|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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 ## |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 12:45:26 GMT, in a place far, far away, Craig Fink
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: I totally disagree with you. Who cares? 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. Again, who cares? How is where you heard about it relevant to the discussion? 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. You don't know what you're talking about. Show us the calculations. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
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 10:41 PM |
NAVY recognizes Columbia astronaut | Jacques van Oene | Space Shuttle | 0 | July 9th 03 06:59 PM |
NAVY recognizes Columbia astronaut | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | July 9th 03 06:59 PM |