A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

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".

˘NASA engineers were confident that they did everything right,÷ Gutierrez
said. ˘They were so sure everything would work as planned they didnĂt
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.÷
....

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 earthĂs atmosphere.

˘If the engineers at NASA had looked closer at the video that showed the
foam hitting the orbiterĂs wing, the crew could have done something about
the hole in the leading edge of the wing once they were in orbit,÷ 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.

˘There was no escape system in place on the Columbia, either,÷ Gutierrez
said. ˘The breakup started at about 200,000 feet. With oxygen masks, the
crew wouldĂve at least had some chance at surviving if theyĂd had a
parachute system.÷

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



## CrossPoint v3.12d R ##
Ads
  #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, 06:24 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
Brian Gaff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,312
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)

Yes, but hindsight is a wonderful thing, isn't it?

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
wrote in message
...

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".

˘NASA engineers were confident that they did everything right,÷ Gutierrez
said. ˘They were so sure everything would work as planned they didnĂt
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.÷
...

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 earthĂs atmosphere.

˘If the engineers at NASA had looked closer at the video that showed the
foam hitting the orbiterĂs wing, the crew could have done something about
the hole in the leading edge of the wing once they were in orbit,÷ 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.

˘There was no escape system in place on the Columbia, either,÷ Gutierrez
said. ˘The breakup started at about 200,000 feet. With oxygen masks, the
crew wouldĂve at least had some chance at surviving if theyĂd had a
parachute system.÷

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



## CrossPoint v3.12d R ##



  #5  
Old November 13th 06, 06:39 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,466
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
  #6  
Old November 13th 06, 07:25 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)


"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
. uk...
Yes, but hindsight is a wonderful thing, isn't it?


the sad part is how the people who were worried AT THAT TIME were
bullied before the disaster, and side-lined afterwards out of embarrassment.


  #7  
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
  #8  
Old November 13th 06, 07:48 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,516
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)

Certinally a launch boost escape system is still needed........

Hey lets fly and take our chances, its worked fine so far

That attitude got us challenger and columbia and sadly probaby will
again, but THAT will be the last flight!

  #9  
Old November 13th 06, 08:57 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
Danny Dot[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 481
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)


"Jim Oberg" wrote in message
...

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
. uk...
Yes, but hindsight is a wonderful thing, isn't it?


the sad part is how the people who were worried AT THAT TIME were
bullied before the disaster, and side-lined afterwards out of
embarrassment.


Bullied is the right word. That is what I have been saying. NASA culture
is a bully culture.

Danny Dot


  #10  
Old November 13th 06, 11:48 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
Neil Gerace
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 326
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)

"Danny Dot" wrote in message
...

"Jim Oberg" wrote in message
...

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
. uk...
Yes, but hindsight is a wonderful thing, isn't it?


the sad part is how the people who were worried AT THAT TIME were
bullied before the disaster, and side-lined afterwards out of
embarrassment.


Bullied is the right word. That is what I have been saying. NASA culture
is a bully culture.


In that case it shares it with every other large organisation. People just
protecting their jobs.


 




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 10:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ę2004-2018 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.