A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 13th 06, 04:12 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 224
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)


Remember the question why NASA did not release their results on the
in orbit repair options for Columbia? It seems the results were too
unwanted obvious:


http://www.stpns.net/view_article.ht...43251064362304

Astronaut Talks Of Shuttle Disasters, Life In Space
By John Larson for Mountain Mail, November 09, 2006

Both space shuttle disasters, Challenger in 1986 and Columbia in 2003, could
have been survivable, said former NASA astronaut and aeronautical engineer
Sid Gutierrez of Albuquerque.
....
As an Air Force instructor, fighter, and test pilot, he flew over 30
different types of airplanes, sailplanes, balloons and rockets. He
logged more than 4,500 hours of flying time. Gutierrez is a native
New Mexican born in Albuquerque, and currently a department manager
at Sandia National Laboratories.
....
Gutierrez said the fault lies in two words: "engineering arrogance".

ôNASA engineers were confident that they did everything right,ö Gutierrez
said. ôThey were so sure everything would work as planned they didnÆt
think an escape system was necessary. The fact is, if there had been
an escape system on Columbia and Challenger, the crews could have
survived.ö
....

As a NASA astronaut Gutierrez was pilot of Space Shuttle Columbia on
STS-40 in June, 1991, and commander of Endeavor on STS-59 in April, 1994.

In February 2003 Columbia disintegrated above Texas while re-entering
the earthÆs atmosphere.

ôIf the engineers at NASA had looked closer at the video that showed the
foam hitting the orbiterÆs wing, the crew could have done something about
the hole in the leading edge of the wing once they were in orbit,ö he
said.

He said something as simple as wet towels forming a several-inches-thick
layer of ice would have been enough to keep hot gasses from burning into
the crack in the leading edge.

ôThere was no escape system in place on the Columbia, either,ö Gutierrez
said. ôThe breakup started at about 200,000 feet. With oxygen masks, the
crew wouldÆve at least had some chance at surviving if theyÆd had a
parachute system.ö

He said the shuttle is the most dangerous space vehicle ever flown.



## CrossPoint v3.12d R ##
  #3  
Old November 13th 06, 05:36 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
Jim Oberg[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 440
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)


"Jorge R. Frank" wrote
Gutierrez is wrong. And it turns out, so were NASA's results from the CAIB
report. The three years of work that have gone into RCC repair capability
since that report have made clear that the in-flight repair options for
Columbia would not have worked.


It's not even clear whether the proposals would have delayed breakup
a few minutes, or hastened it due to higher drag. I'd like to believe that
an attempted repair would have given the ship another minute or two
to get lower and slower, and perhaps cross the boundary where
suited crewmembers thrown free by the cabin break-up might, might,
just might have survived to low enough that their parachutes would
have saved them. But at any altitude, co-existing even briefly with a
debris cloud of jagged metal is problematical. It's what I was saying the
first hour of the live coverage with ABC, when I talked on-air from my
home: the odds of survival were low but not zero and in the initial hours
post-breakup all efforts must focus and looking for parachutes on the
ground because anybody getting out of the ship alive would need help
really bad.

Had there been warning, you also bet that there wouldn't have been
anybody in the ship doing entry without helmets and gloves -- an
appalling failure of safety practices, in real life, but sadly consistent
with safety standards that had crept up on some (not all, or even most)
of the team.


  #4  
Old November 13th 06, 06:39 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)



Jim Oberg wrote:

I'd like to believe that
an attempted repair would have given the ship another minute or two
to get lower and slower, and perhaps cross the boundary where
suited crewmembers thrown free by the cabin break-up might, might,
just might have survived to low enough that their parachutes would
have saved them. But at any altitude, co-existing even briefly with a
debris cloud of jagged metal is problematical.


Don't forget some of the other stuff that would have been in the area;
the footage of the break-up made it look like the OMS pods and nose RCS
exploded as it got lower, so you might have been jumping into a cloud of
hydrazine and UDMH, which wouldn't have helped your pressure suit or
parachute any.

Had there been warning, you also bet that there wouldn't have been
anybody in the ship doing entry without helmets and gloves -- an
appalling failure of safety practices, in real life, but sadly consistent
with safety standards that had crept up on some (not all, or even most)
of the team.


Yeah, that was a real sloppy thing to do. They were getting very lax
about things, and Story Musgrave's standing reentry really set a bad
example in that regard.

Pat
  #5  
Old November 13th 06, 07:31 PM posted to sci.space.history
Monte Davis Monte Davis is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Sep 2005
Posts: 466
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)

Pat Flannery wrote:

you might have been jumping into a cloud of
hydrazine and UDMH, which wouldn't have helped your pressure suit or
parachute any.


Doubtful -- at almost any speed, any "cloud" is going to be left
behind very quickly indeed by denser chunks, including surviving
astronauts.

Monte Davis
http://montedavis.livejournal.com
  #6  
Old November 14th 06, 02:22 AM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)



Pat Flannery wrote:


so you might have been jumping into a cloud of hydrazine and UDMH,
which wouldn't have helped your pressure suit or parachute any.



Note how I managed to equip the Shuttle with a monopropellant RCS? :-)

Pat
  #7  
Old November 14th 06, 05:15 AM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
Dale[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 278
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)

On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 19:22:24 -0600, Pat Flannery wrote:

Pat Flannery wrote:

so you might have been jumping into a cloud of hydrazine and UDMH,
which wouldn't have helped your pressure suit or parachute any.


Note how I managed to equip the Shuttle with a monopropellant RCS? :-)


Fortunately, the resulting toxic cloud whizzed harmlessly over
everybody's heads

Dale
  #8  
Old November 15th 06, 02:25 AM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
Terrell Miller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 274
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)


"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


Had there been warning, you also bet that there wouldn't have been
anybody in the ship doing entry without helmets and gloves -- an
appalling failure of safety practices, in real life, but sadly consistent
with safety standards that had crept up on some (not all, or even most)
of the team.


Yeah, that was a real sloppy thing to do. They were getting very lax about
things, and Story Musgrave's standing reentry really set a bad example in
that regard.


the thing that still galls me about that particular Musgrave Maneuver is
that, the evening of the Columbia disaster, he was on CNN *bragging* about
doing that entry, going on and on about all the neat stuff he saw out the
window. At some point he must have seen Miles's face, or he just suddenly
realized what he was saying, because he got very serious all of a sudden,
and they cut to somebody else.

Trauma makes people do and say some very unfortunate things.

--
Terrell Miller


"Just...take...the...****ing...flower...darlin g"
Terrell's dating style according to OKCupid.com


  #9  
Old November 16th 06, 04:01 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
Neil Gerace
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 326
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)

"Terrell Miller" wrote in message
news

the thing that still galls me about that particular Musgrave Maneuver is
that, the evening of the Columbia disaster, he was on CNN *bragging* about
doing that entry, going on and on about all the neat stuff he saw out the
window. At some point he must have seen Miles's face, or he just suddenly
realized what he was saying, because he got very serious all of a sudden,
and they cut to somebody else.

Trauma makes people do and say some very unfortunate things.


Some people just won't be told to wear a seat belt, I suppose


  #10  
Old November 14th 06, 01:45 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
Craig Fink
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,858
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)

I totally disagree with you.

I can imagine you have a lot of personal investment in your point of view,
as you actually knew about the impact to the wing a long time (many days)
before the Disaster. And, choose to believe what you were being told by
your sources that everything was fine. I can totally understand your
baggage leading to your conclusions. You were hoodwinked like many of the
NASA engineers, that NASA management wouldn't stick their heads in the
ground. Me, I first heard about the Disaster in WalMart, when I overheard
someone talking about the destruction of Columbia.

But, any repair, wet towels or tortillas would have been much better than
leaving a gapping hole in the leading edge of the wing. Entry heating is a
time function, just like thawing your Thanksgiving Turkey. It takes days
to thaw a Turkey in the fridge. A day outside the fridge on your counter.
And with a blow torch, probably well over an hour. Plenty of time to make
it to the runway. I'd suggest that some NASA Engineers should take a
frozen Turkey this year and stick it in their nice arc jet facility for
Thanksgiving. To see just how long it takes to thaw a Turkey heated with a
Shuttle Entry profile. I think by the time their done, they'll find their
Turkey is crispy on the outside, and still raw or frozen on the inside. A
Turkey might even be a relatively accurate frozen thermal mass
representative of the size that would have been inside the leading edge.

I think they would have been standing on the runway, instead of spread out
all over Texas.

--
Craig Fink
Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @
--

On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 16:36:01+0000, Jim Oberg wrote:


"Jorge R. Frank" wrote
Gutierrez is wrong. And it turns out, so were NASA's results from the CAIB
report. The three years of work that have gone into RCC repair capability
since that report have made clear that the in-flight repair options for
Columbia would not have worked.


It's not even clear whether the proposals would have delayed breakup
a few minutes, or hastened it due to higher drag. I'd like to believe that
an attempted repair would have given the ship another minute or two
to get lower and slower, and perhaps cross the boundary where
suited crewmembers thrown free by the cabin break-up might, might,
just might have survived to low enough that their parachutes would
have saved them. But at any altitude, co-existing even briefly with a
debris cloud of jagged metal is problematical. It's what I was saying the
first hour of the live coverage with ABC, when I talked on-air from my
home: the odds of survival were low but not zero and in the initial hours
post-breakup all efforts must focus and looking for parachutes on the
ground because anybody getting out of the ship alive would need help
really bad.

Had there been warning, you also bet that there wouldn't have been
anybody in the ship doing entry without helmets and gloves -- an
appalling failure of safety practices, in real life, but sadly consistent
with safety standards that had crept up on some (not all, or even most)
of the team.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others) [email protected] Space Shuttle 301 December 11th 06 10:34 PM
NASA Spacewalking astronaut completes unique repair Jacques van Oene Space Shuttle 1 August 3rd 05 08:01 PM
NASA Spacewalking astronaut completes unique repair Jacques van Oene News 0 August 3rd 05 07:52 PM
AP: NASA Still Lacks Repair Kits for Astronauts in Orbit, Nearly Two Years After Columbia Disaster Mr. White Space Shuttle 0 December 6th 04 11:41 PM
Navy Recognizes Columbia Astronaut Ron Baalke Space Shuttle 0 July 9th 03 07:38 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.