Space shuttle Columbia crashes
- Thread starter Shadowfax
- Start date
Aunty Em
Well-Known Member
I must admit most of mine tend to be "off the cuff", occassionally I'll research an answer first if I'm not particularly knowledgable about the subject, but mainly it's from my own knowledge or experience... it's also a good way of finding out about a particular subject without reading through reams of stuff yourself... you just have to remember it's subjective...
Professur
Well-Known Member
1: Please don't consider SB to be a typical canadian. He's not a typical anything.
2: They're considering that the foam that broke off may have been too thin and allowed water to condense on it. The water would have further reduced the effectiveness of the foam to the point where the liquid hydrogen in the external tank would have caused the infiltrated water to change to ice. If this happened, the presumed 3lbs piece of foam may have actually been a 20+lbs block of ice, with a much greater hardness factor.
3: While I can't remember the exact figures, it takes (approx) 100lbs of fuel to lift 1lbs of payload into orbit. Manouvering fuel is payload. The Canadarm is payload. Cameras, sensors, and EVA gear are all payload. They don't squeeze in a little more fuel just in case. They don't carry spare parts. And, contrary to what Hollywood and the movies Arrmagedon and Space Cowboys would have you think, scrambling a launch means shaving hours or days off a launch schedule, not months. Just filling the external tank takes more time than Colombia had. The best that could have been done would have been to scrub the Russian resupply mission to ISS and used their payload space to ship spares and equipment. But to do that, they would have had to know exactly what damage had been done. An impossible feat given the equipment on board. An examination of the damage would have needed to be done, an inventory of damaged parts taken, the parts found in Spares if they were even availible. Procedures for how to perform the repairs in zero G created. The parts shipped to the russians and prepped for launch. A rendevous orbit calculated. Launch and rendevous time. Repair time.
There simply wasn't enough time. Colombia's orbit would have decayed past the point of return before any rescue and repair could have reached them. Let's face it. They were doomed from the instant they launched. Just like Challenger. Just as the Apollo 1 astronauts were. They were the price we have to pay for advancement. We could take greater precausions. We could have a whole orbiter sitting standby at the ISS, just in case. But how much would that take away from the rest of the program?
Safety is easy. You build a bunker, and stay in it. You never go out. You never do anything. You don't live. The men and women of NASA aren't like that. They want to go. They see the risks. They accept them. They accept that the first guy up a scaling ladder isn't likely to make it back down. It's estimated that the chances of a total loss of a ship is one in seventy five. They know this. They do it anyways.
So, SB, don't cheapen their sacrafice. Don't cheapen their gift to us. They gave their lives, that we could go further.
2: They're considering that the foam that broke off may have been too thin and allowed water to condense on it. The water would have further reduced the effectiveness of the foam to the point where the liquid hydrogen in the external tank would have caused the infiltrated water to change to ice. If this happened, the presumed 3lbs piece of foam may have actually been a 20+lbs block of ice, with a much greater hardness factor.
3: While I can't remember the exact figures, it takes (approx) 100lbs of fuel to lift 1lbs of payload into orbit. Manouvering fuel is payload. The Canadarm is payload. Cameras, sensors, and EVA gear are all payload. They don't squeeze in a little more fuel just in case. They don't carry spare parts. And, contrary to what Hollywood and the movies Arrmagedon and Space Cowboys would have you think, scrambling a launch means shaving hours or days off a launch schedule, not months. Just filling the external tank takes more time than Colombia had. The best that could have been done would have been to scrub the Russian resupply mission to ISS and used their payload space to ship spares and equipment. But to do that, they would have had to know exactly what damage had been done. An impossible feat given the equipment on board. An examination of the damage would have needed to be done, an inventory of damaged parts taken, the parts found in Spares if they were even availible. Procedures for how to perform the repairs in zero G created. The parts shipped to the russians and prepped for launch. A rendevous orbit calculated. Launch and rendevous time. Repair time.
There simply wasn't enough time. Colombia's orbit would have decayed past the point of return before any rescue and repair could have reached them. Let's face it. They were doomed from the instant they launched. Just like Challenger. Just as the Apollo 1 astronauts were. They were the price we have to pay for advancement. We could take greater precausions. We could have a whole orbiter sitting standby at the ISS, just in case. But how much would that take away from the rest of the program?
Safety is easy. You build a bunker, and stay in it. You never go out. You never do anything. You don't live. The men and women of NASA aren't like that. They want to go. They see the risks. They accept them. They accept that the first guy up a scaling ladder isn't likely to make it back down. It's estimated that the chances of a total loss of a ship is one in seventy five. They know this. They do it anyways.
So, SB, don't cheapen their sacrafice. Don't cheapen their gift to us. They gave their lives, that we could go further.
Shadowfax
<b>mod cow</b>
i have to agree on this one with Prof and OSLI...not much to add.
one note though: rendezvous with the Columbia was impossible, since they weren't carrying a docking module along from what i know. And the docking module isn't a piece of equiptment that can be installed in space.
one note though: rendezvous with the Columbia was impossible, since they weren't carrying a docking module along from what i know. And the docking module isn't a piece of equiptment that can be installed in space.
sbcanada
New Member
outside looking in said:
outside looking in said:
Looks like a case of Mr. Moderator letting off some personal attacks. I have a very simple one that clearly expresses myself....... Fuck You.
^ Now there's a sign of intelligence. Bottom line is this... they (the engineers) knew there was probably damage that could threaten the shuttle. But all the intelligent big shots at NASA just shoved their thumbs up their own asses and hoped for the best. Well they fucked up. They fucked up bad and it really makes them look stupid. Even if there was no way to tell if there was damage, or if there was no way to rescue the doomed crew..... THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN.
It's really dissapointing if we can't even check for damage or go rescue the crew of a doomed spacecraft. There should be provisions and plans in place in case something like this happens. The American government could perhaps cut back on their yearly invasion of country X and give NASA some of that money. If something hits the shuttle on takeoff... I speak for all mankind when I say we should damn well be able to check for damage and rescue the crew if nessessary!
P.S.
I admit an error on my part in my previous posts... I incorrectly thought that the shuttle was at the Space Station running experiments, as I'm so used to hearing about.
Mirlyn
Well-Known Member
You know, I personally don't think this tragedy is worth arguing about. Someone/something royaly screwed up, I think we all can agree. By the looks of things, we'll know soon enough the details without having to resort to personal attacks to express our opinions right now. 
outside looking in
<b>Registered Member</b>
You know, it looks really stupid for the Canadians not to be able to solve the world's health problems. Even if there aren't any Canadian super drugs that can cure all ailments, including malnutrition, THERE SHOULD BE.
It's really dissapointing that you guys can't feed the starving and cure the ill. There should be provisions in place in case someone becomes undernourished or sick. Perhaps the Canadian government should cut back on the number environmental restrictions on retrieving oil, and give some of the extra money to their health organizations to solve this problem. I speak for all mankind when I say that when someone is in need the Canadians should damn well be able to take care of their problems, whatever they might be!
In case your brain cell is having prolems with parody or sarcasm this week, let me help: it's easy to just say something, no matter how unrealistic or assinine it may be (reference your above post). It's easy to declare that something should be, without having to offer any explanation of how to accomplish it. It's even easier when you can blame the problem on someone else (i.e., "the Americans").
Such statements just make you look even more ignorant... if that is logically possible.
It's really dissapointing that you guys can't feed the starving and cure the ill. There should be provisions in place in case someone becomes undernourished or sick. Perhaps the Canadian government should cut back on the number environmental restrictions on retrieving oil, and give some of the extra money to their health organizations to solve this problem. I speak for all mankind when I say that when someone is in need the Canadians should damn well be able to take care of their problems, whatever they might be!
In case your brain cell is having prolems with parody or sarcasm this week, let me help: it's easy to just say something, no matter how unrealistic or assinine it may be (reference your above post). It's easy to declare that something should be, without having to offer any explanation of how to accomplish it. It's even easier when you can blame the problem on someone else (i.e., "the Americans").
Such statements just make you look even more ignorant... if that is logically possible.
Professur
Well-Known Member
SB, do you ever think before you hit the send button? There could have been emergency procedures in place. At a cost of millions. There could have been a second orbiter sitting on station at the ISS waiting for an emergency. At a cost of billions. There could have been a rescue orbiter sitting on the pad fueled and ready to go during the entire mission. At a cost of tens of billions.
Who's supposed to pay for all that? NASA? The US people?
One day, there'll be regular orbital traffic, and tomorrows shuttle could be scrubbed to chase and save today's. Just like 200 years ago, someone heading west was making a one way trip and hoping to return. Today a rescue can be sent anywhere. Except up. One day, the resources for a space rescue in orbit will be there. And someone will be bitching coz we can't do a rescue for an interstellar ship.
It's called the leading edge for a reason.
And as for the personal attacks... I don't really see calling someone an idiot when he's being an idiot as a personal attack. That's just calling it as it is. Maybe if you stopped and read what you've typed before you submit, you wouldn't get called names. Maybe.
Who's supposed to pay for all that? NASA? The US people?
One day, there'll be regular orbital traffic, and tomorrows shuttle could be scrubbed to chase and save today's. Just like 200 years ago, someone heading west was making a one way trip and hoping to return. Today a rescue can be sent anywhere. Except up. One day, the resources for a space rescue in orbit will be there. And someone will be bitching coz we can't do a rescue for an interstellar ship.
It's called the leading edge for a reason.
And as for the personal attacks... I don't really see calling someone an idiot when he's being an idiot as a personal attack. That's just calling it as it is. Maybe if you stopped and read what you've typed before you submit, you wouldn't get called names. Maybe.
Is it today already?
outside looking in
<b>Registered Member</b>
Yeah, but us retarded people still like to win at something! Don't take this away from us!
watch the video of teh final minutes (pre-disaster time)
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...cid=514&u=/ap/20030228/ap_on_sc/shuttle_video
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...cid=514&u=/ap/20030228/ap_on_sc/shuttle_video
sbcanada
New Member
If they can make robots that can go to mars, collect soil samples and return with them, why can't they make a robot that can move around the exterior of the space shuttle and inspect for possible damage? Give the little bastard some rope, suction cups, magnets, or a lil jetpack if need be, but don't tell me its impossible. Hell, they could have designed surveilance cameras into the shuttle. They could be deployed and undeployed like the shuttles gear. My point is that there should be a way for them to inspect the shuttle when it's in orbit, and that has nothing to do with Canada being able to solve the world's problems.