significant errors" in financial statements provided by NASA.
That big number, $565 billion, with a "B", was the result of posting problems, new software and a "massive
cleanup" of 12 years of NASA's financial records, said NASA chief for integrated financial management Patrick
Ciganer. Under the new system, Ciganer said in a phone interview, errors that were discovered in the transition
could show up multiple times in the accounting process: once as an erroneous credit in one column, then as a debit
to delete the error, then as a credit in the correct column. By this reckoning, a $40 billion contract that stretched
over 9 years and several separate NASA centers generated $120 billion worth of entries, and these were turned
over to the auditors.
"They have weak controls and problems with their internal system that make them vulnerable to (financial) fraud,
although we don't have that evidence yet," said GAO dir. Gregory Kutz, looking into NASA's accounting issues. A
Senate hearing on the issue was set for Wednesday. With a current annual budget of $16.2 billion, NASA's
priorities include an ambitious multi-year mission to the moon and possibly Mars, finishing construction on the Intl
Space Station and returning the grounded shuttle fleet to flight after the 2003 Columbia disaster.
The independent investigation of the Columbia accident, in which 7 astronauts died, found NASA's culture at fault.
The same spirit that fueled the early boom in space exploration in the 1950s evolved into separate parts of a
sprawling agency working independently rather than cooperatively. The same independent path extends to NASA's
financial accounting, Cobb said. "You've got an environment at the agency where there are these 10 centers which
pride themselves on their independence and it becomes very difficult in connection with any of NASA's
functional management responsibilities to have people kowtow to the folks at (NASA) headquarters who have the
responsibility to pull it all together," Cobb said.
Cinager said he was hopeful that NASA's culture would change, noting a new "willingness of all of the
constituencies in the agency to introspectively look at how can they improve the way they are doing their specific
duties." Yale School of Management accounting prof. Shyam Sundar described the event as "a big mess," after
seeing the auditor's report.
"If NASA would have been a public co., the management would have been fired by now," he said.
Space junk: the stuff left behind
10.19.00 Robt Roy Britt Space.com
Thousands of nuts, bolts, gloves and other debris from
space missions form an orbiting garbage dump around
Earth, presenting a hazard to spacecraft. Some of the bits & pieces scream along at 17,500 mph. When these
objects fall back into Earth's atmosphere, which they inevitably do, they behave just like any other meteor, lighting
up the sky.
A 1999 study estimated there are some 4 million pounds of space junk in low-Earth orbit, just one part of a celestial
sea of roughly 110,000 objects larger than 1 centimeter, each big enough to damage a satellite or space-based
telescope.
Some of the objects, baseball-sized & bigger, could threaten the lives of astronauts in a space shuttle or the
International Space Station. As an example of the hazard, a tiny speck of paint from a satellite once dug a pit in a
space shuttle window nearly a quarter-inch wide.
Aware of the threat, the U.S. Space Command monitors space debris & other objects, reporting directly to
NASA & other agencies whenever there's threat of an orbital impact. As of 6.21.00, the agency counted 8,927
man-made objects in the great above & beyond; some are there more or less permanently. Of the total, 2,671
are satellites (working or not), 90 are space probes that have been launched out of Earth orbit, and 6096 are mere
chunks of debris zooming around the third planet from the Sun. U.S. leads the former Soviet Union in the total
quantity of orbital junk, but some companies & other organizations contribute significantly to the count.
But there are more objects up there. The Space Command's electronic eyes can spot a baseball-sized object up to
about 600 miles high, officials say. But at 22,300 miles up, where geostationary satellites roam providing weather
images used by forecasters, an object has to be as big as a volleyball to be seen. These object, moving in fixed perches with the
rotating Earth, may remain in place for centuries, experts say.
And even with more than a dozen of these electronic eyes arrayed around the planet, the agency admits to not
being able to see the entire sky all around the world. The threat to satellites & Earth-orbiting deep-space
telescopes from orbiting debris is clear. In the first 6 months of 1999, 57 of the tracked objects re-entered Earth's
atmosphere, according to U.S. Space Command Maj. Michael Birmingham. Birmingham said that 91 objects fell
into the atmosphere in all of 1998, and 69 in 1997.
The most spectacular re-entry in the short history of the phenomenon was Skylab. Launched in 1973 (2 years after
Russia put its first space station into orbit), the first & only U.S. space station stumbled home 6 years later,
part of it splashing into the Indian Ocean and another portion ending up in Australia.
"Most objects that re-enter the Earth's atmosphere burn-up or re-enter over water," Birmingham said, noting that
nearly three-quarters of the planet is wet and a great majority of what's dry is uninhabited. "Since the space
surveillance mission began, almost 17,000 objects that we track re-entered the Earth's atmosphere. Catastrophic
re-entries such as Skylab are rare & the exception."
Pentagon to shoot down broken spy satellite
2.14.08 AP
Wash.D.C. President Bush has ordered the Pentagon to use a Navy missile to attempt to destroy a broken U.S. spy satellite, thereby minimizing the risk to humans from its toxic fuel, by intercepting it just before it re-enters the atmosphere, officials said Thursday.
The effort, first of its kind, will be undertaken because of the potential that people in the area where the satellite would otherwise crash could be harmed, the officials said. Deputy National Security Adviser James Jeffrey, briefing reporters at the Pentagon, did not say when the attempted intercept would be conducted, but the satellite is expected to hit Earth during the first week of March.
"This is all about trying to reduce the danger to human beings," Jeffrey said.
Joint Chiefs of Staff vice chairman Gen. James Cartwright said at the same briefing that the "window of opportunity" for such a shootdown, presumably to be launched from a Navy ship, will open in the next three or four days and last for seven or eight days. He did not say whether the Pentagon has decided on an exact launch date.
Cartwright said this will be an unprecedented effort; he would not say exactly what are the odds of success.
"This is the first time we've used a tactical missile to engage a spacecraft," Cartwright said.
After extensive study and analysis, U.S. officials came to the conclusion that, "we're better off taking the attempt than not," Cartwright said. He said a Navy missile known as Standard Missile 3 would be fired in an attempt to intercept the satellite just prior to it re-entering Earth's atmosphere. It would be "next to impossible" to hit the satellite after that because of atmospheric disturbances, Cartwright said.
A second goal, he said, is to directly hit the fuel tank in order to minimize the amount of fuel that returns to Earth.
Software associated with the Standard Missile 3 has been modified to enhance the chances of the missile's sensors recognizing that the satellite is its target; he noted that the missile's designed mission is to shoot down ballistic missiles, not satellites. Other officials said the missile's maximum range, while a classified figure, is not great enough to hit a satellite operating in normal orbits.
"It's a one-time deal," Cartwright said when asked whether the modified Standard Missile 3 should be considered a new U.S. anti-satellite weapon technology. Cartwright also said that if an initial shootdown attempt fails, a decision will be made whether to take a second shot.
Jeffrey said members of Congress were briefed on the plan earlier Thursday and that diplomatic notifications to other countries would be made before the end of the day.
Shooting down a satellite is particularly sensitive because of the controversy surrounding China's anti-satellite test last year, when Beijing shot down one of its defunct weather satellites, drawing immediate criticism from the U.S. and other countries. A key concern at that time was the debris created by Chinese satellite's destruction, and that will also be a focus now as the U.S. determines exactly when and under what circumstances to shoot down its errant satellite.
The military will have to choose a time and a location that will avoid to the greatest degree any damage to other satellites in the sky. Also, there is the possibility that large pieces could remain, and either stay in orbit where they can collide with other satellites or possibly fall to Earth.
It is not known where the satellite will hit. But officials familiar with the situation say about half of the 5,000-pound spacecraft is expected to survive its blazing descent through the atmosphere and will scatter debris, some of it potentially hazardous. over several hundred miles. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.
The satellite is outfitted with thrusters, small engines used to position it in space. They contain the toxic rocket fuel hydrazine, which can cause harm to anyone who contacts it. Officials have said there is about 1,000 pounds of propellent on the satellite. The satellite known by its military designation US 193 was launched in December 2006. It lost power and its central computer failed almost immediately afterward, leaving it uncontrollable. It carried a sophisticated and secret imaging sensor.
Russia says U.S. may use satellite blast as test
2.16.08 Tanya Mosolova Reuters
Moscow Russia's Defence Ministry said on Saturday a U.S. plan to shoot down an ailing spy satellite could be used as a cover to test a new space weapon. The ministry said there was insufficient proof that Washington's decision to fire a missile at the disabled satellite was to prevent a potentially deadly leak of toxic gas as it re-entered Earth's atmosphere.
"In our opinion, the decision to destroy the U.S. satellite is not as harmless as it is being presented. Especially as the United States has been avoiding talks on restricting a space arms race for quite a long time," the ministry's information department said in a statement. "Under cover of discussions about the danger posed by the satellite, preparation is going ahead for tests of an anti-satellite weapon. Such tests mean in essence the creation of a new strategic weapon."
U.S. officials said on Thursday that President George W. Bush had decided to have the Navy shoot the 5,000-pound (2,270 kg) satellite with a modified tactical missile after security advisers suggested its re-entry could lead to a loss of life. Some space and security experts have said they did not believe Washington's justification for the plans and argued the Pentagon was more likely testing its ability to target other states' satellites.
This suggestion is rejected by U.S. officials. It will be the first time the United States has conducted an anti-satellite operation since the 1980s. Russia also has not conducted anti-satellite activities in 20 years.

Independent board to probe space shuttle
1.2.03 Matt Kelley AP
Wash.D.C. U.S. govt appointed an independent board Saturday to investigate the space shuttle
Columbia disaster. Experts from USAF & USN, which had 5 of the 7 crew members, will join officials from the
Transportation Department and other federal agencies on the review panel, NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe
said.
[ This mission's 80 experiments were conducted by 6 military personnel. Why does a scientific space
lab require a military crew? Because they're much less expensive than equally skilled private sector labor; their heirs can't sue for reparations.
Which was the civilian crew member? An even less expensive H1-B Punjabi female. ]
NASA also will conduct its own investigation into the disaster, O'Keefe said at a news conference from Cape
Canaveral FL. Both investigations will review all the information NASA collected as the Columbia began its descent
for landing, then started breaking up more than 200,000 ft over Texas. That information includes transmissions
from the crew, as well as records from the shuttle's sensors, analysis of the debris and data from military, govt and
commercial satellites.
Israeli astronaut has prayer cup 1.19.03 AP
48-year-old astronaut, Israeli air force colonel and former fighter pilot Ramon said he was well aware of all the security surrounding his launch. He
called the protection, unprecedented for a NASA space shot, "unbelievable & helpful. I didn't have any doubt that
everything would go pretty good and so it did,''
|
Military satellites with infrared detectors saw several flashes as Columbia broke apart, according to a defense
official who spoke only on condition of anonymity. It was unclear whether those ``spikes'' of heat indicated an
explosion, the burning of pieces of debris re-entering the atmosphere or something else. O'Keefe and other senior
administration officials said there was no indication that any kind of attack from the ground caused the
disaster.
FBI spokeswoman Angela Bell also said there was no indication of terrorism and that the FBI would have a minor
role in the investigation, mainly helping collect evidence.
Federal Emergency Management Agency took the lead in responding to the disaster. The
military's Northern Command, which handles operations inside U.S., was coordinating Defense Dept response. 2 F-
16 fighters from an Ft Worth TX Air Force Reserve unit joined effort to search for pieces of the shuttle, said unit
spokesman Maj. Clay Church.
Army's 1st Cavalry Division also sent search &rescue task force from Ft Hood TX to help search for
debris.The task force included helicopters & military police to search for and to guard pieces of wreckage for
collection by NASA, Ft Hood spokesman Cecil Green said. The teams were relying on UH-60 Black Hawk
helicopters during the day and OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopters at night, Green said.
Homeland Security Sec. Ridge called AZ & NM officials to warn them about possible debris, although those
states were out of the likely debris field. OK, TX & LA were more likely to see shuttle debris.
All debris is U.S. Govt property and is critical to the investigation of the shuttle accident. Any & all debris from
the accident is to be left alone and reported to Govt authorities. Unauthorized persons found in possession of
accident debris will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. If you find any debris, please call the Johnson Space
Ctr Emergency Operations Ctr 281.483.3388 or send e-mail to columbiaimages@nasa.gov
Columbia's problems began on left wing
2.1.03 Marcia Dunn AP
details
Cape Canaveral 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 1.16.03 launch, 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 & 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 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 sr government official said.
If the liftoff damage was to blame, shuttle & crew 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. 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.
Calif. Inst. 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 & falling.
Dittemore was unaware of the sighting and did not want to speculate on it. Dittemore said even if 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, said 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 4 months that a piece of fuel-tank foam came off during a shuttle liftoff. In Oct. 2002,
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.
Communication lost with shuttle
2.1.03 CNN
38 miles above Texas on its way to Kennedy Space Ctr FL
O'Keefe said that NASA officials had
been waiting eagerly for the shuttle to land because "we couldn't wait to congratulate them" for their extraordinary
performance.
The debris field is believed to be very large. Residents as far east as Shreveport, Louisiana, reported
seeing & feeling an apparent explosion. "As we seen [Columbia] coming over, we seen a lot of light and it
looked like debris & stuff was coming off the shuttle," Benjamin Laster of Kemp TX told CNN. "We seen large
masses of pieces coming off from the shuttle as it was coming by," Laster said. "The house kind-of shook and we
noticed a sonic boom
and then we seen a big continuous puff of vapor or smoke stream come out and
then we noticed a big chunk go over."
Search & rescue teams from Dallas Ft Worth area were alerted and residents were urged to stay away from
any possible debris from the shuttle, which may be hazardous, said NASA public affairs officer James
Hartfield.
NASA officials at Johnson Space Ctr Houston 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.
Officials said no tracking data were available.
NASA unlikely to build new space shuttle
2.1.03 Matt Crenson AP
NASA is extremely unlikely to build a new space shuttle to replace Columbia, according to experts, leaving the
space agency with 3 remaining orbiters as its entire fleet for the foreseeable future. The next generation of reusable
space vehicles is at least 10 to 15 years off, said 189-93 shuttle chief engineer Donald H. Emero.
"I think the country will not invest in any more shuttles,'' Emero said Saturday.
Until a few years ago, NASA was exploring several designs for vehicles to replace the space shuttle. But new
NASA administrator, Sean O'Keefe shelved those designs and committed to operating the space shuttle for the
next 10 to 15 years. The fleet's primary mission during that period will be constructing & servicing the intl
space station.
Discovery, oldest of NASA's 3 remaining shuttles, has been in service for 18 years. Endeavour, built at a cost of
about $2 billion to replace the Challenger after that spacecraft exploded shortly after takeoff in 1986, has been
flying for a decade. Atlantis, the third remaining shuttle, has been in use for 17 years.
NASA's shuttle fleet was grounded for nearly 3 years following the Challenger disaster, as investigators struggled
first to determine what had caused it to explode then to fix the problem. In the hours after that accident, few could
have guessed that the cause would be a rubber "O-ring'' stiffened & cracked by low temperatures.
[ No one needed to guess. Investigation revealed prior warning
from technicians in the firm & govt who were hounded from the program for naysaying ]
At that time, NASA had sufficient spare parts to assemble Endeavour as a replacement for Challenger. But today
the space agency does not have that capability. Emero said the investigation of Saturday's accident could take as
long as that inquiry, but doubted it would because Challenger was destroyed by such a minor defect that was
difficult to find. There is no doubt that the remaining space shuttles will be grounded for some time pending NASA's
investigation of the Columbia accident.
"Certainly there is a hold on future flights until we get ourselves established and understand how this happened,''
said space shuttle program manager Ron Dittemore. The next shuttle mission on NASA's flight schedule is a 3.1.03
to the space station by the Atlantis orbiter.
During the 1990s, NASA spent billions of dollars investigating a radical design to replace the space shuttle. The X-
33 vehicle would have had a dramatic "lifting body'' design propelled by a type of rocket that had never been used
in spaceflight. But persistent engineering problems led NASA to abandon the vehicle in 2001.
Boeing says space shuttles to last into next decade
9.17.03 Reuters
Kennedy Space Ctr The fleet of 3 U.S. space shuttles will probably operate for another 10 to 15
years, despite new space vehicles expected to launch during that time, a top space official at Boeing Co. said on
Tuesday. A NASA plan to develop an orbital space plane by 2010 was plausible but would not fully replace the
shuttle's heavy lift ability, said Boeing's NASA Systems unit vp & GM Mike Mott.
"There is not right now on the drawing board one vehicle that can replace what the shuttle can do," Mott told
reporters during a briefing at the company's offices at Florida's Kennedy Space Ctr. Since the Intl Space Station
was designed to work with the space shuttle and to stay in service until at least 2018, the shuttle should probably
stay in service until that date, Mott said.
"So if you go to 2018 that becomes very logical because that (the shuttle & the space station) works together
as an integrated system," Mott said. Chicago-based Boeing is one of NASA's biggest contractors, jointly operating
the space shuttle program with Lockheed Martin Corp. In light of the mid-flight explosion of the shuttle Columbia on
Feb. 1, leaving a fleet of just 3 orbiters, NASA has accelerated plans for a shuttle replacement and is expected to
ask for proposals by early 2004, Mott said.
Sometime in the summer of 2004, NASA is expected to award the contract for an orbital space plane. That contract
is estimated by industry experts to be worth as much as $4 billion. Over the next 3 to 4 years, Mott expects NASA
to award between $10 billion and $12 billion in new space contracts.
Shuttle crash & smug NASA managers
"I f-ing warned them!" more
2.1.03 Dian Hardison Counterpuch
2 years ago, I was a highly decorated NASA engineer. I was awarded their highest medal, for Exceptional
Achievement, something that is usually reserved for senior managers, because of my expertise. I was a safety
engineer.
I was removed from my GS-13 position as an internationally recognized authority on hypergolic propellants &d
explosives, and forced off the Kennedy Space Ctr. At gunpoint.
Their excuse was that I had "abused govt equipt." Because I sent a friend an e-mail joke.
The reality was that I wouldn't play their "political ball." I F-ING WARNED THEM.
I told them technicians & engineers were overworked. I told them that there were too many managers
and too many meetings and "dog & pony" shows. I told them that their senior "face time" play games, while
they spent all their time plotting how to give each other pay raises, and left the guys on the floor to struggle day to
day with obsolete and overpriced and unqualified equipt, was going to result in another Challenger.
I was there for Challenger. I saw the same exact conditions happening again. Overpaid, lazy, irresponsible
managers concerned solely with their climbing up their ladders. I told them they were skimping on inspections.
I told them that the ground crews were asleep on their feet from exhaustion.
I made as much noise as I knew how to make about the top-heavy bureaucracy sitting around in their fancy
panelled offices, giving whorish press interviews in their smugness, while they did not have a clue what was going
on in the real world where I was working.
They fired me. They fired a GS-13 civil servant, with an Exceptional Service medal & 10 dozen
commendations. For sending an e-mail joke. In reality, for objecting to political fat-cats sitting on their fat rear
ends and failing to do their jobs.
Like Challenger, those who are most guilty are the ones who will attempt to make the most political capital out of it.
But the blame for Columbia lies entirely & totally with the NASA administrators. They should all be investigated
for their criminal negligence. They should all serve time in jail.
I warned them. They did their best to destroy me, because I warned them. It's too bad that innocent astronauts paid with their lives for NASA managers greed and political ass-kissing. But I am not surprised. 2 years ago, I warned them.
Lost in space
3.5.02 Radley Balko TCS
America's federally run space program faces a funding crunch. According to Space.com , NASA has run $5 billion over budget in attempting to complete its portion of the Intl Space Station. The agency has also been forced to cut back on space shuttle missions or, at the request of the Bush administration, privatize the shuttle program
altogether. Here's hoping the Bushies stick to their guns, and NASA is forced to allow free markets to carve niches from space.
Carl Sagan's
politics were a hair to the right of Angela Davis, but his analysis of the history of human
technology in Cosmos makes a compelling case for NASA's eradication, and for a space program driven entirely by private enterprise. In Cosmos, Sagan rightly points to human societies that welcomed new & potentially
uncomfortable ideas, shunned mysticism, and ventured seaward as the antecedents to modern space
exploration.
[ Mysticisms rightly shunned are superstitious worship of an
invisible free hand properly guiding resource allocation via unregulated markets and deification of munitons makers' corporate welfare. ]
From ancient times he cites the Ionians, whose geographical placement exposed them to vastly different ideas
from neighboring civilizations, as the prototype of a society conducive to the advancement of human thought. The
Ionian region produced most of ancient civilization's great thinkers, incl Democritus, Aristotle and Plato, to name
three. Sagan also cites the seventeenth century Dutch & Chinese Sung dynasty, as other civilizations worthy
of our praise & admiration. [ Both cultures engaged in slave
trade ]
What Sagan fails to mention, at least explicitly, is that in addition to his favored criteria of open exchange of ideas
and an aversion to religious oppression, all of these societies also embraced trade, and were comparatively friendly
to free markets. [ "Comparitively" to warlord guided anarchy
antithetical to any preservation of infrastructure ]
Last July, Stephen Davies of Manchester University gave a lecture in San Diego entitled "History of Liberty, History
of Power." In it, Prof. Davies looked at the strong correlation between free societies and their scientific &
cultural achievement. Davies explained how China's Sung dynasty, spanning the 10th to 13th centuries, embraced
free thought and open trade by banning censorship, encouraging movement & commerce, minting billions of
coins, and even establishing banking & insurance systems.
More pertinent to the point, the Sung built grand, expansive ships for exploration & trade, ships on a size and
scale never seen before.
17th century Holland too was a remarkably free society for its day. Holland became a destination for intellectuals
& artists from all over Europe looking to escape the wave of censorship & church-led oppression
sweeping the continent. Dutch East Indies Company, which was more privately than publicly funded, sent ships on
exploratory missions all over the globe, and came back with, as Sagan writes "the zest for discovery of new lands,
new plants and animals, new people, (and) the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake."
Which brings me back to NASA. Since its inception, NASA has held a heavy regulatory lid over space
entrepreneurship. Yes, NASA thrilled us with such breakthroughs as a moonwalk and a Mars rover, but the
agency's first inclination has long been to protect its turf, and in the process smother any new, private markets
emerging with respect to space.
[ Absolutely false assertion based on the claim any restriction is
equivalent to utter prohibition. ]
Last spring for example, billionaire Dennis Tito offered to pay $20 million to visit the space station MIR. NASA
balked, deeming him a "mere tourist" who oughtn't benefit from taxpayer-supported research. After several other
attempts, all rebuffed by NASA, Tito finally turned to Energia, a largely private Russian company, which gladly
obliged his extra-planetary ambitions, and sent him to the Intl Space Station.
An American "consumer" was forced to take his business to a private Russian company, because an American
"state-run agency" wouldn't accommodate him.
[ I want to binge on heroin while raping underage women. Does
that mean Albania is more enlightened than U.S. because I can go there & do so? ]
Ed Hudgins, formerly of the Cato Institute, testified before Congress last June on the issue of space & private
enterprise. Hudgins pointed out that about a million people took flights in airplanes in the 40 years after the Wright
brothers first put humanity airborne. But so far, 40 years after the first cosmonaut left the earth's atmosphere, fewer
than 500 people have traveled to space. It isn't as if the desire isn't there.
[ Inaccurate analogy failing to mirror the genuine relationship.
Space is drastically more inimical to routine travel and not remotely as productive for commerical travel.
Unspoken contention that all markets are practically uniform to application of commerce is a myth of capitalism.
]
According to a report by the Space Transportation Association & NASA itself, more than half the American
public would travel to space, technology & cost permitting. There are dozens of entrepreneurs eagerly
awaiting the opportunity to merge space & private enterprise.
[ Capitalism's Tom Swift myth: all problems of technology &
cost can be practically solved by application of eager entrepeneurs. Space perils make clear how puny that
solution's use is. ]
Recently space hero Buzz Aldrin announced plans for a floating hotel that would shuttle between the earth &
moon. In his testimony, Hudgins pointed to several other private companies willing & anxious to squeeze profit
from space, incl such projects as space "cruises," exploration of alternative energy sources, and less expensive,
out & back thrill trips to the tip of the atmosphere.
The Space Transportation Association estimates that a "ticket" to space could cost as little as $10,000 in the
decades to come, a cost reasonable enough to bring in a half-million "tourists."
[ Enron forever put a stake through the heart of reliance on wishful
industry projections. ]
Americans fail to see the consumer potential for space because space has for too long been under NASA's
jurisdiction tucked far away from any commercial endeavors. NASA is a federal agency, subject to the same
bureaucratic waste, turf protection, and inefficiency that plagues other govt agencies.
[ Capitalist myth of market efficiency. "Bulworth" spoke empirical
truth: however flawed, govt delivers for 3¢ administrative cost what industry delivers at 21¢ cost.
]
Space shuttle contractors
2.3.03 M.Norris & H.Berkes NPR
growing NASA reliance on contractors for work once performed by govt employees,
who spend
92% of NASA's $3 billion space shuttle budget and employ more than 80% of the people who work at the
Johnson & Kennedy Space Ctrs.
What we learned after Challenger: schedule pressure caused both NASA & contract
managers to ignore or overlook evidence that Challenger shouldn't be launched.
|
It isn't religious zealotry or mysticism or an aversion to learning that's holding back our society's potential for
discovery, it's overgrown bureaucracy.
[ That bureaucracy having resulted most from direct nurture of
hypocritical religious zealotry & mysticism of capitalism as proselytized by NatSec corporate welfare for most
of the past century ]
Yes, NASA took us to the moon. But the "moon race" was spurred in part by Cold War competition from the
Soviets. There's also no evidence to suggest that private firms couldn't have gotten us there sooner.
[ Capitalist myth of more sooner = increased efficiency hence
superior. Stewardship abides w/ patience; speculation damns the hindmost and squanders tomorrow for immediate
but illusory gain. ]
Now that the Cold War is over, NASA has little competitive incentive for innovation.
[ False unsupported claim ]
Faced with competing budget priorities, a war on terrorism & an economic recession, to name two, it could be
a long while before NASA finds the public funding (or interest) it thinks it needs to accomplish its missions.
But that's no reason to hold back our pursuit of knowledge & discovery. Better to free up space to the
profiteers & businessmen than to wait for rejuvenated public interest, or for another president who might will
us to our generation's moon mission. Americans will regain interest in space when enterprising capitalists find ways
to bring space to Americans.
But for that to happen, NASA needs to evolve radically or simply step aside.
[ Money does not make the world go around. Interplay between
inertia, gravity and cosmic currents of particles & electromagnetic waves appear to do that, although no one is
certain how or why.
Motive energy of currency is a euphemism, which is the maximum validity of laissez faire claptrap from the
Victorian era now a century old. Greed is NOT good. Capitalism is a religion, not a science or even sound logic
validated by empirical test. Self interest must be enlightened to the point of its extinction before safe strategic
stewardship can surplant expedient tactical speculation.
NASA engineers & corporate technicians told Morton Thiokol & U.S. Govt the Challenger's o-rings were not
reliable. For speaking truth, they were removed from decision making processes.
Not until post Challenger shuttle management was relegated to corporate welfare for munitions makers in an illegal
albeit sanctioned "trust" or cartel named United Space Alliance did profit motive once more kill expensive, highly
trained personnel & destroy irreplacable transport vehicles.
The frontier of space is far too critical for mankind's future to squander it on behalf of industry revenue
enhancement. Industry has repeatedly demonstrated it is not capable of self regulation, or even safely executing
average missions.
Do you want to fly in spacecraft managed by Enron? ]
NASA's debris experts been working on foam issue for years
2.3.03 John Kelly Florida Today ¹
Houston From tiny fragments to large chunks, NASA has known for years that pieces of the foam
insulating its external tank would break off and sometimes strike the bottom of the orbiter during its climb to orbit.
A 1997 report by NASA engineer Greg Katnik, who monitors problems with ice & debris during shuttle
launches at Kennedy Space Center, described a launch in which more than 300 tiles were damaged by the falling
spray-on foam material.
Katnik's report was part of an ongoing process of studying the issue. NASA has in recent years made slight
adjustments in how it prepares the tank for launch to try to minimize the so-called "shedding" of foam. On the
particular 1997 launch Katnik was studying, more than 100 of the dents were larger than an inch. Some were more
like scrapes, measuring as long as 15 inches.
"Foam cause damage to a ceramic tile!" Katnik said w/ questioning tone in a tile investigation status report which
appeared in a NASA newsletter-like Web site. "That seems unlikely. However, when that foam is combined with a
flight velocity between speeds of MACH two to MACH four, it becomes a projectile with incredible damage
potential.
The big question?: At what phase of the flight did it happen and what changes need to be made to correct this for
future missions?"
The foam has now become one focus of the investigation into the loss of Columbia, which burned up during reentry
through the Earth's atmosphere on Saturday morning. When it launched 1.16.03, a large chunk of debris fell from
the tank and struck the under side of the orbiter. A video obtained by Florida Today shows a flash of light upon
impact.
"Everyone has leaped to the conclusion that was the cause," Associate NASA administrator Bill Readdy said at a
news conference today. "I' m not ready to say that
that is certainly the leading candidate right now. But we
have to rule things out."
Shuttle program manager Ron Dittemore has said that the impact, which NASA believed at the time to be
"inconsequential," could have damaged the tiles that protect the orbiter from the heat of reentry. Dittemore said the
shuttle transmitted data in its final moments showing spiking temperatures near the left wing where the tile damage
occurred on launch day.
The mission that Katnik was studying was STS-87, a science mission aboard the shuttle Columbia. All of the
shuttles have sustained tile damage during launch and while enduring the rigors of flying in space & back
through the atmosphere to get home. Tiles on the under side of the orbiter are very fragile & susceptible to
damage, esp. from objects moving at very high speeds.
Columbia's had particular trouble with its tiles, incl losing hundreds of them during its delivery from the
manufacturer to Kennedy Space Ctr aboard a modified 747 in preparation for its inaugural 1981 flight.
About 3 hours before every launch, a crew clad in orange jump suits walks up & down the entire length of the
shuttle launch tower. They're looking mostly for ice, which tends to form on the outside of the big orange external
tank because of the supercold liquid hydrogen & oxygen stored inside. They're also looking for anything else
that could be considered dangerous foreign object debris, or FOD in NASA's acronym-heavy lingo.
The damage on that particular Columbia mission was not normal, Katnik said in his report. One suspected reason
for the change in damage, according to reports by Katnik & outside organizations that helped Kennedy Space
Ctr study the issue, is NASA changed the way it "foamed" the external tank sometime shortly before that mission in
an effort to be more environmentally friendly by reducing the use of ozone-depleting materials.
"Freon was used in the production of the previous foam," he reported. "This method was eliminated in favor of foam
that did not require freon for its production. MSFC is investigating the consideration that some characteristics of the
new foam may not be known for the ascent environment."
Dittemore said the agency has been studying the shedding issue for years and has made improvements in
processes. One of them includes basically sanding the material on the outside of the orbiter to reduce the rough
part of the surface that is more likely to flake off during launch. Usually, the pieces in question are tiny. But with the
shuttle orbiter, NASA has long said even the tiniest piece of debris can become a potential disaster on launch.
NASA enlisted the help of Dryden Flight Research Ctr, U.S. Air Force and the SW Research Institute in recent
years to study the foam debris issue. Those investigators used pictures, telemetry data transmitted from the orbiter,
radar coverage during launch, aerodynamic modeling, lab analysis and other tools, according to the govt reports.
"At this point, virtually every inch of the orbiter was inspected and all hits were documented & mapped to aid in
visualizing the damage," Katnik reported. "Maps were constructed of the lower surface, the left & right
surfaces and the top surface of the orbiter. At this point, a "fault tree" was created."
Katnik did not return telephone calls seeking comment on his report. The theories he espoused in his summary
report, according to the NASA documents, included:
Shrinkage of the gigantic tank during the loading of the liquid hydrogen, at 400-plus degrees below
zero, and oxygen, at almost 300 degrees below zero. Katnik wrote, "These extreme temperatures cause the
external tank to shrink up to six (6) linear inches while it is on the pad prior to launch. Even though this may not
seem much when compared to the circumference of the external tank, six inches of shrinkage is significant."
Environmentally-friendly material.
The report said Marshall Space Flight Center was assigned to research whether the new freon-free process had
previously unknown weaknesses that made it a bad choice for shuttle launch conditions. It's not immediately known
whether the material was changed back to the previous version after that or not.
The new material, according to the report, was also used on the previous mission, STS-86, which also had a higher
than normal level of tile damage. However, that was deemed an anomaly at the time and, because it was a night
launch, NASA did not have photographs good enough to study what was going on in the space between the tank
& orbiter during that ascent, the report said.
Aerodynamics of a new roll maneuver called "heads up," which had not been completed
before.
Primer that bonds the foam to the metal tank did not hold, but that theory was dismissed early on
because the areas of damage, which were described as "divots" in the report, were not deep enough to expose that
primer.
A Dryden Flight Research Ctr report tested the new foam using a special aircraft. "Initial results of the flight
tests at Dryden, which were designed to replicate the pressure environment the shuttle encounters in the first 65
seconds after launch, indicate the new foam survived the tests in perfect shape, with no evidence of flaking or
erosion found," according to a Dryden press release issued at the time to tout its assistance to the shuttle
program.
According to the release, "Dryden research pilot Dana Purifoy flew the F-15B through a series of side-to-side yaw
maneuvers beginning at 7,300 feet altitude. He then increased speed & altitude in a stair-step approach,
finally zooming up to 61,000 feet at speeds of up to Mach 1.5 (1.5 times the speed of sound) before descending for
landing."
"It was important that the F-15B could match part of our (shuttle launch) profile, and it does a fantastic job of doing
that," said Lockheed-Martin Michoud Space Systems aerodynamicist Roy Steinbock, staff engineer on the
experiment, according to comments reprinted in the center's press summary at the time. "Our main goal was to try
to match the dynamic pressure history (that the external tank encounters during a shuttle launch).
The Dryden F-15B can match the high-altitude, low-pressure environment that the shuttle encounters, and can test
a multitude of Mach numbers in (one) flight. That's something we cannot do anywhere else; we can't replicate that
in a wind tunnel."
U.S. Air Force issued a separate 3.19.99 press release detailing its role in ongoing evaluations of the foam
problem.
The report said foam is a "concern because it causes tile replacement costs to significantly increase,
however, it is not a flight safety issue." Dittemore made a similar point on Sunday, saying that the ongoing
problems with tile damage, incl one flight where the "popcorning" external tank foam damaged more tiles than
normal, was a cost & processing issue.
He said that while the damage to the tiles never appeared to pose a threat to the orbiter, it did take a lot of time
& money to replace the tiles. There are more than 20,000 of the insulating pieces under the orbiter.
In the Air Force release, its Materiel Command reported assisting NASA with supersonic tunnel tests on panels of
the shuttle external tanks, which helped match some of the conditions of launch. As of the time of that release, the
Air Force said NASA's efforts so far to discover the cause of the foam shedding were unsuccessful. The report said
that the Air Force also was unable to replicate the damage being seen during flight in its tests in the supersonic
tunnel. The report said the Air Force generated plentiful data for NASA to look over about the stresses on the
material from heat, vibration, pressure and other forces being applied during launch.
|
bailout
"
As sports become ever more extreme & expensive, surely the next millennium will find the spaceways
filled not with govt employees but rather daredevils
"
5.3.65 article description
of Vostok is recounted with the comment that the spherical capsule was the great surprise: "Gagarin traveled like
Baron Munchhausen - on a cannon ball!"
Can you survive in space without a spacesuit?
The sci-fi movie "Sunshine" gets it almost right.
8.1.07 Morgan Smith Slate
In the new sci-fi film Sunshine, an astronaut named Mace must leave his spacecraft without a protective suit. He makes it through his exposure with only a case of frostbite. Could you really survive outer space without a suit?
Yes, for a very short time.
The principle functions of a spacesuit are to create a pressurized, oxygenated atmosphere for astronauts, and to protect them from ultraviolet rays and extreme temperatures. Without it, a spacewalker would asphyxiate from the lack of breathable air and suffer from ebullism, in which a reduction in pressure causes the boiling point of bodily fluids to decrease below the body's normal temperature. Since it takes a bit of time for these things to kill you, it's possible to make it through a very quick stint in outer space.
At most, an astronaut without a suit would last about 15 seconds before losing conciousness from lack of oxygen. (That's how long it would take the body to use up the oxygen left in the blood.) Of course, on Earth, you could hold your breath for several minutes without passing out. But that's not going to help in a vacuum.
In fact, attempting to hold your breath is a sure way to a quick death. To make it for even a few seconds, Sunshine's Mace must have expelled the air from his lungs before he ventured into the starry void. If he hadn't, the vacuum would have caused that oxygen to expand and rupture his lung tissue, forcing fatal air bubbles into his blood vessels, and ultimately his heart and brain.
Scuba divers are also at risk for air embolism; they're instructed not to hold their breath as they ascend from the deep sea.
An astronaut who fell unconscious from lack of oxygen would last for a few minutes more before dying from asphyxiation or the effects of the pressure reduction. Ebullism would result in the formation of bubbles in the moisture found in the eyes, mouth, and skin tissue.
One NASA test subject who survived a 1965 accident in which he was exposed to near-vacuum conditions felt the saliva on his tongue begin to boil before he lost consciousness after 14 seconds.
In the movie, Mace takes the precaution of wrapping himself in insulation torn from the walls of the spacecraft he's leaving. This might provide some protection against temperatures in space that can run from minus-200 to 200 degrees Fahrenheit.
It might also ward off ultraviolet-related skin damage during a short jump through space.
What about the frostbite? That's actually the least plausible result of Sunshine's suitless spacewalk. The cold wouldn't cause Mace too much harm in just 15 seconds, even if he encountered the very lowest temperatures in space. That's because heat leaves the body very slowly in a vacuum.
The more likely damage would be a "space hickey", caused from the swelling and bursting of the skin's small blood vessels—which would look more like the effects of freeze-drying a wart than a case of frostbite.

Space camp falls from orbit & into foreclosure
Kids say they're more interested in Earthbound pursuits. 9.11.01 also affected attendance
at Florida facility.
9.25.02 John-Thor Dahlburg L.A.Times
Titusville, FL Here on a school field trip, Grace Wilkowski trooped past cases of memorabilia from
the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo missions, and etched acrylic likenesses of the astronauts who were heroes to a
generation of Americans. Space, remarked the Georgia teen, seems so passe. "With the problems we have on
Earth, space exploration isn't now our top priority," said the Savannah 14-year-old who wants to become a
physician. "It's OK to do some preliminary exploration & stuff, but we need to be able to figure out how to
better survive on Earth together."
That attitude, in a nutshell, may explain the woes of U.S. Space Camp Florida, a privately run training ground for
young would-be astronauts outside the gates of Kennedy Space Ctr. Dropping attendance & related financial
problems have forced the facility and the adjacent U.S. Astronaut Hall of Fame into foreclosure, and barring
eleventh-hour intervention of an angel investor, the attractions will be auctioned off at a Florida courthouse today. A
related space camp in Mountain View, Calif., went belly up in January.
¹
One week this month, the Florida camp graduated only 14 children, though it has room for 276. September is
normally a slack time, said camp & hall of fame dir. Mary Merritt, but she acknowledged that enrollment has
been falling for more than a year. Once such a national passion that astronaut John Glenn, who in Feb. 1962
became the first American to orbit the Earth, needed 6 people to help answer his fan mail, interest in space has
been dwindling among adults & children alike for years, said Bowling Green State Univ. OH popular culture
prof. Jeff Brown. "As a society," he said, "we've shifted our focus from outer space to computer space."
Then came 9.11.01. "Cops & firemen have always been something we valued, but now the real heroism of
their work is evident," Brown added. "I've heard some little girls say they now want to grow up not to be a high-
fashion model, but a policewoman." America's first woman in space, Sally K. Ride, said she finds that while many
young people don't know much about the history of the space program, they are still fascinated by outer
space.
"They are absolutely enthralled by astronauts, by space exploration, by being weightless in space, by looking back
at Earth," said UCSD physics prof. Ride. "It's amazing to me how many of them yearn to be in the space program."
Space, Ride said, remains a remarkably effective hook to grab & keep children's attention. The accompanying
message to America's girls from an educational co. that Ride has founded, Imaginary Lines Inc., is that "it's
fascinating, cool, OK" to be interested in math, science and engineering, she said.
If Space Camp felt shock of 9.11.01, Merritt said, it's chiefly because families became much more reluctant to allow
sons & daughters to fly unaccompanied on airliners to attend. An economic downturn already underway also
thinned the ranks of parents willing or able to spend up to $799 in peak season on a 5 day virtual cosmic
experience for their child. "Our enrollment has declined, esp. after 9.11.01, but our organization has not done a
good job in marketing itself," Merritt said. "I think children are still interested in space and dream of being
astronauts."
Space Camp traces its genesis to German-born rocket scientist Werner Von Braun, who believed youngsters could
be lured into studying the sciences by being exposed to excitement & romance of space travel. The first camp
opened in Huntsville, AL in 1982 and was so successful that the Florida installation opened in 1988. Other camps
sprang up from Japan to California. Campers clad in sky-blue flight suits are spun here in centrifuges, don
harnesses that let them walk in simulated lunar gravity, and work on a "zero-G wall" where pulleys and harnesses
duplicate the weightlessness of space. There are simulated space shuttle missions, with teams working inside
realistic mock-ups of the spacecraft & mission control center.
The Florida camp alone claims to have introduced more than 50,000 children to the rudiments of imitation
spaceflight, incl 1993 seventh-grader Lance Bass, who, as member of the pop group 'N Sync, tried to join a three-
man Russian crew blasting off next month to the Intl Space Station. Bass, now 23, was bumped from 10.28.02
Soyuz launch and replaced by a cargo container when he didn't pay the $20-million fee demanded by the
Russians, but he was reported this week to be at Russia's cosmonaut ctr outside Moscow beginning another
training program.
In the 1990s, the Florida facility, joint venture of the Astronaut Scholarship Foundation and the Space Camp
Foundation, saddled itself with $10 million in debt to fund construction of a dormitory and an expanded hall of fame.
SouthTrustBank of Birmingham, AL, which holds the mortgage on the properties here, postponed the sell-off once
as it negotiated with a potential buyer, but the auction is now supposed to go ahead. .
"I'm getting a little bit worried," Brenda McMillan, marketing representative for the camp and hall of fame, said
Tuesday. "I'd like to have a white knight come in and save us. I have my fingers crossed." For 12 years, Keith
Sterner, 35, has worked at the attractions here. One recent morning, as he showed a visitor around exhibits in the hall of fame also being toured by the students from Savannah, the guide couldn't hide his gee-whiz reactions.
There was Virgil I. "Gus" Grissom's silver pressure suit, he marveled, and Wally Schirra's cramped Sigma 7
Mercury capsule, and the singed Apollo 14 Command Module, "Kitty Hawk," that flew to the moon and back in
1971.
Sterner hopes something with sufficient "glamour & glitz," like a manned mission to Mars, comes along soon to awaken in others the same youthful passion for space travel he felt as a child. Space Camp, he firmly believes, fulfills a need. "One kid who came here told us this is the first place he'd ever been where it was cool to be smart," Sterner said.
Intl space crew retrievable
2.1.03 AP
Even with its shuttles grounded, NASA can easily retrieve the astronauts aboard the international space station
using Russian vehicles. A Soyuz vehicle attached to the space station could bring the 3 astronauts onboard back to Earth at a moment's notice.
But if the space agency's remaining shuttles are out of service for an extended period in the wake of Saturday's
catastrophe, as seems likely, it could prove difficult to maintain the station's operations. "This is clearly a big
setback for station because during the rest of this year shuttles were supposed to carry up lots of big pieces of
hardware for assembly,'' said George Washington Univ. Space Policy Institute dir. John Logsdon.
NASA plans call for expanding the space station during 5 shuttle flights this year. Next scheduled flight's 3.1.03
launch by shuttle Atlantis has orders to deliver supplies & scientific equipt. Subsequent missions this year call for installing a framework of external trusses & solar arrays.
With Russia's ability to launch supply vehicles to the intl station already compromised by budget problems, the loss of U.S. space shuttle Columbia could seriously jeopardize the continued operation of the outpost.
With no permanent crew aboard, the space station can operate in a "dormant'' mode as long as occasional
maintenance is performed by visiting astronauts. NASA had already been considering a "demanning''
contingency for 2003 before Saturday's events.
But the longer the station went unoccupied, the greater the chances that it would deteriorate to an uninhabitable
state. A dormant period would also cause a significant interruption in the station's continuing assembly &
scientific research program.
Expedition 6, as the current crew is called, arrived at the station in November and is scheduled to return to in
March. The crew consists of NASA astronauts Ken Bowersox & Don Pettit and Russian Soyuz commander
Nikolai Budarin.
Shuttle Columbia did not visit the space station. The crews of the 2 spacecraft did speak by telephone 1.28.03,
Challenger disaster anniversary. An unmanned supply vessel was to be launched Sunday from Russia's Baikonur
Cosmodrome. It was scheduled to arrive at the orbiting station Tuesday.
Apollo moon experiment still working
7.20.99 David Whitehouse BBC
An experiment left on the lunar surface 30 years ago by the Apollo 11 moonwalkers still continues to return
valuable data about our satellite. Pulses of laser light fired from the Earth are reflected by the lunar laser ranging
reflector. The idea was to determine the round-trip travel time of a laser pulse from the Earth to the Moon and back again, thereby calculating the distance between the 2 with incredible accuracy.
The data gathered has shown us that the Moon is receding from the Earth at about 3.8cm (1.5" every year. It has
also measured minute changes in the shape of the Earth as landmasses gradually change after being compressed by the great weight of the glaciers in the last Ice Age.
Unlike the other scientific experiments left on the Moon, the reflector requires no power and is still functioning
perfectly. The reflector consists of a mosaic of 100 glass half cubes, all together about the size of an average tv
screen. They are called corner cubes and reflect a beam of light directly back towards its point of origin. 3 decades on, the McDonald Observatory Laser Ranging Station near Ft Davis, TX regularly sends a laser beam through an optical telescope to try to hit one of the reflectors.
They are far too small to be seen from Earth. Even when the beam is correctly aligned in the telescope, actually
hitting a lunar reflector is quite challenging. At the Moon's surface the laser beam is a little over 1.5km wide. The
reflected light is too weak to be seen with the human eye. Thanks to the equipt, scientists know the average
distance between the centres of the Earth & the Moon is 385,000km (239,000 miles). This level of accuracy represents one of the most precise distance measurements ever made and is equivalent to determining the distance between London & Moscow to within a quarter millimetre (0.01").
- Earth has a magnetic field that forms a bubble around the planet called a magnetosphere which deflects solar wind gusts. Mars does not have a protective magnetosphere and consequently lost much atmosphere as a result of solar wind erosion.
- Interplanetary Magnetic Field NASA
|
New co. sets goal of settling Mars
9.16.05 Brian Bergstein AP
All companies set goals, but newly formed 4Frontiers Corp. is eyeing some expansive horizons. The company's mission: to open a small human settlement on Mars within 20 years or so. The company's initial plans are a lot more terrestrial than ethereal, like developing a 25,000 sq ft replica of a Mars settlement here on Earth, then charging tourists admission.
But the people behind the venture are quite serious, as serious as the $25 million they want to raise from investors. CEO Mark Homnick, a former manager for Intel Corp. who has registered 4Frontiers in Florida, says he has already raised "a couple million" from people he won't name. He hopes for an initial public offering within 5 years.
That still leaves a lot of questions: Why should people live on Mars? And if it's going to be done, should a private enterprise engage in what would be one of humanity's defining moments? Besides, what's in it for investors?
Homnick and his co-founders, longtime Mars aficionado named Bruce Mackenzie and a 25-year-old MIT master's student, Joseph Palaia, are ready with several answers. irst, they contend, humankind needs a new frontier to explore, with all the intellectual and engineering challenges that homesteading Mars would present.
Also, who knows the fate of our humble Earth? Will we meet an early end at the hands of an asteroid, warfare, disease or some other catastrophe? In that case, we'd sure be glad civilization had been preserved by some colonists on Mars, and perhaps elsewhere in the galaxy, if all goes well on the Red Planet. That broader vision of space settlement gives 4Frontiers its name: the frontiers being the Earth, the moon, Mars and the asteroids.
"It's the nature of life, life tries to expand and tries to adapt," Mackenzie says. "If there's a forest fire in one valley, then all of the organisms in the next valley will slowly creep over the ridge and repopulate that valley. Any species that don't do it eventually die out." Going to space, he believes, is as if "all of earth's life, acting together, is trying to get into the next valley. And the only way we can do it is by building rockets."
Mackenzie, a software developer, has devoted much of his energy to a nonprofit group called the Mars Foundation, which aims to advance knowledge about how to colonize the planet. But he decided a private venture like 4Frontiers also would be necessary, to drive things forward. Although President Bush has called for a manned mission to Mars, Mackenzie believes big bureaucracies might never get the job done right.
"It's better to have lots of groups out there, all trying things," Mackenzie says.
Space tourism is on the verge of becoming big business. Space Adventures Ltd. of Arlington, Va., has brokered $20 million trips for the wealthy on Russian rockets and is taking deposits for $100 million fly-bys of the far side of the moon. For a lot less money, you can sign up for a quick blast into zero gravity. But in comparison, 4Frontiers' ultimate goal of an extended stay on Mars would be off-the-charts extreme.
It would take months to get there. Once there, you couldn't kick off your shoes and dig your toes into the sand. Life would transpire in an enclosed space with pumped-in air (unless Martian settlers could pull off the even more speculative feat of "terraforming" the planet by changing its toxic atmosphere.) Venturing outside would require sealed suits.
To begin, 4Frontiers plans to gather patents and engineering ideas that would enable a small crew to land on Mars with home-building materials and the manufacturing capability to keep adding on. The hot topics would include ways to miniaturize key industrial processes, like making plastic or steel, and methods for exploiting Martian resources, such as the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, iron in the dirt or the water bound up in Martian ice.
As the company gains expertise, it expects to sell consulting services to aerospace companies or NASA. It envisions getting work designing Mars sets for movies and Mars rides for amusement parks. Meanwhile, it plans to construct a mock-up of its Mars home and begin selling tickets to it by 2007. Potential sites in Colorado, Florida and New Mexico are being considered.
The company's business plan estimates these varied projects would bring in $34 million in revenue in 2010, including $7 million in gate receipts at the tourist site. Profits before taxes, depreciation and amortization are forecast at $1.4 million as early as next year, and $29.7 million in 2010.
Even if that flies, then what? A $34 million company probably isn't in a great position to begin launching rockets.
Homnick says 4Frontiers would probably "stay incremental" through the early 2010s, perhaps getting involved in robotic surveys of Mars or asteroid mining. However, projects like that, and perhaps even settling Mars, might require some clarity in space law.
The 1967 Outer Space Treaty declared that the "exploration and use" of outer space and celestial bodies "shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interest of all countries." While that's not exactly the traditional language of private enterprise, some space scholars say it leaves room for commercial projects. A 1979 Moon Treaty was more explicit, holding that bodies in the solar system should not become the property of any nation, organization or person. But most countries, including the United States, China and Russia, never ratified it.
Considering all the possible complications, Mackenzie says 4Frontiers' real success might come simply from getting the public pumped about living on Mars. In turn, that could make Washington eager to fund a settlement. Even if that doesn't happen, he is sure that people eventually will live on Mars, and perhaps scores of other places in space.
"It's a question of when," he says. "I really hope we get started before we have an economic decline that delays it. I'd really hate to have something like the Great Depression, or the Dark Ages that lasted several hundred years, delay getting into space."
correct national policy, wrong technology solution
NASA prepares for nuclear-powered leap to Mars
1.18.03 Chris Ayres Times (London)
¹
²
³
Los Angeles President GWBush is to authorise NASA to develop a hugely expensive nuclear-
powered spacecraft that would take just 2 months to reach Mars. The spacecraft used a small nuclear generator for
power; scientists have speculated that it would be capable of travelling at up to 54,000mph, 3x the speed of
conventional craft, although NASA officials said yesterday that this was still theoretical.
The generator would not power the craft's initial take-off, this would still require conventional rockets, but would be
switched on after it left the Earth's atmosphere. As well as providing electricity for propulsion, the generator would
power on-board scientific experiments and communications with Houston.
Development of space-based nuclear power is unlikely to please other nations who fear U.S. will use the
project, unofficially named Prometheus, mythological Greek figure who stole fire from the gods, for
military purposes. China is the most likely to retaliate with
its own space-based nuclear pgm, prompting comparisons with the the US & Soviet Union Cold War
space race .
Scientists are excited about the prospect of nuclear- powered space travel. It could lead not only to human
missions to Mars but also to the construction of a permanent lunar base and exploration of Jupiter's icy satellite,
Europa. It would also allow an unmanned craft to be sent beyond the Earth's solar system, in a mission that could
last for more than a decade.
NASA also hopes that the ambitious project will inspire American schoolchildren to take a greater interest
in science & technology. U.S. is already beginning to suffer from a shortage of young engineers.
Project Prometheus will involve dusting off a pgm that many regarded as a relic of the Cold War. It was
last backed by President Bush Sr more than a decade ago, before the first Gulf War. It was dropped after
opposition from Congress and a lack of public interest.
It is not clear how the American public will react this time, esp. given U.S. recession and est. $200 billion cost of
going to war with Iraq. However state of the economy has not always been a factor in big NASA space projects.
Analysts have pointed out that President Nixon started the Space Shuttle pgm during a recession.
With this in mind, NASA is thought to be pushing for a significant increase in funding for Project
Prometheus, which has already been allocated $1 billion funding for next 5 years. Speculation that the
President will make an announcement on NASA funding during his State of the Union address to the
American people 1.28.03 was being played down yesterday.
"We're talking about doing something on a very aggressive schedule to not only develop the capability for nuclear
propulsion & power generation but to have a mission using the new technology within this decade," said
NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe.
The move is a significant shift in strategy for NASA, which, since the end of the space race, has been
forced to request funding on a mission-by-mission basis. Now it wants the freedom to develop so-called
"enabling technologies" that could be put to any number of future uses.
"The laws of physics are the only things controlling how fast we go anywhere, what we do and
whether we can survive the experience," Mr O'Keefe said. "So until we beat the technical limitations,
you basically end up arguing about fantasy missions. We've been restricted to the same speed for 40
years. With the new technology, where we go next will only be limited by our imaginations."
Nuclear-powered spacecraft have long been seen as the only serious way to give manned spacecraft enough
power to explore beyond the Moon. Existing spacecraft use the momentum of the launch to simply "coast" through
space. Even before that, however, U.S had spent billions trying to build a space-based nuclear reactor; several
prototypes had been tested in Nevada desert. One reactor was launched in 1965, operated for only 43 days and
remains in orbit to this day. The nuclear project was eventually discontinued.
There are still concerns over the safety of using a nuclear-powered craft in space. The protection of
astronauts would have to be improved, for example. Astronauts return from space with a 30%
decrease in muscle mass and a 10% loss of bone mass. Radiation in a spacecraft is equivalent to
8 chest X-rays every day.
NASA watchdog calls Columbia decisions 'shocking'
8.7.03 Reuters
Cape Canaveral FL NASA made "shocking" & "disappointing" mistakes before & during
the doomed Columbia flight, the watchdog picked by the space agency to monitor its return to flight said on
Thursday. Former astronaut Richard Covey, pilot of first shuttle flight to follow Challenger accident of 17
years ago, is task group co-chair tapped by NASA to oversee reforms expected after another panel
completes its investigation of 2.1.03 Columbia crash and turns over its findings to Congress later this
month.
Covey told reporters at Kennedy Space Ctr he was not necessarily surprised that NASA suffered a second
shuttle disaster, since "space flight is risky business and it will remain risky business." But he said he was
disappointed there were so many management mistakes similar to those that preceded Challenger.
"Shocking? Yeah. Disappointing? Particularly when
it has similarities to the Challenger accident,"
Covey said. Following Challenger crash, investigation board tagged NASA with term "go fever",
a malady that led managers to ignore or minimize risk in order to meet an ambitious launch
schedule.
In Columbia's wake, investigators have said NASA ignored the potential danger of foam shedding from the
shuttle's external fuel tank during liftoff, then managers failed to get imagery from spy satellites
that could have assessed the injury to the shuttle's left wing from a foam impact 81 seconds after
liftoff.
Columbia crew of 7 were lost over Texas when the wing failed at about 21 times the speed of sound. Covey
said his 27-member task group, co-chaired w/ retired astronaut Tom Stafford, may never adequately
address the so-called cultural or managerial issues. Their charter requires them to wrap their work
a month before NASA resumes shuttle flights.
By their nature, such cultural issues, as opposed to purely technical issues, are hard to assess until the
space program is fully operational again. Covey said his board may be restricted to studying plans &
concepts. "But it would not be a complete assessment because the real implementation may take longer,"
he said.
That next launch is tentatively scheduled for March or April 2004 but could be pushed back months, or
even a year or more, depending on how many problems are uncovered by separate investigation group
headed by retired Adm. Harold Gehman. Gehman has said that cultural problems at NASA will be given
attention equal to the technical problems.

1986 Challenger explosion last shuttle disaster
2.1.03 CNN
7 crew members took off 1.28.86 aboard space shuttle Challenger from Kennedy Space Ctr FL. 73 seconds later,
the shuttle disintegrated in the sky. All crew members incl NH teacher Christa McAuliffe were killed while millions
watched on live TV. A gas leak in the right booster rocket was blamed for the Challenger blast. In the explosion, the
crew module separated intact from the fireball, went into a 2½ minute free fall from 50,000 ft and plunged into
the sea.
The crew members had no parachutes and no way to jettison the hatch. The public had embraced the crew
members, including McAuliffe; commander Francis R. (Dick) Scobee, pilot Michael J. Smith; specialists Judith A.
Resnik, Ronald E. McNair and Ellison S. Onizuka; payload specialist Gregory B. Jarvis, a Hughes Aircraft Corp.
employee.
McAuliffe was selected from among more than 11,000 teachers who applied for the Challenger mission. She was
chosen by NASA in 1984 and took a leave of absence that fall to train for the mission.
NASA put the shuttle program on hold after the Challenger accident until 1988. The agency has put the odds of a
catastrophic accident during launch, most dangerous part of any shuttle mission, at 1 in 438.
Astronauts honor Challenger victims
1.28.03 AP
Cape Canaveral Space shuttle Columbia's astronauts joined Mission Control in a moment of
silence Tuesday at the exact time 17 years ago that Challenger exploded in the sky. NASA's work force, in
orbit & on Earth, remembered not only the 7 astronauts who died 1.28.86, but also the 3 killed by fire 1.27.67
in Apollo spacecraft. At the launch site Tuesday, flags flew at half staff for the second day in a row.
The 2 tragedies, separated by 19 years & a single day, represent the space agency's darkest hours.
"It is today that we remember & honor the crews of Apollo 11 & Challenger. They made the ultimate
sacrifice, giving their lives in service to their country and for all mankind. "Their dedication and devotion to the
exploration of space was an inspiration to each of us and still motivates people around the world to achieve great
things and service to others.'' Columbia commander Rick Husband radioed a few minutes before the airwaves went
silent.
Columbia round-the-clock laboratory research mission, featuring more than 80 experiments
Last
week, NASA announced it will hire 3 to 6 teachers for its next astronaut class. McAuliffe's backup, Barbara Morgan, will be on Columbia's next flight, to the intl space station Nov. 2003. She quit her Idaho teaching job in 1998 to become a full-fledged astronaut.
Astronauts experiment with balls of flame
1.23.03 AP
Cape Canaveral Space shuttle Columbia's astronauts created tiny, weak balls of flame Thursday in an experiment that could lead to better car engines. They ignited hydrogen & methane fuel inside a sealed
chamber, and set records for weakest flame & leanest mixture ever burned in space or on Earth, said UCLA lead scientist Paul Ronney.
The 3/8" dia. flames were too weak to be seen by the naked eye and had to be magnified through a video camera. To get the astronauts in the mood, Mission Control piped up a recording of ``Burning Down the House'' by the Talking Heads.
On Wednesday, the astronauts burned a flame that produced just one-half of one watt of thermal power, Ronney
said. A birthday candle, by comparison, is about 50 watts. Then on Thursday, one week into Columbia's 16-day
research mission, one of the flames consisted of an 8 mixture of fuel & air, Ronney said. The leanest
mixture that can be burned in a car engine is about 70%. One flame ball burned for about 20 minutes aboard
Columbia, also believed to be record, Ronney said. A similar fire experiment flew on Columbia in 1997.
By going to space and getting rid of gravity, scientists can get weak flames to burn longer and thus yield data of
use to the auto industry. The goal is to design car engines that can burn fuel more efficiently and produce less
pollution.
Shuttle had more than 80 experiments
2.1.03 Sharon L. Crenson AP
Columbia's 16-day mission featured more than 80 experiments ranging from the effects of space travel on
astronauts to the possibility of creating a new perfume. "Folks on the ground were just ecstatic with the amount of
science that they were reaping,'' said space shuttle pgm manager Ron Dittemore. "Some of it will be their legacy.''
Some research results were lost forever when the shuttle disintegrated over Texas, others were downloaded to
Earth earlier.
Spiders, flowers, cancer cells, ants, carpenter bees, fish embryos, silkworms and rats were all on board. "I hope
they can salvage something,'' said Univ. of Nebraska biochemist Hideaki Moriyama who supplied vials of proteins
to the flight in hopes of finding clues to diseases like HIV-AIDS, Huntington's and Alzheimer's. "It took more than 4
years to prepare those experiments,'' Moriyama said.
USC aerospace engineer Mohamed Abid had a combustion experiment on board. He saw video of his tiny fireballs ping-ponging around the shuttle's laboratory, a safely isolated area. But Abid said the data, designed to help researchers model combustion in car, airplane and rocket engines, was lost.
In another experiment, shuttle crew members collected samples of their own blood, urine and saliva to detect
possible bone loss, kidney stones, muscle loss or weakening of immune systems.
Columbia was the first
shuttle in 3 years not headed to the intl space station or the Hubble Space Telescope.
Israel Space Agency & Tel Aviv Univ. sponsored a $2 million experiment on board. It involved aiming a pair of
cameras at the Mediterranean and Atlantic in search of huge dust plumes from the Sahara Desert that might affect Earth's climate. Soon after the cameras were positioned, NASA reported receiving remarkable details of the clouds.
Perhaps the most commercially viable experiment on board was sponsored by Intl Flavors & Fragrances Inc.,
which sent a miniature red rose plant with 6 buds and an Asian rice flower with a jasmine scent. Astronauts
extracted & preserved essential oils from the flowers so fragrance experts back home could recreate the
smell. A 1998 space shuttle experiment yielded a new scent incorporated in the perfume Zen, and a body spray
called Impulse.
Northeastern Univ. contributed another kind of experiment to Columbia's last flight. They sent zeolites, a kind of
crystal, into the weightless environment. The center is working on ways to improve zeolite materials for more
efficient storage of hydrogen fuels. A project by 2 Arizona State researchers was to help turn crew member urine
& wastewater into clean water for drinking, cooking and bathing.
Johnson Space Ctr scientific investigator David Warmflash had been expecting to study bacteria cultures brought
back to space Saturday afternoon. One of the experiments Warmflash worked on, examining how well bacteria
grew on rocks in space, was put together by an Israeli graduate student & a Palestinian undergraduate
studying in U.S.
Columbia was NASA's oldest shuttle
2.1.03 AP
Space shuttle Columbia was the oldest in NASA's fleet and the first to enter the Earth's orbit in 1981. Saturday's
voyage was its 28th trip into orbit. Named after a ship that made the first American circumnavigation of the globe in 1792, Columbia flew into orbit in 1981. 4 ships joined the fleet over the next decade;
Challenger in 1982; Discovery in 1983; Atlantis in 1985, and Endeavour, built in 1991 to replace the Challenger
after it exploded in 1986.
The shuttle went by the name OV-102, standing for Orbiter Vehicle. It weighed 178,000 pounds with its main
engines installed. The shuttle had undergone about 50 modifications, incl addition of carbon brakes, improved nose wheel steering and an enhancement of its thermal protection system.
It was last refurbished in 1999. Scientists found 3 cracks last July in Columbia's stainless steel liners used to direct the flow of super-cold hydrogen fuel to the main engines. Similar cracks had been discovered in other ships in the fleet.
Age was not considered a factor in the cracks because they were found in NASA's oldest & newest
shuttles.
Oldest NASA shuttle Columbia made 28 voyages
2.1.03 Reuters
Wash.D.C. Columbia, named after Boston MA based sloop that in 1792 maneuvered past the
dangerous sandbar at the mouth of a river extending more than 1,000 miles/1600 km through what is today
southeast British Columbia, Canada and the Washington-Oregon border,
launched era of reusable space
freighters, replacing expendable rockets used during first 2 decades of manned space flight. Its 1.16.03 16-day
voyage marked NASA's 113th shuttle mission. Columbia was delivered to Kennedy Space Ctr March 1979 and
lifted off for the first time 4.12.81.
The 22-year-old spacecraft underwent more than 100 modifications in Sept. 1999 at Rockwell Intl's Palmdale,
California, assembly plant.The orbiter returned to Kennedy Space Ctr Feb. 1992 after the $70 million tuneup, which
included upgrades to make a longer stay in space possible.
"Columbia is a safer shuttle today than the day it first launched," astronaut John Young, who commanded
Columbia's first space mission, said at the time. "Columbia has gotten better as it has gotten older. It's gone from
test flights to doing things we once never dreamed we could do." Modifications included a new, lighter cockpit that
used less electricity, inspection of more than 200 miles of wire and enhanced heat protection on the craft's
wings.
On Friday, NASA's flight entry director, Leroy Cain, was asked about possible damage or missing tile to the left
wing of the orbiter on lift off. He said the analyzes by NASA engineers had shown any damage to be minor.
Experts warned of safety worries
Age, oversight sparked concerns among range of observers
2.2.03 R.J.Smith, J.Warrick, R.Stein & E.Pianin Wash.Post
Wash.D.C.
warnings by govt auditors & experts who voiced concerns about lapses in oversight and deferred safety improvements for NASA's aging fleet of space shuttles. Although "safety first" was the watchword of shuttle launches, aerospace engineers have repeatedly complained that belt-tightening & shifting priorities were denying Columbia & the 3 other shuttles the necessary upgrades &
improvements.
As recently as last April, the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel chairman Richard Blomberg warned Congress that NASA's management of the shuttle program had drawn "the strongest safety concern the panel has voiced" in 15 years. "I have never been as worried for space shuttle safety as I am right now."
The last lethal shuttle disaster, 17 years ago, provoked calls for revolutionary changes in the program's
management. The agency promised safety would henceforth be put far ahead of all other considerations, incl
budget constraints, users' demands and political pressures. "We will never launch when it is unsafe," then NASA
space flight dir. Fred Gregory promised the House science & space subcommittee 9 months ago.
While none of those who issued warnings pointed specifically to a defect immediately known to be implicated in
yesterday's disaster, they warned repeatedly that safety was losing the battle for scarce NASA funds. The
program's 40% budget decline over the past decade had undermined its ability to guarantee flawless
performances, they said.
NASA's response was mostly to say it disagreed: The problems were not that bad; safety was still the top priority;
and the number of shuttle "anomalies" or defects was dropping fast. "NASA will continue to ensure that an
adequate staff & shuttle workforce" is available to maintain a perfect record, Gregory promised.
But safety experts have long said NASA's claim that safety was improving stemmed from an illusion. The shuttle,
they said, was an aging, balky and delicate space truck that exceeded NASA's own risk limits for manned flight.
Time was not its friend. The ungainly glider was created in the 1970s through a marriage of adventurous design
& well-known technology, and it was considered underfunded from the outset.
By all accounts, the program has never really embraced the past decade's stunning advances in aerospace
engineering & safety testing. After the shuttle Challenger exploded on launch in 1986, for example, numerous safety advisers urged that a crew ejection capsule be added to save lives even in the midst of calamity. "There is a clear need
to develop a plan to address the absence of an escape system by either upgrading the space shuttle or initiating a program with a realistic timetable to replace it," the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel concluded last year.
NASA has studied the problem for years, but the costs of retrofitting such a device kept it from acting. As a result,
Columbia's crew had no choice but to follow the craft's fate as it broke up around the point of reentry into Earth's
atmosphere.
No new shuttle has been in development, and, in fact, many of the most recent safety alarms stemmed from the
agency's recent plan to try to extend the life of the current shuttles by an additional 25 years. Blomberg warned, in
particular, that budget-tightening compelled the shuttle program to spend most of its resources on current
operations while planned improvements, incl some that would "directly reduce flight risk," were deferred or
eliminated.
"The concern is not for the present flight or the next or perhaps the one after that," Blomberg said last April. "One of the roots of my concern is that nobody will know for sure when the safety margin has been eroded too far. Repeated govt & contractor hiring freezes" during the shuttle's operating life "led to a lack of depth of critical skills" that become more troubling as the system ages, Blomberg said.
In implied criticism of Congress & White House, the panel said in its most recent published report that NASA's budgets were "not sufficient to improve or even maintain the safety risk level of operating the space shuttle. Needed restorations & improvements cannot be accomplished under current budgets and spending
priorities."
In mid-2001, 5 of 9 members of the aerospace advisory panel and 2 consultants were asked to step down after
NASA changed its charter and required rotating memberships. They were replaced, but the year "was one of
significant upheaval on the panel," the panel said in a report last March.
The most detailed independent assessment of shuttle safety in recent years, completed March 2000, pointed to
specific problems that analysts yesterday said may have played a role in Columbia's breakup around the time of its reentry into Earth's atmosphere. It called for scrutiny of wiring problems in "difficult-to-inspect regions" of the
Columbia shuttle, in particular, a problem that NASA said it had fixed.
It also said that NASA was not using the latest scientific techniques to find and fix structural cracks & other
consequences of routine aging. The panel said further that NASA was not working hard enough to find & fix
corrosion beneath the tiles that protect the shuttle from intense heat during reentry, and that the agency was not
working hard enough to find a way to probe or study portions of each shuttle's structure, one-tenth, on average,
that are entirely inaccessible.
"The large reduction in NASA quality assurance inspectors for each shuttle is very disturbing," said the panel
chaired by NASA's own Ames Research Ctr dir. Henry McDonald. Some of the safety alarms stemmed from what experts have described as inadequate NASA oversight of those parts of the program that have been privatized. 3 days ago, the General Accounting Office (GAO) described NASA's management of its major contractors as "weak" and "debilitating," and accused the space agency of placing "little emphasis on end results [or] product performance."
The GAO report was the latest in a series by the congressional auditing agency faulting NASA's management of
major programs, incl the shuttle. Weak contract management had been ranked as a "high-risk" problem at NASA
since at least 1990, the report said.
Increased fiscal pressure on NASA is partly the result of steep budget cuts over the past decade. Funding for
NASA & other civilian agencies involved in the space program was slashed by $1 billion in fiscal 2002, while
Defense Dept spending on space programs rose by $600 million, according to a recent study by industry trade
group Aerospace Industries Association "The civil space program that NASA runs has been neglected for a
generation, and as a consequence we find ourselves flying increasingly aged technology," said think tank
Lexington Institute defense industry analyst Loren Thompson.
In 1996, NASA turned over space shuttle flight operations to the United Space Alliance, private firm owned by
Boeing Co. & Lockheed Martin Corp. Under pressure from the Clinton administration & Congress to cut costs, NASA had gradually shifted many responsibilities to the private sector. United Space is now considered the prime contractor for the space shuttle program and manages about a third of the program's budget.
In addition to its role as part of United Space, Bethesda-based Lockheed also provides many crucial functions, incl construction of the external tank that feeds liquid propellant to the shuttle's 3 main engines. It also develops the electronic systems that perform navigation, guidance & flight control for the space program and manages data collection, said spokesman Tom Jurkowsky.
While NASA managers have described their contractor oversight as adequate, NASA's Office of Inspector General disagreed. "The lack of systematic & well-documented contract surveillance is a particular area of concern", the inspector general said in a report last June. In response to such reports, NASA has sometimes sought increased funding, added backup systems and new safety routines, and has taken other steps designed to bolster its already complex procedures for preventing accidents.
But NASA has always acknowledged that the program would never be 100% reliable. After post-Challenger
safety upgrades, NASA estimated there was a 1-in-250 chance of catastrophic failure and fatalities. "The shuttle is a wonderful machine, but it is at that left-hand bar of risk to humans," NASA's aerospace technology office head Sam Venneri said in congressional testimony last year.
GlobalSecurity.org dir. John Pike, longtime critic of the agency's shuttle management, said even this estimate is
speculative. "NASA has been wildly unrealistic about shuttle reliability. If you look back at their reliability estimates,
I think that they basically just made them up," Pike said.
"There's a statistical chance every time you launch that there could be an accident. This is just a very hard thing to do", George Washington Univ. Space Policy Institute dir. John Logsdon said yesterday. "It's only in retrospect that you can say that it wasn't enough. Second-guessing is easy. Hindsight is wonderful."
"What people have done to keep an old system flying is just amazing. But it's an old system. At some point, they
had to expect something to go wrong," said former NASA Mars exploration manager Donna Shirley, now an
University of Oklahoma in Norman aerospace engineering instructor. "It's remarkable that they've kept it going this
long."
National Space Society exec.dir. Brian Chase noted NASA had also struggled with aging support facilities crucial
for maintaining the fleet. "There's definitely been concern about the facilities on the ground," Chase said.
"Everything from rusting pipes to crumbling concrete."
Experts fired after questioning safety
Panel warned NASA pgm was headed for trouble
2.3.03 Wm J. Broad & Carl Hulse NY Times
After an expert NASA panel warned last year that safety troubles loomed for the fleet of shuttles if the space
agency's budget was not increased, NASA removed 5 of its 9 members and 2 consultants. Some of them now say the agency was trying to suppress their criticisms. A sixth member, retired 3 star admiral Bernard
Kauderer, was so upset at the firings that he quit the group, NASA's Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel, a group of
industry & academic experts charged with monitoring safety at the space agency.
NASA says it changed the charter of the group so that new members, younger & more skilled, could be
added. "It had nothing to do with shooting the messenger," said Wash.D.C. NASA HQ spokeswoman Sonja
Alexander.
One of those who found himself pushed off the panel said that was exactly what was going on. "We were telling it
like it was and were disagreeing with some of the agency's actions," said shuttle expert Dr. Seymour Himmel who served on the panel for 2 decades. The eight departed panel members & consultants had long experience with the shuttles' systems and their troubles. In interviews on Sunday, some said NASA had developed an institutional myopia about the panel's warnings, advice and observations, however pointed.
Members of Congress who heard testimony from the panel last spring said Sunday that they would re-examine
whether budget constraints had undermined safety, but several said they doubted it. The Bush administration said it would propose a $470 million increase in NASA spending today, when it presents a federal budget to Congress, and that the increase was planned before the Columbia's destruction.
The panel's most recent report, which came out last March and included analyses by the 6 departed members,
warned that work on long-term shuttle safety "had deteriorated." Tight budgets, it said, were forcing an emphasis
on short-term planning and adding to a backlog of planned improvements. It called for sweeping change.
'planting the seeds' for disaster
"I have never been as worried for space shuttle safety as I am right now," the report's chairman Dr. Richard
Blomberg told Congress in April. "All of my instincts suggest that the current approach is planting the seeds for
future danger."
Even the director of the private consortium that presently manages half of the space shuttle budget had
predicted before the accident that the program was headed for serious trouble. "I am more pessimistic today than I have been in the 17 years I have been doing this," said United Space Alliance dir Michael McCulley at a
Senate hearing in Sept. 2001.
Referring to looming challenges of replacing a wide range of aging shuttle components & support equipt,
McCulley said, "The ice is getting thinner under our feet as we move toward the middle of this lake."
Since he spoke, NASA's space shuttle budget has been increased by more than $100 million. But at the same time, several repairs deemed critical to improving crew safety, such as a redesign of its internal warning sensors and the replacement of a hazardous internal power unit, were deferred by the Bush administration because they cost too much.
Leading members of congressional committees with oversight of the space program promised Sunday that they
would investigate whether the budget policies of the administration and Congress were a factor in the loss of the
shuttle. "A large part of our inquiry will be examining what policies contributed to the loss of the Columbia and what policies should follow the tragedy," said Rep. Sherwood Boehlert R-NY, who heads the House Science Committee.
But he said he believed the agency had been adequately funded. "Have we done the right things? he said. "I think
the answer is yes."
shortchanged by space station
As recently as last week, the General Accounting Office said the space agency was continuing to be challenged by shortages of trained staff. Over the years other panels have issued similar reports. For example, a NASA
committee reported in 2000 that more money & staff were needed to support operations critical to shuttle
safety.
Some lawmakers also contend that the shuttle program has been shortchanged in recent years while the intl space station now under construction experienced cost overruns. They said budget problems prevented NASA from initiating safety upgrades in the shuttle.
Staff members at the House Science Committee, which delivered the main congressional report on the 1986
Challenger explosion, were researching records of the Challenger inquiry Sunday. They were also trying to
assemble comprehensive data on the NASA budget to show precisely the history of funding on the shuttle program and shuttle safety. "We are going to let everything see the light of day," said Boehlert, who said an initial review could find no evidence that Congress ever denied a NASA request for resources pinned to safety.
Lawmakers and other space experts on Capitol Hill, however, said it is no secret that NASA has had major
difficulties with programs & personnel issues. "NASA has got a lot of problems, there is no question about it," said one senior official. "They have been under a lot of scrutiny because of some high- profile screwups and the enormous cost overruns in the space station."
Langley director eyes safety center
8.19.01 Sonja Barisic AP
Hampton VA NASA safety center being created in response to the Columbia space shuttle accident is on track to open around 10.1.03, the man overseeing its startup said Tuesday. Roy D. Bridges is in his second week as director of NASA's Langley Research Ctr, where the new NASA Engineering & Safety Ctr will be based. He said developing the safety center will be his top priority.
The independent center will perform engineering assessment & testing to support critical NASA projects and
serve as a central clearinghouse for staff concerns during future missions. Creation of a safety center addresses a concern by the Columbia accident investigation board that NASA doesn't have enough technical expertise in its
existing safety organizations, Bridges said.
A Langley engineer was among those involved in e-mail discussions in the days before the 2.1.03 Columbia
disaster. He raised the possibility of damage to the spaceship's thermal protection system from a flying piece of
foam during launch. The concerns were forwarded to Langley's acting director, whose staff was assured by
Johnson Space Ctr in Houston that the shuttle was fine.
Secret shuttle part sought in search
¹
2.8.03 Reuters
Cape Canaveral FL Hundreds of searchers combed an area in east Texas Thursday for a top-
secret object from the doomed shuttle Columbia while VP Cheney paid tribute to the 7 dead astronauts.
As it began to consider whether meteorites or even space junk played a role in the disintegration of the shuttle over Texas, NASA took steps to ensure that the investigation into the disaster would follow the evidence wherever it led.
In & around tiny Texas town of Bronson, near the Louisiana border, hundreds of National Guardsmen, federal agents, state troopers and volunteers searched for a mystery object from the shuttle. They searched block by block and used machetes to hack their way through thick woods that surround the town. The searchers were given a picture of a faceplate from the device, which said "Secret Government Property" in white letters on a black background.
Houston Chronicle Thursday reported that the object was a communications device that handled encrypted
messages between the shuttle & the ground. It said the device was in a govt "telecommunications security"
category that normally allowed handling only under the tightest of restrictions.
There was no indication why the Bronson district had been made the focus of the search. Texas state troopers
stood guard over the operation and told photographers to keep their distance. They said they would be asked to
leave the area if searchers found something they did not want photographed.
In Texas, Nacogdoches County Sheriff Thomas Kerss said the rain had made it difficult for heavy equipt and
vehicles to cross wooded areas & pasture land to collect debris. Tens of thousands of pieces of the shuttle
rained down on east Texas and Louisiana when the shuttle disintegrated.
"Each & every part of the shuttle is an important piece in trying to help NASA solve this mystery as to what occurred," Kerss told a news conference.
Shuttle program manager Ron Dittemore said that despite reports of witnesses who saw what appeared to be
pieces of Columbia breaking away as far west as California, no debris collected west of Ft. Worth, TX had been
positively identified as belonging to the shuttle.
NASA expanded the power of the Space Shuttle Mishap Interagency Investigation Board, chaired by retired Navy
Admiral Harold Gehman. O'Keefe said the investigation board would be able to add new members at its discretion. Editorials, op-ed pages and TV commentators have all questioned the independence of the investigation.
Federal Emergency Management Agency said President Bush had amended the emergency declaration issued for Texas after the disaster to incl all states in which debris is found. The agency said Bush's amendment authorized it to pay all the federal costs of retrieving debris in any state where it was reported to have been found.
Columbia shuttle debris in last resting place
1.30.04 Reuters
Cape Canaveral FL NASA allowed reporters to see debris from the space shuttle Columbia in its
final resting place Friday, a space that is part shrine and part laboratory, described by a NASA official as "the
Arlington Cemetery for Columbia." The viewing of the depository, at Cape Canaveral where the U.S. space agency launches its shuttles, took place just ahead of Sunday's first anniversary of the most recent U.S. space
disaster.
84,147 lbs of recovered shuttle pieces are neatly labeled and bar-coded & displayed or crated with a
sense of order & composure that contrasts sharply with the violent demise of U.S.' oldest shuttle craft.
Columbia, returning to Earth with a wing damaged during lift-off 16 days earlier, broke apart in the skies over Texas 2.1.03, killing all 7 astronauts aboard.
Converted office space inside the mammoth Vehicle Assembly Building, where the shuttles begin their long, slow roll-out to the launch pad, was chosen as the depository for the debris. Some of the pieces are instantly
recognizable. The shuttle's forward window frames survived the disaster, though only fragments of the windows
themselves survived. A hatch door and a complete landing gear, with 4 fairly intact tires beside it, are also on
view.
"Columbia was a great ship," said shuttle pgm launch dir. Michael Leinbach . "We like to call this the Arlington
Cemetery for Columbia." Arlington National Cemetery, just outside Wash.D.C., is where U.S. has buried its
honored war veterans since the Civil War. A memorial service for Columbia astronauts is being held there for
families next Monday.
Remains of NASA's earlier flight disaster, the Challenger, lost just after its launch 18 years ago, were buried in an
abandoned missile silo, but NASA decided the Columbia debris still had a useful purpose. So far, NASA said, some 20 research institutions, mostly universities, have expressed interest in studying the debris. Although satellites routinely are destroyed in the atmosphere, the cost of collecting the debris has always prevented materials scientists from studying how various components react to the intense heat and kinetic energy of reentry.
Some Columbia parts, esp. wing panels that failed in the accident, are already being studied at different NASA
centers as part of the space agency's effort to return the three remaining shuttles to flight status.
Remains of the crew compartment are kept in a room apart from the rest of the debris. Because the 7 astronauts
died on those 2 decks, the Astronaut Office must approve the release of those materials, NASA said. "It'll happen
eventually. Somebody will have a good safety idea and they'll need access to the crew compartment. And, of
course, the astronauts have a personal interest in that," said Columbia vehicle manager Scott Thurston.
Also stored in the room are the thousands of sympathy cards & mementos sent by school children and a
banner signed before launch by all the NASA and contract employees who prepared the orbiter for launch.
"It helps us when we come into this room. It was stuff we just couldn't destroy," said Leinbach.
NASA weighs new shuttle foam problem
7.4.06 M. Schneider, S. Borenstein AP
Cape Canaveral FL NASA wrestled Monday with whether to try a Fourth of July space shuttle liftoff after the startling discovery of a small chunk of foam insulation that broke off Discovery's fuel tank as it sat on the launch pad. The troubling find came after inspectors discovered a 5" long crack in the foam, a problem that continues to vex NASA ever since a big piece of foam brought down Columbia and killed seven astronauts in 2003. NASA managers were meeting Monday evening to decide how to tackle the problem and whether a Tuesday launch was possible.
At least one member of the panel of experts that investigated the Columbia accident said he was nervous about the decision.
"If those guys aren't more nervous than I am, they've become jaded and should resign their positions," said Nobel Prize-winning physicist Douglas Osheroff. But 2 of Osheroff's accident board colleagues said they were comfortable, with board chair Harold Gehman Jr. saying, "It looks to me like they are following the right decision processes."
NASA managers are leaning toward flying Discovery with no changes to the foam section in question, said external tank project manager John Chapman. The other options were to spend a day inspecting the foam area of concern, which would push the launch back to Wednesday, or to try to fix the foam, which would take several days and require NASA to use a new technique since such a repair has never been done in that area before, Chapman said.
"We believe we're getting much more comfortable with the ability to potentially fly as we are right now, but the team is still looking at that," Chapman said. "We want to make sure that we understand all the considerations that caused this foam to be lost."
The 3" long, triangle-shaped piece fell off an area of foam that covers an expandable bracket holding a liquid oxygen fuel line against the huge external tank. NASA engineers believe ice built up in that area from condensation caused by rain Sunday.
The tank expanded when the super-cold fuel was drained after Sunday's launch was canceled because of the weather. The ice that formed "pinched" some of that foam, causing the quarter-inch-wide crack and the piece of foam to drop off, said space shuttle program deputy manager John Shannon.
|