Shuttle ET damage photos

OK, a thought. This is the most fuelled refuelled tank for a long time. The
pressure changes and weight distribution on the intertank region has seen
several cycles. As its machine sprayed then there is obviously no actual
check of the adhesion until later on. I suspect the expansion and
contraction and the general stress bending has lossened it in some places.
Seems to me there is no real problem, except as has been stated, if this
situation occurs again, then if that lets loose earlier you have a problem.

Back up for this theory to me is that it did not seem affected by the much
greater aerodynamic forces and only later, when the tank was a lot emptier,
and hence forces changed, did it come off.

Its also interesting to note that despite protestations to the contrary,
the assembly of this tank was not inspected properly, as if it had been, the
extreme tolerance stretching of the hydrogen connection skew would have
been noted earlier, and one must suspect that maybe other things were missed
as well.

Complacency near the end of a production run is quite a common problem you
know.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...
http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/st...d2/index2.html
I dug out the calipers and figured out the size of the shed pieces near
the LOX pipe in the upper photo.
They are three to four feet long by 4-5 inches wide.

Pat

Brian Gaff wrote:
Its also interesting to note that despite protestations to the contrary,
the assembly of this tank was not inspected properly, as if it had been, the
extreme tolerance stretching of the hydrogen connection skew would have
been noted earlier, and one must suspect that maybe other things were missed
as well.

Complacency near the end of a production run is quite a common problem you
know.

They are now looking at poor adhesion between the foam and the primer on
the exterior of the tank in the intertank structure, and checking out
all of the specifics of this particular tank's production history. At
least one tank got very wet during hurricane Katrina when part of the
production facility was damaged:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michoud_Assembly_Facility
If their primer works like house paint primer, then it should be
applied, then allowed to dry for a specific amount of time, but not too
long...or it will lose some of its desired tackiness for the final coat
to adhere to. So any production upset at Michoud could have affected the
foaming process adversely.

Pat

I wonder if that was before the foam was sprayed on?

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...


Brian Gaff wrote:
Its also interesting to note that despite protestations to the contrary,
the assembly of this tank was not inspected properly, as if it had been,
the extreme tolerance stretching of the hydrogen connection skew would
have been noted earlier, and one must suspect that maybe other things
were missed as well.

Complacency near the end of a production run is quite a common problem
you know.

They are now looking at poor adhesion between the foam and the primer on
the exterior of the tank in the intertank structure, and checking out all
of the specifics of this particular tank's production history. At least
one tank got very wet during hurricane Katrina when part of the production
facility was damaged:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michoud_Assembly_Facility
If their primer works like house paint primer, then it should be applied,
then allowed to dry for a specific amount of time, but not too long...or
it will lose some of its desired tackiness for the final coat to adhere
to. So any production upset at Michoud could have affected the foaming
process adversely.

Pat

As I say, being blind I cannot see the pictures, but I've had some
description of the first lot.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...


Brian Gaff wrote:
Its also interesting to note that despite protestations to the contrary,
the assembly of this tank was not inspected properly, as if it had been,
the extreme tolerance stretching of the hydrogen connection skew would
have been noted earlier, and one must suspect that maybe other things
were missed as well.

Complacency near the end of a production run is quite a common problem
you know.

They are now looking at poor adhesion between the foam and the primer on
the exterior of the tank in the intertank structure, and checking out all
of the specifics of this particular tank's production history. At least
one tank got very wet during hurricane Katrina when part of the production
facility was damaged:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michoud_Assembly_Facility
If their primer works like house paint primer, then it should be applied,
then allowed to dry for a specific amount of time, but not too long...or
it will lose some of its desired tackiness for the final coat to adhere
to. So any production upset at Michoud could have affected the foaming
process adversely.

Pat

Brian Gaff wrote:
As I say, being blind I cannot see the pictures, but I've had some
description of the first lot.

I'm sorry about that, I really have to write that down in relation to
posting replies to you.

Pat

Brian Gaff wrote:

As I say, being blind I cannot see the pictures, but ....

at Virginia Tech you can still drive....
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-1242-Science-News-Examiner~y2009m7d16-The-blind-can-drive-at-Virginia-Tech'
....The blind drivers actually performed better than their sighted counterparts