|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
MEDS Glass Cockpit Led to Death of Columbia Crew (One Gaping Hole in the CAIB Report)
A popular poster available from NASA is the one showing the shuttle's
modern glass cockpit. Whenever I look at this image: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/...2000e10522.jpg ....I feel a sickening reminder of how this glass cockpit led to the death of the seven Columbia astronauts. Gehman's group worked diligently over seven months to deliver a statement that NASA lacked adequate funding for safe shuttle operations. This is a seriously flawed conclusion. NASA was given 10 figures worth of money to improve the shuttle - well over a billion dollars. The problem that proved fatal was that NASA prioritized glitz over safety. Here is a .pdf of a 1997 GAO report on shuttle upgrades: http://www.gao.gov/archive/1998/ns98021t.pdf Page 6 highlights the four most costly upgrades, including over $200 million to fund a snazzy glass cockpit. What was NASA doing pumping so much money into an upgrade that had questionable value with regards to safety? What was Congress doing in approving NASA's wish list? How is it that priorities got so backwards that safety took a back seat to "flash"? Consider this feeble justification for the MEDS upgrade: _____ ....Gregory, who piloted space shuttle mission STS-67 in 1995 and also helped evaluate MEDS from a pilot's perspective. Most astronauts entering the space shuttle for the first time, find the experience to be a step backwards. "The flight instruments are very reminiscent of the 60s and 70s technology," Gregory says. "When MEDS was first being developed...the shuttle pilots were older pilots...used to the steam gauges. "Today, new shuttle commanders and pilots are used to the glass cockpits of the F-15s, F-16s and F/A-18s, which they have flown either as operational or test pilots. This [upgrade] is bringing them back to what is familiar to them." _____ (From http://www.defensedaily.com/reports/...paceshutle.htm) So with MEDS making the top four with regards to cost, consider the upgrades that didn't make the cut. Years before STS-107, NASA had designed a more robust replacement for WLE RCC to counter: "...the risk of a catastrophic puncture of an Orbiter wing leading edge..." A simple Googling of [WLE MMOD] will take you straight to the webpage that NASA keeps available (MMOD stands for Micro-Meteoroid Orbital Debris). The quote above is taken from this page: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/upgrades/wle.html This site (last updated on "04/07/02") offers lots more info on this upgrade that got cancelled: _____ Solution: Design being implemented provides additional insulation (Nextel 440 fabric) behind the Inconel foil for WLE panels 5-13. Initial Operation Date: Phase II Upgrade OV-102 STS-103 (12/2/99) OV-103 STS- 97(4/8/99) OV-104 STS-92 (1/14/99) OV-105 STS-96 (12/9/98) _____ So why did Hal Gehman and his group not bother to highlight this fact? A thorough investigation would have criticized this misappropriation of MEDS at the expense of safety. A tragic irony is that Willy McCool had a leading role in the MEDS upgrade. Here is a photo of him working at SAIL, the Shuttle Avionics Integration Lab (designated as OV-095): http://www.unitedspacealliance.com/p...ds/meds12b.jpg Here's a page listing shuttle program goals: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/upgrades/goals.html Nowhere do I see a goal of "keeping up with the Jones's" triple-7 style, as Bill Gregory seems to justify the cost. But it is brutally evident that what was sacrificed at the expense of the decision to implement MEDS was: "Goal 1: Fly Safely". NASA had gotten plenty of money to fly the shuttle safely. That money was not spent wisely. ~ CT |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
MEDS Glass Cockpit Led to Death of Columbia Crew (One Gaping Holein the CAIB Report)
I'd tend to think that there is more justification to be found for MEDS
than the one you cite, which indeed is feeble. Two points I remember: it became increasingly difficult and costly to maintain the original display equipment; and the new devices allow more information to be presented in more easily perceptible form, required for the additional tasks in building ISS. Solution: Design being implemented provides additional insulation (Nextel 440 fabric) behind the Inconel foil for WLE panels 5-13. I doubt that this modification would have made much of a difference in the STS-107 scenario - it is directed at the much smaller damage caused by orbital debris. Jan |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
MEDS Glass Cockpit Led to Death of Columbia Crew (One Gaping Hole in the CAIB Report)
I'm sorry, but you are talking with the benefit of hindsight, a technology
not available to us! The leading edge scheme, for instance, was named after what it was supposed to prevent, namely micro meteorite damage, which I gather has not been a significant problem, so little wonder it was not given a high priority. Now if it had been called foam impact strangthening of leading edge, then two things should have happened, 1 why the hell do we need to do this, fix the bloody foam! and if we fix the foam, do we really need this? The glass cockpit sounds valid to me, as it must save a lot of retraining of how to use equipment, and presumably be easier to actually fly it. So, I say, lets spend the money of hindsight research! :-) Brian -- Brian Gaff.... graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them Email: __________________________________________________ __________________________ __________________________________ --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.518 / Virus Database: 316 - Release Date: 11/09/03 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Stuf4 spouts garbage was ( MEDS Glass Cockpit Led to Death ofColumbia Crew (One Gaping Hole in the CAIB Report)
Stuf4 wrote:
A popular poster available from NASA is the one showing the shuttle's modern glass cockpit. Whenever I look at this image: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/...2000e10522.jpg ...I feel a sickening reminder of how this glass cockpit led to the death of the seven Columbia astronauts. What a crock of ****. Not spending the money on the Meds would not stop the foam strike. You idiot Julian |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Stuf4 spouts garbage was ( MEDS Glass Cockpit Led to Death of Columbia Crew (One Gaping Hole in the CAIB Report)
In article ,
Julian Bordas wrote: Stuf4 wrote: A popular poster available from NASA is the one showing the shuttle's modern glass cockpit. Whenever I look at this image: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/...es/jsc2000e105 22.jpg ...I feel a sickening reminder of how this glass cockpit led to the death of the seven Columbia astronauts. What a crock of ****. Not spending the money on the Meds would not stop the foam strike. You idiot Julian Not only that but do you really think Nextel 440 fabric behind the leading edge would have provided sufficient thermal protection for a TEN INCH hole in the RCC panel 8? Furthermore, have you even seen the foam test strike videos? It's is VERY possible that the foam would (and did) knock large pieces of fractured RCC straight back into the cavity; it is very unlikely that any sort of high-tech fabric insulation would survive such a shattering impact to the RCC; it would tear or rupture as the RCC fragment(s) were smashed back through it. The upgrade you refer to was supposed to help in a micrometeoroid impact scenario. I suggest you consider the sizes, masses, velocities and impact angles such an uprgrade is supposed to help with, and consider as well the estimated sizes of any supposed RCC penetrations caused by such an impact. On second thought, why don't you spend less time digging through obscure reports for bits of data which are meaningless without full context and MORE time understanding fundamental principles of engineering? -- Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D. Reformed Aerospace Engineer "Heisenberg might have been here." ~ Anonymous |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
MEDS Glass Cockpit Led to Death of Columbia Crew (One GapingHole in the CAIB Report)
Stuf4 wrote:
A popular poster available from NASA is the one showing the shuttle's modern glass cockpit. Whenever I look at this image: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/...2000e10522.jpg ...I feel a sickening reminder of how this glass cockpit led to the death of the seven Columbia astronauts. [snip] Sounds to me like you're trying to create a cause celebre. With the benefit of hindsight, it's easy to say we should have upgraded RCC or updated CRATER or performed more foam strike testing. Instead, NASA updated the cockpit as part of shuttle upgrades to keep the shuttle flying for another 20 or 30 years. Saying things like "...this glass cockpit led to the death of the seven Columbia astronauts" is a sensational claim devoid of merit. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
MEDS Glass Cockpit Led to Death of Columbia Crew (One Gaping Hole in the CAIB Report)
"Stuf4" wrote:
...I feel a sickening reminder of how this glass cockpit led to the death of the seven Columbia astronauts. This is asinine... even for you. Roger -- Roger Balettie former Flight Dynamics Officer Space Shuttle Mission Control http://www.balettie.com/ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
MEDS Glass Cockpit Led to Death of Columbia Crew (One Gaping Hole in the CAIB Report)
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
MEDS Glass Cockpit Led to Death of Columbia Crew (One Gaping Holein the CAIB Report)
Stuf4 wrote:
Consider this feeble justification for the MEDS upgrade: You forgot the fact that the new cockpit weighs a lot less, consumes less power (considere that fuel cells share oxygen with humans, loweing power consumption helps when the time comes to add a few days to a mission), and are far less complex to maintain. And while MEDS currently only replicates old steam gauges, they were developped to allow future plans to make more dramatic changes to the cockpit flight computers, allowing further automation. So I am not sure of that $200 million you quoted was simply for MEDS or if it included a substantial portion for the baseline design of a new cockpit to come in the future. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
MEDS Glass Cockpit <- CT Troll Thread, kids! Killfile NOW!
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 13:01:31 GMT, stmx3
wrote: Sounds to me like you're trying to create a cause celebre. ....Kids, don't fall for this troll. ~CT or Stuff4 is a rather infamous troll around these groups. If you google on his account, you'll find all he does is post banal and impossible conspiracy theories designed to **** people off with their sheer audacity and ignorance. Note that you'll need to search before 2/1/03, as he thankfully vanished after Columbia(*) and only recently resurfaced a couple of weeks ago. Don't let his bull**** start screwing up the group again. PLEASE just killfile the troll and be done with him. (*) The hope at the time was that he was in the debris path and got painfully killed by an impact or ten. 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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Shuttle Columbia Whitewash | Peter J Ross | Space Shuttle | 18 | September 3rd 03 03:28 AM |
Whoever beleives Columbia could have been saved, needs to stop watching movies. | Oval | Space Shuttle | 20 | August 31st 03 12:01 AM |
NEWS: After Columbia Tragedy, NASA Considers Space Rescue | Rusty Barton | Space Shuttle | 12 | August 29th 03 05:07 AM |
News: Families of Columbia crew await shuttle report.... | Rusty Barton | Space Shuttle | 1 | August 11th 03 11:24 PM |
DEATH DOES NOT EXIST -- Coal Mine Rescue Proves It | Ed Conrad | Space Shuttle | 4 | August 2nd 03 01:00 AM |