The launch of STS-26

It was the perfect day for a launch, just beautiful. Blue skies, no wind
all the way to the heavens, and it almost didn't happen. Prelaunch
predicted vehicle loads were at or above limits (100%), giving mission
managers much to think about before the decision was finally made "go".

Good luck to the crew of STS-114, hopefully they'll have just as nice a
day to launch as STS-26 did.

--
Craig Fink
Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @

Craig Fink wrote:
It was the perfect day for a launch, just beautiful. Blue skies, no wind
all the way to the heavens, and it almost didn't happen. Prelaunch
predicted vehicle loads were at or above limits (100%), giving mission
managers much to think about before the decision was finally made "go".

Good luck to the crew of STS-114, hopefully they'll have just as nice a
day to launch as STS-26 did.

For STS-26, a WCDT and a FRF exposed the TSM leaks and wrung out the
facility problems that NASA and Lockheed hadn't bothered with for
Challenger, Mission 51-L.

Who said, "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure?" Nobody had
to tell him to "go fly a kite!"

Have you taken a look at the FSS lately? If you look around on the web,
you can find a photo or two of its pitiful-looking condition.

Someone should check the NASA/Lockheed accounting for money spent on
Launch Pad 39B and its MLP since the last launch from that site. My
guess is that about three years of downtime haven't improved their
condition much. A FRF would check out the stagnant launch pad
environment. It would also stress Lockheed's tank mods a bit, in
advance.

So much for common sense and a practical engineering approach for
committing to launch. NASA has forgotten its own safety guidelines,
again.

Challenger's Ghost