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
  #61  
Old November 16th 06, 10:10 AM posted to sci.space.history
OM[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 806
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 03:07:33 -0600, OM
wrote:

...Lessee, if we had to come up with a "Strongly Urged Killfile List",
who'd be on that one permanently?

Brad Guth
Craig Fink
Wbua Znkfba(#)
Charleston
"jonathan"(*)
Thomas Lee Elfritz (**)
~CT aka "Stuff4"
Eric Chomko
Bob Haller aka "hallerb"
William Mook
Alan Erskine (***)
"scott grissom" (**)
Greg Kuperberg
Fred J. McCall
Nicholas Fitzpatrick
Nomen Nescio
Andre Lieven
BlagooBlanaa
Daniel Joseph Min(**)

Secret987


....Whoops! Forgot JF Mezei on that list.

OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[
  #63  
Old November 16th 06, 02:27 PM posted to sci.space.history
Rand Simberg[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,311
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 13:08:17 GMT, in a place far, far away, Monte
Davis made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

One of the most striking things about discussions of space is the
widespread disconnect between the ugly real world of aerospace
engineering and an imagined, beautiful "how it oughta be" where the
engineers always get to do everything right without any interference
from managers, Congress (for NASA) or investors (for private
ventures).


What's so frustrating is that we aren't even asking to do everything
right. We'd just like to do it so everything isn't so damned *wrong*.
  #64  
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


  #65  
Old November 16th 06, 04:07 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
...

"Neil Gerace" wrote in message
...
"Danny Dot" wrote in message
...


I have worked for several other large organizations, I found NASA to be
the worst. Recall two commissions have found a problem with NASA's
culture.


True, but I think it's by no means unique or even unusual. I worked for a
large bank until recently, and it was just as bad.



If the bully process was as bad as it is at NASA, I can understand why you
don't work there anymore ;-)


I think the common thread is: nobody likes a smartarse.


  #67  
Old November 16th 06, 05:04 PM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 224
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)


"Because the NASA team could not verify that the repairs would
survive even a modified re-entry, the rescue option had a
considerably higher chance of bringing Columbia's crew back alive."
(CAIB Vol. 1)

In effect, the same guys who immediately after the diasater openly
stated "there was no way to repair" (they even said it that line as
the astronauts were still alive) did later the task to investigate
whether their statement was correct. They did it the NASA disaster
way: "inconclusive"


That's about all they could do, under the time constraints required by
the CAIB.


They had several months to do some tests. But they never published
what they did. They have this test facility and they were ordered
by Gehman to do it. So they did something. And no action in such
a facility without a report. This reports are somewhere. It seems
the astronaut corps got knowledge of its content and thats where
Sid Gutierrez statment about wet towels came from.



It seems the results were too
unwanted obvious:

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.

What is your source? Was it you who said something the same line
over a year ago claiming some knowledge of NASA tests not yet
released? As we got no source it was dismissed as one of the many
Columbia Usenet myths. But maybe there is a report out now. I`m not
the only one eager to read it!

It depends on what you mean by "report". NASA has published no report
directly addressing Columbia repair on STS-107. But then again,
that's not necessary. What I did was to read the CAIB report, both
Volume 1 section 6.4 and Appendix D.13, and make careful note of the
assumptions both stated and implicit. Then I read on NASA's work on
RCC repair and entry aerothermodynamics since the CAIB report was
published. This work does not directly address 107, but the results
of it invalidate the assumptions from CAIB. It's as simple as that.

First, the results of the RCC impact tests at SwRI demonstrate that
the area around the hole in panel 8L almost certainly had surrounding
areas where the RCC was cracked and delaminated. Arcjet tests at Ames
and JSC demonstrate that RCC damage propagates rapidly along these
cracks. So it doesn't matter what the crew puts in the hole behind
the panel to try to stop the flow of superheated air; the damage will
quickly spread and allow the superheated air to simply go around the
repair.


In simple words you assume the hole in the RCC would grow up until
most the RCC was consumed and the ice block was no longer a blockade.
That would be a clear "no way to repair". But I doubt that the
delamination would spread that fast.


What data are you basing that doubt on?


The fact that NASA never mentioned this failure mode in the repair
option discussion during CAIB. NASA had to know for +30 years how a
crack in the RCC will behave during reentry. So the oxidation at
the hole of Columbia never was an issue because they did know it was
none.

As a matter of fact, you're
wrong. A 15-minute arcjet test on an RCC specimen with a 0.03" crack had
to be aborted a little after the five minute mark because the specimen
was eroding so fast.


Ok, let us look in this example. Show me the source. I`m very interested
in the details of this test.


Its a plasma oxidation of an
otherwise covered RCC layer on the open crack surface. The hole may
be 2 cm wider after reentry, but not 4 times its size. As you read
it otherwise somewhere (or you got that impression there), please
give me your source.


My source was a presentation on RCC arcjet test results given to the
Orbiter Return-To-Flight Working Group, sometime in the spring of 2004.


What we need it a transcript or the technical report on it. Look, how
can you be sure that the words you heard(!) had realy your interpretation
as the only one? Mayby it was a test of some proposed new RCC material
or of repair stuff or operational limits of the arcjet facility were
tested...

Keep in mind that we are talking about a very emotional issue in a
highly tragic event. All people (I too) would prefere the "there was
no way to save them" notion. But it was not true. And worse, this
notion was main factor in what killed them. You and a lot of others
(remember Phil Chiens postings here) were subconsciously searching
for arguments to let it be true. I think you were the first or even
the only one who found the delamination issue. As longer away the time
you heard it as more and more you were convinced on it. And others
here were happy to read it in the slight feeling it may perhaps be true.
Thats the way myths got spread, in Usenet and reality.



2. there was no evidence of BL trip related damage by CAIB, it
all developed at the RCC


There was no evidence *remaining*. The RCC panel in question eroded away
quickly; *none* of its lower surface was recovered. Likewise the lower
surface of the wing behind it. The CAIB noted there was very little
debris recovered from the left wing.


The remaining evidence was extern the shuttle. The telemetry showed
no indication of BL trip. The CAIB reconstruction of the destruction
process explained all evidence (even the lost bright glowing tiles)
by events just behind the leading edge.


3. required smoothness criteria for the shuttle was to protect it
against any thermal damage to the tiles. This was to keep the tiles
reusable. In case of an emergency some tile damage would be
accecptable.


It depends on where the damage is.

4. on other missions Columbia had several early BL trips without
serious damage or without any damage at all.


The earliest of those BL trips was around Mach 19, more than halfway
through the peak heating period. I'm talking about a BL that goes
turbulent from the *very beginning*, at Mach 25.


I have not checked this. But as others have pointed out, the heat load
at Mach 25 is rather low.


--
JRF

## CrossPoint v3.12d R ##
  #68  
Old November 16th 06, 05:12 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)

h (Rand Simberg) wrote:

What's so frustrating is that we aren't even asking to do everything
right. We'd just like to do it so everything isn't so damned *wrong*.


I feel your pain, quite sincerely. My comment was directed not at
those (like you) with hands-on experience, but at those DerekL
recently described as "fanboys, opium dreamers, and folks eager to
prove that _their_ penile substitute is not only bigger, but faster
and cheaper too."

I've spent too much time as a citizen watching other agencies' R&D and
procurement to believe that NASA + primes is an especially awful case
within government. And I've spent too much time in my career watching
dysfunction (failing but unstoppable projects, managerial and
divisional infighting, and all the rest) at ABB, United Technologies,
Philips, Con Edison, and most of the big players in energy, IT, comm
and pharmaceuticals -- to believe that private enterprise and market
discipline automatically produce better results. I think it's just
especially frustrating to us because we love space and are impatient
for progress.

Monte Davis
http://montedavis.livejournal.com
  #69  
Old November 16th 06, 06:24 PM posted to sci.space.history
Rand Simberg[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,311
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 16:12:11 GMT, in a place far, far away, Monte
Davis made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

(Rand Simberg) wrote:

What's so frustrating is that we aren't even asking to do everything
right. We'd just like to do it so everything isn't so damned *wrong*.


I feel your pain, quite sincerely. My comment was directed not at
those (like you) with hands-on experience, but at those DerekL
recently described as "fanboys, opium dreamers, and folks eager to
prove that _their_ penile substitute is not only bigger, but faster
and cheaper too."

I've spent too much time as a citizen watching other agencies' R&D and
procurement to believe that NASA + primes is an especially awful case
within government. And I've spent too much time in my career watching
dysfunction (failing but unstoppable projects, managerial and
divisional infighting, and all the rest) at ABB, United Technologies,
Philips, Con Edison, and most of the big players in energy, IT, comm
and pharmaceuticals -- to believe that private enterprise and market
discipline automatically produce better results. I think it's just
especially frustrating to us because we love space and are impatient
for progress.


They may not always produce good results, but if they're operating in
a free market (Con Ed, for example, wouldn't count), they have to
provide *better* results. If not, they eventually go out of business
(e.g., GM's recent woes).
  #70  
Old November 16th 06, 06:56 PM posted to sci.space.history
Eric Chomko
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,630
Default NASA Astronaut on Columbia Repair (and others)

I want to know who has you in their killfile, OM. You seem to have an
inflated opinion of yourself. Your website sucks and you don't use your
real name. I basically think that you are a sheep that tires to act
like a wolf.

Mook has at least twice your intellect as does Jonathon.

Also I note that you killfile those that don't share your political
views, unless they are Henry that is.

Eric


OM wrote:
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 20:58:50 -0600, Herb Schaltegger
wrote:

Now you understand why many of us finally killfiled him - he spouts the
same nonsense over and over again and just completely ignores
information to the contrary.


...Lessee, if we had to come up with a "Strongly Urged Killfile List",
who'd be on that one permanently?

Brad Guth
Craig Fink
Wbua Znkfba(#)
Charleston
"jonathan"(*)
Thomas Lee Elfritz (**)
~CT aka "Stuff4"
Eric Chomko
Bob Haller aka "hallerb"
William Mook
Alan Erskine (***)
"scott grissom" (**)
Greg Kuperberg
Fred J. McCall
Nicholas Fitzpatrick
Nomen Nescio
Andre Lieven
BlagooBlanaa
Daniel Joseph Min(**)

Secret987

...And, of course, anyone from talk.bizarre or the net.kooks types who
crosspost from their respective pigpens to our group. Note that I may
be missing one or two, like that one moron who was bitching about the
Texas U. AeroEng department for kicking him out because he was a
psychotic, or that fat retarded bitch who was "scott grissom's" little
sycophant a few years back.

...Note that I didn't list Tony Lance there. While his drivel hasn't
been seen around here for a while, the "Big Bertha" posts are
sometimes too stupid to pass up for a laugh, especially since there's
some concensus that Lance might have been using a modded copy of
Racter all along to generate those things.

[Thinks]

...Heh, I finally posted that killfile list after all. Took me long
enough, huh? Either way, this list comprises the most known, regular
or semi-regular trolls that pollute this newsgroup - not to mention
usenet - way too much for most people's tastes.

(#) Filtering on just the last name will be sufficient to remove all
of this psychotic troll's postings and those of his equally psychotic
family's, save for those of "Charleston".

(*) Absolutely NOT to be confused with Jonathan Silverlight, who is a
valued contributor to this group.

(**) Uses many aliases.

(***) Alan's not actually a troll per se, but he's raised the ire of
quite a few trolls who pollute the group with accusations of his being
a child molester/pervert/democrat to the point that it's easier to
just killfile his name to get rid of them all.


OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog -
http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[


 




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 04:56 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.