Drudge's Headline: COLUMBIA CREW SURVIVED MINUTE LONGER THAN PREVIOUSLY INDICATED, SAY INVESTIGATORS...

but the link is self-referencing.

Elizabeth

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/16/na...partner=GOOGLE

On 15 Jul 2003 21:35:06 -0500, cndc
wrote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/16/na...partner=GOOGLE

Why is this news? It's been known for months and published in NASA's own
timeline. The latest version they have is Rev 15 from March, but even it shows
these things (with the exeption of the OEX data, which was learned later):

07:59:28 CST Husband says "Roger, uh, b--"
07:59:32 CST loss of signal, data still downlinked to White Sands
but not passed to JSC due to corrupt data for 5 more sec
07:59:34 CST Master Alarm in cockpit due to FCS channel 4 failure
07:59:46 CST "Roll Ref" message on board, rapid change in L/D ratio
07:59:52 CST LRCS leak message
08:00:02 CST LRCS leak message
08:00:03 CST start of 2-second "window" of data, indicating loss of hyd
systems, LRCS/LOMS problems, left elevon problems, electrical
bus shorts (all of which cause alarms in the cabin)
08:00:05 CST last recorded frame of data
08:00:19 CST last recorded time tag on the OEX (which would stop recording
when power is removed)
08:00:21 CST onset of main body breakup

The scariest part of this timeline is from about 07:59:30 to 08:00:00 - just 30
seconds, but that's when all hell broke loose.

"Michael R. Grabois ... change $ to \"s\""
wrote in :

On 15 Jul 2003 21:35:06 -0500, cndc
wrote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/16/na...l/16SHUT.html?
ex=1058932800&en=7512384f537281e1&ei=5062&partne r=GOOGLE

Why is this news? It's been known for months and published in NASA's
own timeline.

Worse, we are already seeing the media "morph" this story. The NY Times
story was "crew was alive almost one minute after loss of signal" which,
while hardly news, was at least accurate, while Drudge's headline was "crew
was alive one minute after previously indicated", which is an outright lie.

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

"Michael R. Grabois ... change $ to "s"" wrote
in message ...

The scariest part of this timeline is from about 07:59:30 to 08:00:00 -
just 30
seconds, but that's when all hell broke loose.

Correct me if I'm wrong. Wasn't that first loss of signal at 07:59:32 caused
by the sudden left yaw when the RCS lost the battle to keep the shuttle
pointed in the direction flight? Wouldn't the crew be knocked unconscious
by such a violent movement? I assume the axis of rotation was somewhere
behind the cockpit, so the crew would have been thrown forward into their
restraints. I hate to say it but, if they didn't black out from the G force
of that yaw, I think their necks were snapped by the momentum of their
helmets moving forward.

The NASA data shows that the crew compartment survived at least another
minute. It shows that the computers survived another minute. I still think
the crew died instantly - and painlessly. They never knew what hit them.

07:59:28 CST Husband says "Roger, uh, b--"
07:59:32 CST loss of signal, data still downlinked to White Sands
but not passed to JSC due to corrupt data for 5 more sec
07:59:34 CST Master Alarm in cockpit due to FCS channel 4 failure
07:59:46 CST "Roll Ref" message on board, rapid change in L/D ratio
07:59:52 CST LRCS leak message
08:00:02 CST LRCS leak message
08:00:03 CST start of 2-second "window" of data, indicating loss of hyd
systems, LRCS/LOMS problems, left elevon problems, electrical
bus shorts (all of which cause alarms in the cabin)
08:00:05 CST last recorded frame of data
08:00:19 CST last recorded time tag on the OEX (which would stop recording
when power is removed)
08:00:21 CST onset of main body breakup

8:00:24 CST Last message from orbiter, "We are bouncing" or something
like that.

Elizabeth

In article , says...

"Michael R. Grabois ... change $ to "s"" wrote
in message ...

The scariest part of this timeline is from about 07:59:30 to 08:00:00 -
just 30
seconds, but that's when all hell broke loose.

Correct me if I'm wrong. Wasn't that first loss of signal at 07:59:32 caused
by the sudden left yaw when the RCS lost the battle to keep the shuttle
pointed in the direction flight? Wouldn't the crew be knocked unconscious
by such a violent movement? I assume the axis of rotation was somewhere
behind the cockpit, so the crew would have been thrown forward into their
restraints. I hate to say it but, if they didn't black out from the G force
of that yaw, I think their necks were snapped by the momentum of their
helmets moving forward.

I don't think, from what I've read, that this is an accurate depiction of
either the reason for the comm dropout at 07:59:32 or the speed of the
yaw maneuver.

My memory is that the initial comm dropout was legitimately ratty comm
off the tail -- the vertical stabilizer came between the antenna and the
TDRSS through which comm was being relayed. While the data at that point
indicated that the orbiter was *losing* the battle to maintain attitude,
it had not yet lost control authority. Even when comm was restored for
two seconds after a 25-second gap (plus five seconds of degraded data at
the beginning of the dropout), and the orbiter was reported in an
"uncommanded attitude," nothing suggests that it had yawed so quickly as
to break necks within the crew compartment.

--

It's not the pace of life I mind; | Doug Van Dorn
it's the sudden stop at the end... |

"OM" om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote
in message ...
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 08:24:09 -0500, "Chris" wrote:
the crew died instantly - and painlessly. They never knew what hit them.

...And to be totally honest, I actually *wish* that was in fact what
happened.

I'm convinced it's what happened. Maybe I haven't been following the news
or the newsgroup closely enough, but I haven't seen anyone dispute it. I
haven't seen anyone say "these would be forces involved and humans can
survive these conditions." So, based on my own understanding of what
happened when communications were lost I have come to the conclusion that
the conditions involved would have been instantly lethal.

I only raise this issue because it seems to me that part of the motivation
behind the NY-Times article is to make everyone recoil in horror at the
thought of the astronauts slowing burning alive as their spacecraft
disintegrated around them. The NYT also seems to want to kindle a fresh
wave of sadness and morning by preying upon the fear we all have that their
deaths were torturous.

If this were a movie, a big hole would be blown in side of the cockpit and
air would rush in. There would be screaming and yelling, the sound of
warning klaxons, and flashing red lights all round. But this isn't a movie.
What really happened I believe is that the astronauts died instantly - the
moment the shuttle yawed left - from the incredible amount of centrifugal
force exerted on the cockpit. They never knew what hit them.

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 08:24:09 -0500, "Chris" wrote:

The NASA data shows that the crew compartment survived at least another
minute. It shows that the computers survived another minute. I still think
the crew died instantly - and painlessly. They never knew what hit them.

....And to be totally honest, I actually *wish* that was in fact what
happened.

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 16 Jul 2003 08:34:33 -0500, cndc
wrote:

8:00:24 CST Last message from orbiter, "We are bouncing" or something
like that.

....Do *NOT* consider this official in any way, shape or form. Lizzie
claims she was given this information by some manifestation of Jesus
Christ that's taken residence in her stomach. She's made several other
claims that the same static also has KC screaming "We're burning up!",
along with other outlandish claims. For those not familiar with
Lizzie's claims following the loss of Columbia, here's the google link
to the primary thread:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...%3Dd%26hl%3Den

(Watch the word wr
ap, kids...)

....Take note that Lizzie has apparently x-no_archive'd her posts, so
that the intact posts don't show up on google unless they're quoted.
However, quite a few people quoted her blatherings while pointing out
that she was dead wrong in her "interpretations" of the static, so you
can very easily get a clear view of what a whacko she is by reading
through the thread. Also, there's a section in the FAQ dealing with
her upset stomach:

http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss...l#garbled_xmit

Enjoy!


--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.