Engineers Warned of Possible Columbia Breakup Scenario-BEFOREHAND-

[MegalosSkylaki]

What can I say ? Read it yourself.

Hindsight is always perfect --but this isn't excatly hindsight.
This is utterly eerie.

"Why are we having this conversation a day before the landing and not a day after the launch?"--NASA Engineer at Langley, Va.

MegalosSkylaki

Ya think there's a conspiracy here?

[MegalosSkylaki]

What a jokester you are, Shahani.

Beeg DooGs don't joke.

We growlllll.

DOOGSTER

[RedFury]

Well, realistically, what could they have done about it? It's not like they were close enough to the space station or could just pull over and change the flat tire

[Epidemic]

I would like to see the chatter that happens normally around previous flights.

Do they always come up with some doom and gloom scenario.

Did other insulation failures in the past yield such a response.

Finally what options did they have reguarding risk management vs reality of repair or rescue?

The risk of the wing burning off may just not have outweighed the breathing of carbon dioxide until dead.

Interesting stuff though.

If this was an unusual discussion from former what if's it would seem management should have been informed so they could compare a what if they stay in space 3 more weeks while we organize a rescue launch of the other shuttle.

[MegalosSkylaki]

I don't know how fast or how how they were when the tiles broke off, but what if instead of continuing to orbital velocity, they slowed their course and bought themselves within bailout altitude ?

Defense in Depth means not having to say you're sorry.

DK.

DOOOOG

[Epidemic]

The determination that damage may have occurred to the wing was made days after launch during a frame by frame analysis of the launch. After reviewing an estimated 10,800 frames (assuming 60 fps and 3 minutes to tank insulation whack) they noticed 1 or 2 frames in which a blur of something appeared to hit the wing from the tank.

Point being you can not review film frame by frame real time and determine if a bail out is required before launch is completed. AFAIK there was no sensor warning prior to re-entry. As far as slowing the shuttle down after that the only way with fuel available is to burn it off in friction with the atmosphere.

[originel]

yeah...and in general it is not possible to "slow down" for a more gnetle re-entry. in actuality the shuttle has a fairly gentle and slow re-entry. the apollo and soyuz capsules would enter the atmosphere at around mach 23, a good 21% faster than the shuttle at mach 18. the way the shuttle re-enters is to kinda slide in whereas the two capsules dropped in more. in order to do a slower decent you would need something to keep the shuttle from just dropping like a rock since at that altitude their is so little air the shuttle can't generate the lift from it's wings...it normally gets it from friction (a little bit) with the air and it's forward momentum (Where it gets most of it from). really and truly the only other option would have involved them somehow getting back to the ISS (prolly not possible) and then getting another shuttle up their to pick them up in a timely manner before they ran out of food and such (also prolly not possible) and just letting the columbia fall unmaned to it's death. simply there was no way of getting the columbia down without destroying it.