|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Challenger Salvage Chief Conceded Fireball Crossing
In late October 1987, AF Col. Ed O'Connor (who directed the
51-L debris recovery) confirmed an in-cloud booster crossing. =========================================== DANIEL MAXSON: Do the SRBs -- or did they -- cross in the clouds? COL. ED O'CONNOR: Ya, the feeling is they did. What happened is when the aft fixture failed, that SRB rotated out. So that's why the thrust would force it to *cross* -- after the *forward* section failed -- cross the path of the other which was still *attached*! DANIEL MAXSON: Ya but -- but they were held *together*. I was told by a NASA expert the SRBs were held together by a big *ring* of the thrust structure of the external tank. Otherwise they would have immediately exited the cloud. And that they went maybe a half-second held together by some kind of an ET *ring* frame. COL. ED O'CONNOR: Well, there's *two* things that holds it together. At the *rear* there's a heavy ring for attachment, and that's where the *failure* occurred, heating one of those struts that holds them together and then *ripping* the rest of it out. In the *top* structure, there's a thrust *beam* that goes through the intertank area. There's some *ancillary* stuff there. The forward *held* for a little bit. DANIEL MAXSON: And it allowed them to cross. COL. ED O'CONNOR: Ya. DANIEL MAXSON: Okay. =========================================== [Given probable cause, a federal judge can order an 'in camera' inspection of classified (in this case SENSITIVE) film data.] -- John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace) Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Challenger **Salvage**Chief** Conceded Fireball Crossing
A little birdie told me about this:
"John Maxson" wrote in message In late October 1987, AF Col. Ed O'Connor (who directed the 51-L debris recovery) confirmed an in-cloud booster crossing. COL. ED O'CONNOR: Ya, the feeling is they did. What "the *feeling* is they did." Wow. What a ringing endorsement from the salvage chief. happened is when the aft fixture failed, that SRB rotated out. But, *you* wrote that the left SRB tail dropped - due to gravity as you described. He says they went "out". If they went out, how would they have rolled the vehicle? COL. ED O'CONNOR: Well, there's *two* things that holds it together. At the *rear* there's a heavy ring for attachment, and that's where the *failure* occurred, heating one of those struts that holds them together and then *ripping* the rest of it out. So ... what was it that "heated" the strut to the point where it failed? An SRB breech, perhaps? Yes, and we can see the plume from that "blowtorch" that failed the strut, as he says. Gee, where did that plume go to? Yet another selective use of a misintepreted quote by an authority who may be stepping out of his area of expertise. What's next John? I can see it now: "Titusville Piggly Wiggly Head Cashier admits RCS firings on ascent." "KSC's Cafeteria Master Chef Breaks Silence, Reveals He Cooked up O-Ring Idea." |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Challenger **Salvage**Chief** Conceded Fireball Crossing
I should learn not to read news and eat at the same time. Thanks for a touch
of the absurd that appeals to my sense of humour, and apologies if it was in bad taste considering the incidents involved. 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: 6.0.502 / Virus Database: 300 - Release Date: 18/07/03 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Challenger Salvage Chief Conceded Fireball Crossing
What you and Lockheed intend to do, Berndt, is attempt
to discredit *any* authority who argues or witnesses in *any* way against Rogers' O-ring decree. -- John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace) Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com) Jon Berndt wrote in message ... Yet another selective use of a misintepreted quote by an authority who may be stepping out of his area of expertise. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Challenger **Salvage**Chief** Conceded Fireball Crossing
"John Maxson" wrote in message
What you and Lockheed intend to do, Berndt, is attempt to discredit *any* authority who argues or witnesses in *any* way against Rogers' O-ring decree. As you know, I speak for myself alone. I don't intend to discredit anyone. You've discredited yourself. As for your hypothesis, it's also already been discredited, ad nausuem. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Challenger **Salvage**Chief** Conceded Fireball Crossing
"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
I should learn not to read news and eat at the same time. Thanks for a touch of the absurd that appeals to my sense of humour, and apologies if it was in bad taste considering the incidents involved. Brian There is, of course, no humor in the accident, but there periodically is in watching John Maxson's quest for legitimacy and vindication for his hypotheses*. Note: My use of hypothesis comes from Marriam Webster (www.m-w.com): HYPOTHESIS implies insufficient evidence to provide more than a tentative explanation a hypothesis explaining the extinction of the dinosaurs. THEORY implies a greater range of evidence and greater likelihood of truth the theory of evolution. LAW implies a statement of order and relation in nature that has been found to be invariable under the same conditions the law of gravitation. Jon -- of course I speak only for myself. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Challenger Salvage Chief Conceded Fireball Crossing
Jon Berndt wrote in message
... "John Maxson" wrote in message What you and Lockheed intend to do, Berndt, is attempt to discredit *any* authority who argues or witnesses in *any* way against Rogers' O-ring decree. As you know, I speak for myself alone. I don't intend to discredit anyone. Nevertheless, the world knows that you just *did* -- *again*! I repeat, with no uneasiness whatsoever, that you are a liar. You clearly are as badly burnt to a crisp and as out of whack in your unfounded allegations as your highly-touted but plainly worthless efforts to kill-file yourself from the engineering truth. You are as blind as a bat; you are battier than a bat, and like a bat, you fly off haphazardly at night looking for bugs to convert to hermetically-sealed guana (like the bugs in your sim programs). -- John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace) Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Challenger **Salvage**Chief** Conceded Fireball Crossing
On or about Tue, 22 Jul 2003 23:48:31 -0500, Jon Berndt
made the sensational claim that: What's next John? I can see it now: "Titusville Piggly Wiggly Head Cashier admits RCS firings on ascent." Titusville doesn't have a Piggly Wiggly. Not that that would stop Maxson from making the statement anyhow. -- This is a siggy | To E-mail, do note | This space is for rent It's properly formatted | who you mean to reply-to | Inquire within if you No person, none, care | and it will reach me | Would like your ad here |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Challenger Salvage Chief Conceded Fireball Crossing
If you had no need for your quest for legitimacy, you
could have pointed to a NASA disproof of the fireball crossing in January 2001 (or in January 1986 or 1987). You could not then, and you cannot now. You (like Dan) must constantly resort to admonitions of "stay tuned," even in the face of facts conclusively proving you both (like NASA and Lockheed) to be 51-L frauds. -- John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace) Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com) Jon Berndt wrote in message ... There is, of course, no humor in the accident, but there periodically is in watching John Maxson's quest for legitimacy and vindication for his hypotheses*. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Challenger **Salvage**Chief** Conceded Fireball Crossing
"LooseChanj" wrote in message news:y7wTa.6332
What's next John? I can see it now: "Titusville Piggly Wiggly Head Cashier admits RCS firings on ascent." Titusville doesn't have a Piggly Wiggly. Not that that would stop Maxson from making the statement anyhow. It actually might make it _more_ likely - you couldn't trace it. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|