The reality is that there are no new things to be discovered about the Shuttle, only concessions to be made to keep flying. I'm sure the temperature increase and possibility of catastrophic failure has been analyzed and accounted for years ago..... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Latrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Europa IcePIC mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 4:40 PM Subject: Re: More pieces of the puzzle fall into place
> > Why not just create a cradle made out of lightweight materials > (fiberglass would work) that sits detween the shuttle and the tank. > That would deflect 90% of the debris without adding more than a few > hunder pounds of weight. > > This is of course assuming that the foam/ice fall is in fact the > culprit. > > Joe Latrell > > On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 13:38, Bruce Moomaw wrote: > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/02/03/sprj.colu.shuttle/index.html > > > > http://www.msnbc.com/news/867336.asp?0si > > > > The foam fragment is now officially the prime suspect in the disaster -- > > NASA's engineers concluded during the flight that it could have caused > > damage ranging from removal of a single tile to removal of tiles "over an > > area of 7 by 30 inches", but that this probably would not have led to a > > burnthrough. It now starts to look as though the fragment actually hit near > > the seam of a wheelwell door -- one of the most vulnerable spots on the > > Shuttle -- so that the tile gap did the fatal damage that was considered > > statistically unlikely by those engineers. (A whole series of observers all > > over California -- including a whole group of Cal Tech scientists -- now > > consistently report seeing several small fiery objects fall off the Shuttle > > during reentry, followed by a much bigger object.) > > > > But this hardly makes it a fantastically unlikely freak > > accident --significant tile damage on Shuttles as a result of debris (both > > foam and ice) falling off the external tank occurs regularly. (One engineer > > told "60 Minutes" last night that there have been flights in which, on > > return, "half the tiles on the vehicle were damaged".) It now looks very > > much as though NASA applied the same reasoning on tile damage which (as > > Richard Feynman pointed out) they were applying to O-ring damage before > > Challenger: we've gotten away with it so far, so let's keep flying without > > any expensive modifications until we run out of luck, and only then run back > > to Congress with our begging bowl... > > > > And -- even if we do solidly nail this down as the cause -- the > > modifications needed to correct it will be difficult. Either we have to > > find a way to ensure that no debris -- either foam or ice -- falls off the > > external tank during launch, or we have to find a way to greatly harden the > > Shuttle's tiles. Either way, we're looking at a mandatory program delay > > resembling that after the Challenger disaster, at a time when the Station > > needs constant manned maintenance. > > > > == > > You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ > > > > == > You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
