Space Shuttle Columbia Explodes

Post by **Sylvus** » February 3, 2003, 3:21 pm

Sputnik!

Braxter · Post by **Braxter** » February 3, 2003, 3:49 pm

kyoukan type-R wrote:I ran out of honey nut cornflakes this morning. should I be building a rocket?

yes, because we all know that going to other planets will more than double the size of the periodic table of honey nut cornflakes.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » February 3, 2003, 3:49 pm

kyoukan type-R wrote:oh which broken sattelites did they fix?

That cant fixthem because of that Fucking Canadian Robotic Arm

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » February 3, 2003, 3:52 pm

Braxter wrote:
kyoukan type-R wrote:I ran out of honey nut cornflakes this morning. should I be building a rocket?
yes, because we all know that going to other planets will more than double the size of the periodic table of honey nut cornflakes.

The fuck you say?

Edit: W00T I'm almost 1337

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » February 3, 2003, 5:02 pm

Whats worse? The crash or the fact that people tried to sell the rubble on Ebay?

Assholes

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » February 3, 2003, 6:01 pm

You guys see the supposed fissure on the wing that an israeli news source is showing as a television camera shot from the Israeli onboard? check this out...You have to translate the page, but the picture is clear...

http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Cron ... repe.shtml

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » February 3, 2003, 6:32 pm

Jesus Christ. If that's how I think it looks, how could they have written it off as trivial to the safety of the crew? But then, who knows if they could even have fixed it. I have no idea what kind of materials they carry and what have you. But damn...

Bwuza · Post by **Bwuza** » February 3, 2003, 6:39 pm

I find this kind of dumb. I mean comon the ship was over 25 years old FF , what the hell did they think that they could have keep using it to year 3000 ?

You normaly buy a new car after what 5-15(20) years ? Depending of course how much you have been using it, and the car under that life time doesnt even come in close to the force and enviroment that the shuttle has experienced.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · February 3, 2003, 6:51 pm

JACKASS!

The space shuttle gets refurbished to like new status before each flight. This has been covered many times on this thread. Fucking read before you post your first time and look like a fucking moron.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » February 3, 2003, 6:59 pm

Granted, I'm no rocket scientist, but that certianly is a huge fucking crack in the wing. Hard to imagine they didn't notice that. I wonder what recourse they would've had if they knew in advance they wouldn't survive re-entry? Dock with the space station and we'd fly up another shuttle for a rescue? That would've been an interesting situation.

Post by **Sylvus** » February 3, 2003, 7:04 pm

Perhaps I'm seeing the picture wrong, but isn't that a picture that was taken from space? If so, it could have been something that wasn't noticeable before takeoff that got much worse on the way up. In which case they may have had few options once they were up there.

I have no idea what it costs to build a shuttle, do you think they have any sort of insurance on them?

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » February 3, 2003, 7:10 pm

Fairweather Pure wrote:Granted, I'm no rocket scientist, but that certianly is a huge fucking crack in the wing. Hard to imagine they didn't notice that. I wonder what recourse they would've had if they knew in advance they wouldn't survive re-entry? Dock with the space station and we'd fly up another shuttle for a rescue? That would've been an interesting situation.

By watching the many professionals (i.e. ex-NASA astronauts and engineers) that have been on TV say there would be no recourse. They wouldn't be able to get to the space station because the shuttle didn't carry enough fuel to change their course 20 degrees. There also wouldn't be another shuttle ready in time to meet up with the one already in space; while one shuttle is in space, the rest are getting refitted, etc... Basically, if something goes wrong, they're fucked.

Sheryl · Post by **Sheryl** » February 3, 2003, 7:30 pm

Is that picture real??

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » February 3, 2003, 7:42 pm

Sylvus wrote:Perhaps I'm seeing the picture wrong, but isn't that a picture that was taken from space? If so, it could have been something that wasn't noticeable before takeoff that got much worse on the way up. In which case they may have had few options once they were up there.

I have no idea what it costs to build a shuttle, do you think they have any sort of insurance on them?

i seriously doubt any insurance carrier would insure something as risky as a space vehichle.

for instance if you go SCUBA diving and get hurt, your health insurance says, 'tough shit', cause it is too risky to insure.

going into space is many orders of magnitude more risky.

Sunserae wrote:Is that picture real??

i'm wondering the same thing. my first guess is no. Trying to find out for myself though. i haven't seen it on any English/Spanish language site. beyond that i'm sort of fuckered. mostly i think it is fake because the ocean is bleeding into the wing... now maybe the CCD chip on a cheap camera would be saturated from any glow from heat on the wing or from intense sunlight, but we've had cameras in space for 40+ years now, i'd expect the guy would have gone up there with one that was worth a fuck.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » February 3, 2003, 8:07 pm

I saw on the news yesterday that astronauts don't take pictures with digital cameras and send the images back to earth, but they use regular film and don't develop it until the shuttle lands. So I doubt the picture is real.

Kaluian_CT · Post by **Kaluian_CT** » February 3, 2003, 8:42 pm

Vitirea was right,....

Not only about the fuel issues, but also The Columbia, being the oldest shuttle in the fleet is the only shuttle not equipped to dock with a space station. Also it was the heaviest of the space shuttle and cannot achieve the distance in orbit necessary to reach the ISS. Furthermore, The Columbia is the only shuttle that is without video for the bottom-side of the vehicle and that is were most of the speculation that the damage may have occured to the tiles that absorb the 3500 F heat on re-entry, and as we know NASA realeased the info that the first signs of a problem were dramatic heat increases.

Also I was listening to the news today, and they believe now that the crew probably knew something was wrong around the time they were over California, meaning they knew they're fate for approx. 10 minutes before Columbia broke apart

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » February 4, 2003, 3:33 am

The fissure is believed to have been caused by a piece of insulation hitting the ablative panels during liftoff.

If that is the case, they were doomed as soon as they left the atmosphere. Those panels are one of the items that have always seemed weak to me.

But then, I sure as hell don't have a better solution.

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » February 4, 2003, 3:44 am

Isnt it obvious that gremlins tore at it????...like the one from the twilight zone movie with jonathan lithgow. "theres...something...on the wing!!!"

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » February 4, 2003, 4:09 am

Fallanthas wrote:The fissure is believed to have been caused by a piece of insulation hitting the ablative panels during liftoff.

That's happened 9 other times on liftoffs, 6 times in particular on Columbia. They didn't think anything about a tile falling off at the time of liftoff because nothing bad had happened before.

emmer · Post by **emmer** » February 4, 2003, 4:11 am

SHATNER

p.s. i grock spock

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » February 4, 2003, 6:06 am

shatner in the old 50's series.

lithgow in the 80's.

VariaVespasa · Post by **VariaVespasa** » February 4, 2003, 7:50 am

Bah, thats not the wing of the shuttle. Best I'm aware the shuttle wing does not have a big black pipe thingie sticking out of it in defiance of aerodynamics like this photo does. It does have a visible pattern of tiles on it which this photo doesnt. And that dent is way too tidy and regular to be anything other than a preformed molding in the surface. Its probably the inside of the cargo bay or something. If nothing else the debris hit the underside of the wing. The underside of the wing is black. The surface in that photo just slightly...isnt.... Even if the surface in this cheesy fake *was* the right color you cant actually see the bottom surfaces of the shuttle from inside, which makes having the bottom of the wing in a photo taken from inside the shuttle during an interview just slightly difficult... Someone should be flogged.

*Hugs*
Varia

Bwuza · Post by **Bwuza** » February 4, 2003, 8:14 am

Midnyte_Ragebringer you fucking retarded reject how good was the shuttel refurbished if there was a huge damn crack in the shuttel?

Cotto · Post by **Cotto** » February 4, 2003, 8:25 am

2 posts > Midnyte

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » February 4, 2003, 9:02 am

shuttel

ROFL

Sabek · Post by **Sabek** » February 4, 2003, 11:12 am

Bwuza wrote:Midnyte_Ragebringer you fucking retarded reject how good was the shuttel refurbished if there was a huge damn crack in the shuttel?

Because it happened on take-off you fucknutz.
Read and comprehend before you open your worthless air-sucking piehole.

Sabek · Post by **Sabek** » February 4, 2003, 11:23 am

Article about the wing
They are suspecting the damage to the left wing was greater than originally believed.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » February 4, 2003, 11:47 am

Vetira,

This wasn't a case of tiles falling off. Apparently a piece of insulation about a foot or so square came off of one of the booster rockets and smacked the underside of the left wing during takeoff. Original estimates put the damage at around 20 inches long and 9-12 inches wide.

The NASA techs didn't think that was significant enough to cause a failure. They are rechecking the math right now. They are also searching for the earliest pieces to have come off to see if the deterioration began at the wing or not.

Kguku · Post by **Kguku** » February 4, 2003, 11:52 am

http://shogun.shafted.com.au/temp/cnnsucks.jpg

Now there's some CNN reporting.

18 times the speed of light!

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » February 4, 2003, 11:57 am

was a typo on the graphics. meant to say "18 times the speed of sound".

that happens with live TV. if i was that show producer, i would have smacked that writer with a rolled up newspaper (they are good for something...) though regardless

miir · Post by **miir** » February 4, 2003, 12:07 pm

CNN is making me much laughing.

The root of the problem:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... urvey.html

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » February 4, 2003, 12:17 pm

Poor bastards are so used to putting Iraq in their graphic overlays they ran it into the wrong frame.

As for Switzerland, I must confess if it wasn't shown to me as an error, the mislabeling would have passed under my notice.

Jesalynn · Post by **Jesalynn** » February 4, 2003, 12:32 pm

I have a feeling they knew once they assessed the damage they had probably a small chance to live upon reentry, but they had to take the risk or die orbiting the earth from lack of oxygen. What's sad is if the new space station was only completed, they could have stayed there for a few weeks until a rescue shuttle could've taken them home, hopefully the station will be done sometime in the near future.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » February 4, 2003, 12:44 pm

LOL i am forwarding those images to a couple guys on my softball team (they do those graphics for CNNI). hehe thanks for that

Cotto · Post by **Cotto** » February 4, 2003, 12:49 pm

Bad poland! Stop moving!

Hammerstalker PE · Post by **Hammerstalker PE** » February 4, 2003, 1:34 pm

And Kyoukan says Iraq isn't a threat? They have already started to invade Europe!

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » February 4, 2003, 1:35 pm

What's sad is if the new space station was only completed, they could have stayed there for a few weeks until a rescue shuttle could've taken them home, hopefully the station will be done sometime in the near future.

The ISS is habited. The problem is they weren't in the same orbit. Space is big. Just because two things are spinning around above the Earth doesn't mean they are necessarily close to each other.

Lexien · Post by **Lexien** » February 4, 2003, 4:14 pm

Xouqoa wrote:
Jesalynn wrote:I do agree in that some of our shuttles are rather old, but to listen to NASA officials, they routinely "upgrade" them and outfit them enough that they are supposedly safe and like new. Unfortunately though, that doesn't really take into effect the structural problems and such you get from heavy use on any vehicle, especially one that goes to space nonetheless.
It's an old design, though. If NASA had a proper budget, they could design a new, much safer takeoff/landing system. In fact, they had several prototypes under development, but I believe had to stop working on them because of budget cutbacks.

Wasent there an X-Project race?

Where companys entered a competition that had them design the new era of reusable space vehicules?

I thnk i saw some information about that on Discovery some years ago wonder what hapened...

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » February 4, 2003, 4:15 pm

Aslanna wrote:
What's sad is if the new space station was only completed, they could have stayed there for a few weeks until a rescue shuttle could've taken them home, hopefully the station will be done sometime in the near future.
The ISS is habited. The problem is they weren't in the same orbit. Space is big. Just because two things are spinning around above the Earth doesn't mean they are necessarily close to each other.

Additionally, there was a previous comment that the Columbia was the only shuttle that wasn't equipped to dock with the ISS.

I always wondered if they could have some form of emergency escape balls like the mars probe was inclosed in that bounced off the martian surface. Guess you'd need to deal with the impact, heatshielding and have a parachute to slow decent as well : )

More realistic escape/safety measures probably were thought of but cost way to much or took too much space.

NASA needs emergency balls!

Sabek · Post by **Sabek** » February 4, 2003, 4:17 pm

I read somewhere that a form of emergency ejection was part of the original shuttle designs. However, the weight of the system was too much and it was scrapped from the design.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » February 4, 2003, 4:18 pm

Lexien wrote:
Wasent there an X-Project race?

Where companys entered a competition that had them design the new era of reusable space vehicules?

I thnk i saw some information about that on Discovery some years ago wonder what hapened...

those were basically designs though, just stuff on paper. my understanding was that they are planning on using the shuttle through about 2015-2020, obviously developing a next generation reusable orbital vehichle in the interim.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » February 4, 2003, 4:32 pm

they are planning on using the shuttle through about 2015-2020

I read 2040 the other day from some NASA official which I cannot link or quote. Anyway, the article went on to discuss how crazy that seems compared to the service life of other vehicles.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · February 4, 2003, 5:02 pm

I've got some fodder for you anti-republicans out there.

Coincidence that Bush gets in office and we have 9-11 happen, which allows him to rebuild our military?

Coincidence that Bush gets in office and the space shuttle blows up and now NASA will probably get OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS more funding to re-tool our space program?

hmmm

Lexien · Post by **Lexien** » February 4, 2003, 5:04 pm

There that was one of the project i saw on tv it looks interesting.

Hyper-X program :

http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Newsroom/FactS ... -DFRC.html

VeeshanVault

Space Shuttle Columbia Explodes

heh

Midnyte_Ragebringer

Re: Midnyte_Ragebringer