51-L RTLS Abort & RCS Valve Commands

Today Jim Oberg claimed that during Mission 51-L's ascent,
RCS valve commands could only have been downlinked if
there was a RTLS abort.

Well, some of you may remember that when NASA's Jim
Mizell saw Challenger's destruction he began running through
the bleachers at KSC shouting, "RTLS! RTLS! RTLS!"

Jim was an expert, and my brother and I had a long talk with
Jim. You don't have to take my word or Jim's though. Here
is a sobering paragraph from page 72 of my book:

=========================================
A voice (recorded on the soundtrack of an airborne
video from the east) gave a delayed alert: "Okay, we
have an RTLS (Return to Launch Site Abort) in
progress ... at Runway 33." The failed RTLS had
begun more than sixty seconds prior to the RSD, an
eternity in shuttle time!
=========================================

(I suspect maybe that should read "fifty" seconds prior.)

Also, from page 104 (referring to events of April 9, 1986):

=========================================
Dr. Ride and her panel met again at Johnson. ...
Subordinate orbiter managers Richard Colonna and
Robert Bobola, the 'forcing factors' for the 51-L
launch, attended in place of Arnold Aldrich. Part of
Dr. Ride's agenda was 'fast sep' with an RTLS.
=========================================

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

Charleston wrote
in message news:e2B_a.78676$zy.21277@fed1read06...

Perhaps that startling videotape belongs on a web page.
Thoughts?

Good idea. My thoughts? Where is the opposing team?
Apparently this RCS issue is over their heads, or else they
don't have any RCS telemetry data to "debate" us with.

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

Mr Maxson has been referring to RCS telemetry that he supposedly acquired
through the Freedom of Information Act.....actually teasing people with the I
have it and you don't routine. This is at odds with the aims of science and so
on.

I am sure that all of us in sss would welcome a candid exposition of RCS
telemetry showing multiple commanded or rogue firings of this system, and would
be in Maxson's debt for increasing our understanding of these long past events.
LMAO.

As it is, the does not exist and is the product of a diseased personality. It
is sad.

The claim of secret knowlege is one of Maxson's overt symptoms. In uh testimony
before the Rogers Commission the RCS telemetry was described as nominal.

I realize that I'm coming to this debate a little late in the game

Early, late, whatever. Your questions are still valid. My best advice comes
from OM. Killfile him.




"Alasdair McKie"
"John Maxson" wrote:

Apparently this RCS issue is over their heads, or else they
don't have any RCS telemetry data to "debate" us with.

May be you are a good conspiracy story writer, but your
marketing efforts to sell your book really suck. Perhaps you
should take a course on this subject.

"John Maxson" wrote in message
...
Today Jim Oberg claimed that during Mission 51-L's ascent,
RCS valve commands could only have been downlinked if
there was a RTLS abort.

Well, some of you may remember that when NASA's Jim
Mizell saw Challenger's destruction he began running through
the bleachers at KSC shouting, "RTLS! RTLS! RTLS!"

Jim was an expert, and my brother and I had a long talk with
Jim. You don't have to take my word or Jim's though. Here
is a sobering paragraph from page 72 of my book:

=========================================
A voice (recorded on the soundtrack of an airborne
video from the east) gave a delayed alert: "Okay, we
have an RTLS (Return to Launch Site Abort) in
progress ... at Runway 33." The failed RTLS had
begun more than sixty seconds prior to the RSD, an
eternity in shuttle time!
=========================================

(I suspect maybe that should read "fifty" seconds prior.)

Also, from page 104 (referring to events of April 9, 1986):

=========================================
Dr. Ride and her panel met again at Johnson. ...
Subordinate orbiter managers Richard Colonna and
Robert Bobola, the 'forcing factors' for the 51-L
launch, attended in place of Arnold Aldrich. Part of
Dr. Ride's agenda was 'fast sep' with an RTLS.
=========================================

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

"John Maxson" wrote"
Well, some of you may remember that when NASA's Jim
Mizell saw Challenger's destruction he began running through
the bleachers at KSC shouting, "RTLS! RTLS! RTLS!"

For review:
http://www.time.com/time/reports/space/disaster3.html

QUOTE
"RTLS! RTLS!" yelled former NASA Engineer Jim Mizell, watching from the
press stands at the cape. He looked up in vain, and in horror, expecting
Challenger to arc away from the unnatural cloudburst and return safely to
the landing strip.
/QUOTE

To me, it sounds like Mr. Mizell was *hoping* for Challenger to emerge from
the conflagration and *perform* an RTLS... he wasn't stating that an RTLS
abort was *in progress*.

He, sitting in the press stands, would have had no indication whatsoever
that an RTLS abort was in progress. Neither would you, Mr. Maxson, with
your myriad of misinterpretations of visual events be able to wish that
event into reality.

And, to describe Mr. Mizell as "running through the bleachers" seems to be a
bit of a stretch.

Jim was an expert, and my brother and I had a long talk with
Jim. You don't have to take my word or Jim's though. Here
is a sobering paragraph from page 72 of my book:

=========================================
A voice (recorded on the soundtrack of an airborne
video from the east) gave a delayed alert: "Okay, we
have an RTLS (Return to Launch Site Abort) in
progress ... at Runway 33." The failed RTLS had
begun more than sixty seconds prior to the RSD, an
eternity in shuttle time!
=========================================

(I suspect maybe that should read "fifty" seconds prior.)

Regardless of what some PAO commentator may or may not have said (I have no
debate on the subject of what was said to the public at the KSC press or
viewing sites, nor is it very relevant), there was no RTLS abort initiated
or in progress during STS-51L at any time.

Also, from page 104 (referring to events of April 9, 1986):

=========================================
Dr. Ride and her panel met again at Johnson. ...
Subordinate orbiter managers Richard Colonna and
Robert Bobola, the 'forcing factors' for the 51-L
launch, attended in place of Arnold Aldrich. Part of
Dr. Ride's agenda was 'fast sep' with an RTLS.
=========================================

She may have been looking to see *IF* that event happened (as a good
investigator will), but certainly seems to be convinced (as am I) that it
did *NOT*.

Roger
--
Roger Balettie
former Flight Dynamics Officer
Space Shuttle Mission Control
http://www.balettie.com/

"Herb Schaltegger" wrote:
"Charleston" wrote:
John Maxson wrote:

=========================================
A voice (recorded on the soundtrack of an airborne
video from the east) gave a delayed alert: "Okay, we
have an RTLS (Return to Launch Site Abort) in
progress ... at Runway 33." The failed RTLS had
begun more than sixty seconds prior to the RSD, an
eternity in shuttle time!
=========================================

(I suspect maybe that should read "fifty" seconds prior.)

Perhaps that startling videotape belongs on a web page. Thoughts?

Unless you provide authenticating documentation, it's going to be
perceived as a forgery.

This is is what makes it so difficult to "prove" anything here. Please
define "authenticating documentation".

1. I can provide a copy of the letter I wrote to Johnson Space Center (JSC)
requesting the videotape.
2. I can provide a copy of the JSC FOIA reply letter.
3. I doubt I have a bank record proving I paid for said tape.
4. I can take a photograph of the tape with NASA typing on it.
5. I can provide whatever information NASA has it listed as and the item
number.
6. I can put a copy of the videotape on the web.
7. I can provide anecdotal information.
8. I can scan a copy of the background info on the camera from the
Photographic Acquisition Disposition Document for STS 51-L.
9. Anyone can then watch and listen and probably appreciate that it is a
real tape.
10. I can lead a Herb to water, but I can't make you drink.
11. I doubt I can easily find the cameraman.

12. And you wonder why my Dad does not put anything else on the web? It is
so disheartening I am sure to provide the best you have only to have someone
make fun of you for doing so. In this instance I will probably do it anyway
because I think it may help my Dad.

Also, from page 104 (referring to events of April 9, 1986):

=========================================
Dr. Ride and her panel met again at Johnson. ...
Subordinate orbiter managers Richard Colonna and
Robert Bobola, the 'forcing factors' for the 51-L
launch, attended in place of Arnold Aldrich. Part of
Dr. Ride's agenda was 'fast sep' with an RTLS.
=========================================

A lot can happen in just a few seconds. Somehow "Uh Oh" seems a tad
insulting as NASA's official last recorded words for the Challenger
crew.
Perhaps an official NASA report paints a different picture. Even now,
it
is being scanned one misearble page at a time, complete with official
signatures. Even more revealing will be copies of certain original
flight
controllers notes, upon which the report was *based*, and notes from
interviews with JSC flight team members who were there at the time.
Surely
official commentary will tell us more than the noisy speculation of
posters
here, who were at Mission Control before or after but not *during* 51-L.

Put up or shut up, Daniel. Coyness is fine for 16 year olds on a date.
It is merely tiresome from you.

I do not take orders from you. You are the tiresome one given your
prerequisites, Mr. Lawyer. On the off hand that you are sincere, clearly
state your requirements of authentication, given the limitations of the web
or you can shut up. You may wish to consult with Roger Balettie and Jon
Berndt, both of whom have posted electronic copies of videotapes of the STS
51-L launch sans audio without your prerequisites and I have heard no
complaints for authentication from you. Said tapes are copies without
acknowledgement of me as the source (last time I looked). The copies were
apparently good enough for them to place on the web as part of an attempt to
discredit my Dad without acknowledgement as to source. Now what are your
standards again if your preconceived notions are not met?

--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

In article _0N_a.79047$zy.4367@fed1read06,
"Charleston" wrote:

This is is what makes it so difficult to "prove" anything here. Please
define "authenticating documentation".

1. I can provide a copy of the letter I wrote to Johnson Space Center (JSC)
requesting the videotape.
2. I can provide a copy of the JSC FOIA reply letter.
3. I doubt I have a bank record proving I paid for said tape.
4. I can take a photograph of the tape with NASA typing on it.
5. I can provide whatever information NASA has it listed as and the item
number.
6. I can put a copy of the videotape on the web.
7. I can provide anecdotal information.
8. I can scan a copy of the background info on the camera from the
Photographic Acquisition Disposition Document for STS 51-L.
9. Anyone can then watch and listen and probably appreciate that it is a
real tape.
10. I can lead a Herb to water, but I can't make you drink.
11. I doubt I can easily find the cameraman.

12. And you wonder why my Dad does not put anything else on the web? It is
so disheartening I am sure to provide the best you have only to have someone
make fun of you for doing so. In this instance I will probably do it anyway
because I think it may help my Dad.

Usually official documents are authenticated under seal (with an
affidavit of the official custodian of the records in question).
Alternately, the custodian him- or herself is called to testify that the
records are what they purport to be.

More to the point, Daniel - why set up another strawman? So what if
some uknown individual saw the stack come apart and misapprehended the
situation, believing he was seeing an RTLS abort rather than a
structural breakup? SO WHAT? That voice was not "calling" the abort in
the sense of ordering the crew (or software) to initiate the abort. So,
again, why set up a diversion like this? What is your goal in even
raising this point?

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
"Heisenberg might have been here."
~ Anonymous

Herb Schaltegger wrote in message
...

That voice was not "calling" the abort in the sense of ordering
the crew (or software) to initiate the abort.

No, it was a voice of authority responding in real-time to official
communication from Air Force Range Safety officers, or their
equivalent, about how to proceed downrange and why.

What is your goal in even raising this point?

He's entitled. It really bothers you, doesn't it?

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:54:48 GMT, "Roger Balettie"
wrote:

QUOTE
"RTLS! RTLS!" yelled former NASA Engineer Jim Mizell, watching from the
press stands at the cape. He looked up in vain, and in horror, expecting
Challenger to arc away from the unnatural cloudburst and return safely to
the landing strip.
/QUOTE

To me, it sounds like Mr. Mizell was *hoping* for Challenger to emerge from
the conflagration and *perform* an RTLS... he wasn't stating that an RTLS
abort was *in progress*.

....And as usual, the old fossil was taking and twisting quotes out of
context. No surprise there.

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

"OM" om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote
in message ...
...And as usual, the old fossil was taking and twisting quotes out of
context. No surprise there.

Fascinating, Captain.

I think twisting is an understatement, but I don't feel like getting my
thesaurus. I love these little "UnMaxsonings" of quotes and snippets from
reports, etc. Very enlightening. Almost as good as the technical info that a
reader can learn second-hand. Format:

Maxson: "Look at this blurry photo! Obviously XYZ was happening and you're
all too blind to see it!"
Actual NASA Employee: "XYZ is actualy not possible in that situation.
Relevant systems A and B were designed so that C is monitored in real time
and anything unusual would show up at D. I used to work at D."

The sad thing is that even a grade schooler would catch the context problems
with most of this "evidence" we've been seeing this week. Some guy in the
bleachers shouting "RTLS!" in desperation is supposed to be evidence that
there was some funky abort scenario happening... Right. But of course, our
resident Crusaders have spent X years and Y-thousand dollars to uncover...

*wind blows*
*tumbleweeds roll by*

....Nothing that can't be torpedoed by a ten-second search at Time.com. And
the OTHER people reading this NG are the "dumb ones?" Right.


----------------------------
Time for a new newsgroup.