Former NASA employees had warned of problems.

[Richard Cranium]

For months, former NASA administrators had voiced concerns about the safety of the shuttle fleet. In April, Richard D. Blomberg, former chairman of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's aerospace safety advisory panel, warned of danger ahead, saying, "I have never been as concerned for space shuttle safety as I am right now."

Blomberg said budget cuts kept the agency from adequately upgrading the aging shuttle fleet. Columbia was built in 1981.

Jose Garcia, a retired NASA technical assistant, said budget cuts throughout the 1990s resulted in the elimination of many safety checks during launch preparations. He went public with his concerns, all the way to President Clinton, but said nothing changed.

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20030202_476.html

I think during take off the insulation foam which ripped off the rockets and hit the shuttle may have caused damage to the tiles or the structure of the craft.

This incident was on video and NASA engineers were aware of it and after analysis decided not to abort the mission.

Only time will tell if they made a wise decision.

[M_Six]

I read a similar story in the Boston Globe. Sad.

[Sweeper]

They also new about the danger with the "O" ring on the Solid Rocket Boosters on Challenger. With the freezing temperature that previous night, they new there was a good chance of a problem but decided to go with the launch anyway.

I find it hard to believe that there are many other operations anywhere (if there are any at all) that are more carefully monitored than NASA's space shuttle program. No matter how many checks are in place, someone will alway think the existing system is inadequete.

I'm not saying that this couldn't have been avoided, but if the criteria to launch is that anybody with any concern has to be absolutely satisfied that there is no risk of failure, then shuttle would never get off the ground....ever. The nature of space travel is inherently very dangerous so while these types of accidents are certainly unforunate, it is also true that if we're going to continue the scientific exploration of space, there WILL be mishaps no matter how many people nor how much money we invest into it.

Could this have been avoided? ... Maybe, but there's no sense pointing fingers until we determine the cause.

I don't believe anyone with the authority to stop Challengers launch thought there was a "good chance of a problem". I'm not privy to the procedures for stopping a launch, but if the O-ring was given a 1 in 100, or even 1 in 1000 chance of failing in a manner that would cause significant risk of catestrophic failure, I have to believe that the launch would have been stopped. Anyone that knows anything about O-rings knows that they are "more likely" to fail in very cold or very hot weather, but it's still a matter of calculating risks against the benefits. Now as it turns out, there was obviously a miscalulation in the seal design, but to think that every possible scenario for failure can be completely designed out in advance isn't realistic either.

Everytime someone gets into their car there's a chance they might not arrive at their destination safely, yet we all do it anyway.

[M_Six]

I don't think it's a case of pointing fingers or "blame" as it was stated in another thread. It's simply that part of the healing and recovery process involves discussion, even if that discussion includes uncomfortable topics. Since terrorism has been ruled out, only NASA itself is left to "blame", if you want to call it that. The important issue now is to discover the two causes; the mechanical one that actually caused the breakup, and the management one that missed the mechanical flaw. There are (sadly) very few survivable structural failure scenarios with the shuttle. It is therefore imperative that events like this are thoroughly researched and discussed so that they don't occur again. No one is calling for retribution and this is all productive and healthy discussion. Stifling it will not help.

Consider this. The shuttle broke up at 40 miles high. The pieces that rained down on a populated area were still large enough to cause damage. Luck saved anyone on the ground from injury. But what if this had happened 5 or 10 minutes later when the shuttle was much closer to earth? Much larger pieces could have caused much more damage on impact. This is a serious issue and needs to be addressed. I have no doubt this incident will lead to a review of landing procedures in general, and of flight path choices specifically.

[nukes]

I don't think anyone it to blame.
Yes they did notice this and they didn't think it would be a problm, but eevn if they did, they had no way of spacewalking round to the underside of the shuttle to inspect on of these.
The same with the sensors faliure. That is bound to a happen on more than one occasion.
This was something that was bound to happen at some point, however sad it may be. The astronauts will surely have known their risk.

[capybara]

Originally posted by M_Six
Consider this. The shuttle broke up at 40 miles high. The pieces that rained down on a populated area were still large enough to cause damage. Luck saved anyone on the ground from injury. But what if this had happened 5 or 10 minutes later when the shuttle was much closer to earth? Much larger pieces could have caused much more damage on impact. This is a serious issue and needs to be addressed. I have no doubt this incident will lead to a review of landing procedures in general, and of flight path choices specifically.

angle of attack is fixed within a narrow range by physics.
and a flight path over amerrica seems ideal. we dont have to
ask foreign countries for perrmission to investigate.
from what i heard: debris hits left wing. loss of insulating tile. elevated temperatures noted in left wing. catastrophic
failure left wing.
but also managerial errors: inflight inspection of tiles
either by spacewalk or robotic arm was not do-able. the spacewalk device (called i think MRR) was not brought along
to save weight because it weighs 600 pounds and they were
carrrying a heavier than usual payload.
no spare tiles were available. no tile repair kit available.
>>>>NOT to point finngerrs of blame, but each of these decisions
reduced the safety margin, like no having a spare tire annd a jack
in your car.
>>>>God Bless Them. [me crying]

Space flight is a risk. Astronauts know this. They died doing what they loved. My deepest sympathies with the families, colleagues and friends of the brave seven. I believe NASA employs the best and safest standards possible for these missions.

NASA's investigation moves forward with swiftness and I'm confident the cause of the disintegration will be found and corrected.

I totally support the Space Program and NASA and hope they are able to get back on schedule asap.