CAIB Working Scenario - Anyone been able to download this yet?

....I've tried unsuccessfully for the past 12 hours to download the
..pdf of the CAIB's working scenario. It gets about 128K downloaded,
then freezes. I've tried this on four systems so far, and same result
each time.

Anyone happen to have the same problems?


OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 00:16:30 -0600, OM
om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org
wrote:

...I've tried unsuccessfully for the past 12 hours to download the
.pdf of the CAIB's working scenario. It gets about 128K downloaded,
then freezes. I've tried this on four systems so far, and same result
each time.

Anyone happen to have the same problems?


OM

I have Surewest DSL and was able to download all three sections of
the report in a few minutes at 10:55pm PDT. So CAIB's server seems to
be working.


--
Rusty Barton - Antelope, California | "When I die, I'm leaving my
Visit my Titan I ICBM website at: | body to science fiction."
http://www.geocities.com/titan_1_missile | - Steven Wright

I've got it down, now I'm doing a high-quality print-out. This is a terrific
product on a horrible project.




"OM" om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote
in message ...
...I've tried unsuccessfully for the past 12 hours to download the
.pdf of the CAIB's working scenario. It gets about 128K downloaded,
then freezes. I've tried this on four systems so far, and same result
each time.

Anyone happen to have the same problems?


OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

On or about Sun, 13 Jul 2003 13:35:53 GMT, James Oberg made the sensational claim that:
I've got it down, now I'm doing a high-quality print-out. This is a terrific
product on a horrible project.
"OM" om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote
in message ...
...I've tried unsuccessfully for the past 12 hours to download the
.pdf of the CAIB's working scenario. It gets about 128K downloaded,
then freezes. I've tried this on four systems so far, and same result
each time.

Anyone happen to have the same problems?

I had to d/l it 3 or 4 times because it ended up corrupted. On windows and
freebsd, each, before I ended up with a "good" file.
--
This is a siggy | To E-mail, do note | This space is for rent
It's properly formatted | who you mean to reply-to | Inquire within if you
No person, none, care | and it will reach me | Would like your ad here

Ok, it seems right clicking and choosing "save link target as" using
netscape/mozilla (I'm assuming this covers Firebird as well) results
in a corrupted file pretty much every time. Netscape 7 gives me a 16k file,
mozilla 1.4+ and netscape 7.1 give me a 25 meg file. Netscape 4.8 didn't
have a problem with right clicking, but shat itself trying to open the file
within the browser.
--
This is a siggy | To E-mail, do note | This space is for rent
It's properly formatted | who you mean to reply-to | Inquire within if you
No person, none, care | and it will reach me | Would like your ad here

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 14:32:40 GMT, LooseChanj
wrote:


Ok, it seems right clicking and choosing "save link target as" using
netscape/mozilla (I'm assuming this covers Firebird as well) results
in a corrupted file pretty much every time. Netscape 7 gives me a 16k file,
mozilla 1.4+ and netscape 7.1 give me a 25 meg file. Netscape 4.8 didn't
have a problem with right clicking, but shat itself trying to open the file
within the browser.

....Same issues with IE. Gets about 128K or so, and then chokes, with
the estimated download time simply increasing by 3 to 5 minutes every
30 seconds or so. I fired off a note to the admin for the CAIB site,
but I don't expect anything from it until at least Monday.

Considering his traffic load, I'm not going to guess at *which* Monday
that will be...


OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

James Oberg wrote:

I've got it down, now I'm doing a high-quality print-out. This is a terrific
product on a horrible project.

It's an interesting and (yes) horrifying read. I'm amazed the vehicle
continued to fly as long as it did with the damage they deduced must have
been occuring inside the wing.

I have to wonder if the vehicle could have been made more failure-resistant
if the wing had been made of, say, composites, or if there had been a backup
system to inject coolant into the wing interior in case of a penetration.

Paul

In article , says...
James Oberg wrote:

I've got it down, now I'm doing a high-quality print-out. This is a terrific
product on a horrible project.

It's an interesting and (yes) horrifying read. I'm amazed the vehicle
continued to fly as long as it did with the damage they deduced must have
been occuring inside the wing.

"Fly" is probably relative. The damage was pretty huge for a long while
before serious aerodynamic problems started. Increasing air density
probably contributed to the timing of the breakup; Columbia was probably
unfit to fly well before that time.

Still, there was some new information in the report. I wasn't aware of
how much the wing shape was changing behind the leading edge, and aside
from loss of tiles. That "recession" of the underside of the wing
is pretty scary to think about.

This was the first time I'd seen anything about the location of the
Littleton tile. That's further proof, as if such proof were needed,
that tiles were coming off in quantity long before the breakup, whether
you just call it a "zipper effect" or get down to root causes like
the wing skin burning away underneath the tiles, or the adhesive
debonding because of the heat.

I have to wonder if the vehicle could have been made more failure-resistant
if the wing had been made of, say, composites, or if there had been a backup
system to inject coolant into the wing interior in case of a penetration.

What would you cool, and how would you cool it? The interior of the
wing is mostly empty space, with solid metal structual pieces.

I'd be interested to know how well composite structural parts would
have held up in this scenario.

Diane

I have to wonder if the vehicle could have been
made more failure-resistant if the wing had been
made of, say, composites, or if there had been a
backup system to inject coolant into the wing
interior in case of a penetration.

It was known at the time that Aluminum was selected
that some additional margin would be lost compared to
other materials then available.

But your premise is problematic. You're suggesting
spending money and likely adding weight to solve a
problem that is more cheaply solved, with no weight
penalty, by flying the STS in-spec. You are proposing
to engineer on the assumption that NASA management
will continue to push the system into the margins
of the envelope.

Heads need to roll on this. That, and only that, just
might get the attention of the surviving managers.

Both shuttle losses were the result of fully realized
risks of parallel staging. Flying the orbiter beside
the solids&fuel, rather than on top, is extra dangerous.
It requires extra care. It didn't get it. In both cases,
management flew despite out of spec incidents (that
just hadn't killed anyone yet, until they did).

General "Buck" Turgidson: "I don't think it's quite
fair to condemn the whole program because of a single
slip up." (from the movie "Dr. Strangelove").

Yes, it is fair. The whole point of the Human Factors
Reliability program in D.S. was to prevent even one
instance of the catastrophe the movie was about.

The whole point of the STS safety program was to
prevent even ONE loss. We've now lost two. If NASA
management doesn't get seriously re-engineered, it
will take three more losses to finally wring out all
the lurking fatal threats.

Regards, PO Box 248
Bob Niland Enterprise
Kansas
which, due to spam, is: 67441-0248 USA
email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com
http://www.access-one.com/rjn

Unless otherwise specifically stated, expressing personal
opinions and NOT speaking for any employer, client or Internet
Service Provider.

Bob Niland wrote:

But your premise is problematic. You're suggesting
spending money and likely adding weight to solve a
problem that is more cheaply solved, with no weight
penalty, by flying the STS in-spec. You are proposing
to engineer on the assumption that NASA management
will continue to push the system into the margins
of the envelope.

In the real world, managers and engineers make mistakes.
Reliability involves 'defense in depth'. For example, if we
always operated nuclear reactors 'in spec' we wouldn't need
containment buildings. We wisely build them anyway, since
people *do* screw up.

The shuttle has a considerable number of places where there
is no defense in depth. I understand that mass budgets force
this to occur, but, nevertheless, those mass budgets are
a function of the design approach, and a different design
might not have required so many compromises.

Paul