Re: Did Greenpeace Doom Columbia?

[Chris Jones]

"Mike Dennis" > writes:

> Does anyone know why NASA changed the ET foam to the current formula? I
> read somewhere that it was changed for environmental reasons.

The foam was changed for environmental reasons, but the foam that flew
on Columbia's ET was the old stuff.

[...]

> Just imagine: if the foam was changed due to environmental concerns, the
> blame may ultimately rest on Greenpeace! ;-)

Just imagine: if the foam had been changed earlier, it may not have
shed and Columbia could have landed safely. If only NASA had listened
to Greenpeace earlier!

(My conclusion is as logical as yours, i.e. not very, but it has the
benefit of being based on a fact rather than a false rumor.)

[Mike Dennis]

Well, the most important thing is that we know more now than we did before.
Thanks!

"Chris Jones" > wrote in message
...
> "Mike Dennis" > writes:
>
> > Maybe your's is based on fact--I don't really have solid info--I raised
the
> > issue because I didn't know. No false rumor was involved--I tend to
think
> > for myself. I'm just sorry you have such a slow 'net connection. It
took
> > months for you to get this... :)
>
> Hee, hee. My net connection is plenty fast; it's that my news server
> saves articles for a long time before expiring them. I was just reading
> the CAIB Working Scenario after downloading it where I saw the facts on
> the ET tanks and foam formulations, and, remembering the earlier
flame^H^H^H^H^Hdiscussion,
> went looking for the old postings to append a reply.
>