edward ohare
July 8th 03, 02:50 PM
Shuttle Foam Test Yields Hole In Wing
By MARCIA DUNN, AP Aerospace Writer
SAN ANTONIO - A chunk of foam insulation fired at shuttle wing parts
Monday blew open a gaping 16-inch hole, yielding what one member of
the Columbia investigation team said was the "smoking gun" that proves
what brought down the spaceship.
The crowd of about 100 watching the test gasped and cried, "Wow!" when
the foam hit the impact so violent that it popped a lens off one of
the cameras recording the event.
Partial posting to comply with copyright law. The full story is at
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=14&u=/ap/20030707/ap_on_sc/shuttle_investigation_8
------
The story calls this the smoking gun. Its a bad description.
The "smoking gun" characterization is generally associated with single
dramatic events. In this case, its being used as proof of what
destroyed Columbia. In the immediate sense, its true. But in the
larger sense, its not.
Foam and tiles have been falling off shuttles for 20+ years. The
events have always been minimized as non-consequential. Yet such
problems reveal basic engineering and/or assembly problems that should
have been addressed.
For years, Hondas blew head gaskets. Honda covered them under "secret
warranties" for those who complained and improved their design. Baby
cribs have been recalled after hazards were found. I just bought some
window blinds where the cords were not attached to each other, and
which included a warning label not to tie them together. Apparantly,
some children have inserted their heads in the loop created by tied
cords and strangled.
Makers of consumer products act upon problems experienced by customers
and/or when required to by regulatory agencies. I'm sorry, but parts
falling off in -normal- use is blatantly indicative of problems. How
NASA ever sold their minimization of this to anyone is beyond me.
Let's get NASA some experienced oversight. The shuttle isn't still
under development, as someone, I can't remember who, posted here
several days ago. Its clearly the wrong answer to the question.
Nothing but a new concept will get rid of what are probably similar
slide by solutions present throughout the design.
Anyway, its not a smoking gun. Its multiple smoking bomb craters.
By MARCIA DUNN, AP Aerospace Writer
SAN ANTONIO - A chunk of foam insulation fired at shuttle wing parts
Monday blew open a gaping 16-inch hole, yielding what one member of
the Columbia investigation team said was the "smoking gun" that proves
what brought down the spaceship.
The crowd of about 100 watching the test gasped and cried, "Wow!" when
the foam hit the impact so violent that it popped a lens off one of
the cameras recording the event.
Partial posting to comply with copyright law. The full story is at
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=14&u=/ap/20030707/ap_on_sc/shuttle_investigation_8
------
The story calls this the smoking gun. Its a bad description.
The "smoking gun" characterization is generally associated with single
dramatic events. In this case, its being used as proof of what
destroyed Columbia. In the immediate sense, its true. But in the
larger sense, its not.
Foam and tiles have been falling off shuttles for 20+ years. The
events have always been minimized as non-consequential. Yet such
problems reveal basic engineering and/or assembly problems that should
have been addressed.
For years, Hondas blew head gaskets. Honda covered them under "secret
warranties" for those who complained and improved their design. Baby
cribs have been recalled after hazards were found. I just bought some
window blinds where the cords were not attached to each other, and
which included a warning label not to tie them together. Apparantly,
some children have inserted their heads in the loop created by tied
cords and strangled.
Makers of consumer products act upon problems experienced by customers
and/or when required to by regulatory agencies. I'm sorry, but parts
falling off in -normal- use is blatantly indicative of problems. How
NASA ever sold their minimization of this to anyone is beyond me.
Let's get NASA some experienced oversight. The shuttle isn't still
under development, as someone, I can't remember who, posted here
several days ago. Its clearly the wrong answer to the question.
Nothing but a new concept will get rid of what are probably similar
slide by solutions present throughout the design.
Anyway, its not a smoking gun. Its multiple smoking bomb craters.