OT: Shuttle Breaks Up During Re-Entry [Archive]

Baron Munchausen

February 1st, 2003, 05:28 PM

Actually, the first shuttle flew in 1981 so they're 'only' 22 years old at most. But that's plenty. The hell of it is, the shuttle program is no closer to being replaced now than it was in 1986 when the Challenger was lost. It was supposed to be a stop-gap while the 'space plane' was developed and NASA has never gotten enough funding to develop that replacement. I wonder if they will get funding now, or if this is the death of NASA as well as those astronauts. No one, Republican or Democrat, has been friendly to the space program for decades. Once we finished the Apollo project interest just collapsed.

[ February 01, 2003, 15:29: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

Ragnarok

February 1st, 2003, 05:28 PM

Wow, that is hard to believe. I didn't get to see it on the news or nothing but I just read it on the CNN web site.

"than it was in 1898 when the Challenger was lost".

You mean we've had space missions since 1898? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif I'm sure that was a typo.

If I had billions of dollars I'd fund NASA. I love seeing space stuff on TV and seeing new discovories come around.
But I don't have that kind of money. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

[ February 01, 2003, 15:31: Message edited by: Ragnarok ]

Arkcon

February 1st, 2003, 05:44 PM

Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
It was supposed to be a stop-gap while the 'space plane' was developed and NASA has never gotten enough funding to develop that replacement.When the shuttle was new, Britian was working on an orbital launch vehice that used a hybrid(air breathing when in the atmosphere) engine. It was to be an alternative to the shuttle when it got old. Never heard about that again.

*Sigh* Richard P. Feynman was pretty critical about safety measures on the shuttle program. But seriously, what bailout procedure could possibly exist for Mach 20 at 200,000 feet.

[ February 01, 2003, 15:45: Message edited by: Arkcon ]

mlmbd

February 1st, 2003, 06:08 PM

It is very, very sad news! I heard this wierd noise, like a mix between an explosion and a sonic boom. Went outside to see what it was. There is a Naval Air station and LTV about 5 miles away. I thought they might be testing a new aircraft. Looked around for the Jet, and saw this white object falling. I felt sick. Because, I knew what it was!

mlmbd http://www.shrapnelgames.com//ubb/icons/icon6.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

sachmo

February 1st, 2003, 06:11 PM

I heard it. I thought someone had backed into my fence with their car...I'm shocked now that I know what it really was. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

oleg

February 1st, 2003, 06:12 PM

Horrable news. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif What is the cause ? There was certainly no fuel on board. Just simple mechanical breakup ?

CNCRaymond

February 1st, 2003, 06:19 PM

Good God what a tragedy! I was up watching the Nasa channel when it happened. (Government/Public access Tv.) This is just horrible.

Could it have been a bomb?

[ February 01, 2003, 16:20: Message edited by: CNCRaymond ]

geoschmo

February 1st, 2003, 06:35 PM

Originally posted by CNCRaymond:
Could it have been a bomb?It's extremly unlikely that this was anything other than just an engineering failure. The shuttle is a complex piece of machinery. Millions of things have to go right every time it flies for it to return safely. And the margin for error is so small. It's not like a car that can roll to a safe stop if the engien fails. If something breaks, things go very bad very quickly.

It's a damn shame is what it is.

Geoschmo

couslee

February 1st, 2003, 06:39 PM

Even at 22 yrs old, one also has to take into account the number of flights. Things get old, things get worn out, and even tho they may pass a saftey test, under extreem situations they may still fail. I read somewhere (iirc) that the Challanger was on it's 11th or 12th mission already when it exploded on take off. Imagine how many trips have been made since then.

On a side note, the Columbia had a mission delayed for some reason, which caused the Challanged mission to be bumped back a few days. The fleet is old. Pleople don't even like 20 yr old cars esp with high milage because of the potential for problems.

It's time for a new shuttle fleet. And until they get the funding for that, I fear we may see other fatal failures become more often. (I hope not).

From Reuters:
"Columbia is NASA's oldest shuttle and first flew in 1981".
It does not say when it was built, most likely at least a year or more before it's maiden voyage. And look at the technological advances made since then.
From AP:
"On Jan. 16, shortly after Columbia lifted off, a piece of insulating foam on its external fuel tank came off and was believed to have hit the left wing of the shuttle. Leroy Cain, the lead flight director in Mission Control, assured reporters Friday that engineers had concluded that any damage to the wing was considered minor and posed no safety hazard."

NASA should take a hint from SEIV, and put a "repair bay" module on the ISS.

One Eyed Jack

February 1st, 2003, 06:52 PM

Even though this shuttle mission has been described as "flawless", I agree with the previous posters in thinking mechanical failure. Investigators currently have little to work from regarding a cause. A tape is making the news rounds of what appears to be ice or a tile falling from the fuel tanks and striking the shuttle wing during launch that investigators are reviewing. However, this is not exactly an uncommon occurrence. In the break up replay many reporters are focusing on what looks to be an explosion (secondary not root cause).

Lots of early reports concerning debris falling coming out of Nacogdoches Texas, both town and county as well as other areas. People are warned to avoid debris due to potential life threatening toxins released by the fuel from the shuttle as it evaporates. Can cause slow suffocation in a 48 hr. period if inhaled. Call your local law enforcement agency if you spot debris. Do not approach.

Some people are sending pictures via the web of debris in their yard to news agencies.

I love the space program and watching this stuff hurts.

dbt1949

February 1st, 2003, 06:59 PM

http://www.smilies-world.de/Smilies/Smilies_gross_1/sad_lg_blk.gif

Tenryu

February 1st, 2003, 07:13 PM

Been watching this stuff since about 9am est. It had become so routine we forget how dangerous it is. Sorta like the first Portuguese explorations and Columbus era ventures toward the east.

Rips my heart out to see this sort of thing happen.

We need to build another, and make it bigger and better and safer.

[ February 01, 2003, 17:14: Message edited by: Tenryu ]

Arkcon

February 1st, 2003, 07:53 PM

Originally posted by CNCRaymond:
Could it have been a bomb?Widely considered to be unlikely. The shuttle has very strict weight limits. So it couldn't have been hidden prior to launch. You can pick aprt other terrorist possibilities as well.

Taera

February 1st, 2003, 08:17 PM

this is all very sad. i have not heard about this before. what saddens me the most is that the elite of our space astronauts AND scientists were burned in atmosphere.

Graeme Dice

February 1st, 2003, 08:22 PM

Originally posted by CNCRaymond:
Could it have been a bomb?That doesn't make any sense, as a bomb works just as well if not better if you set it off well before re-entry.

David E. Gervais

February 1st, 2003, 08:37 PM

This is indeed a tragic day in history. I believe that the best way to honor the crew of Columbia (and the crew of Challenger) is to keep NASA and the space program up and running. These fine people knew the risks and choose to accept them in the persuit of science. I salute their bravery, respect their choice and honor there memory. May their dream live long and prosper.

F Te antKe

February 1st, 2003, 09:51 PM

Seven explorers
Fearless into the unknown
Spirits shall not die

Chronon

February 1st, 2003, 10:36 PM

Originally posted by David Gervais:
I believe that the best way to honor the crew of Columbia (and the crew of Challenger) is to keep NASA and the space program up and running. These fine people knew the risks and choose to accept them in the persuit of science. I salute their bravery, respect their choice and honor there memory. May their dream live long and prosper.It is, indeed, a very sad day for the space program, and I couldn't agree with you more David. Let's hope this turns into a wake-up call for a new approach (perhaps the spaceplane or something similar), rather than a rationale for shutting the program down (as I'm sure some politicians will argue).

Ruatha

February 1st, 2003, 10:48 PM

As previus stated, it's a sad day.
But one can't say it's becouse the shuttles are old.
They're constantly being upgraded, and serviced.
They are supposed to be able to handle 100 take offs.

It could have been made yesterday and still crash, **** happens.
In sweden we built this great warship a couple of years ago, the Wasa. It sunk on it's maiden voyage out of the harbour!
There is always a risc, and sometimes it's worth taking. These people knew that.

MacLeod

February 2nd, 2003, 01:35 AM

Originally posted by Ruatha:
As previus stated, it's a sad day.
But one can't say it's becouse the shuttles are old.
They're constantly being upgraded, and serviced.
They are supposed to be able to handle 100 take offs.

It could have been made yesterday and still crash, **** happens.
In sweden we built this great warship a couple of years ago, the Wasa. It sunk on it's maiden voyage out of the harbour!
There is always a risc, and sometimes it's worth taking. These people knew that.I agree. I seriously doubt NASA is just screwing around when it comes to maintenance. And even if Columbia is the oldest, it's not the most flightworn, the Discovery is (having about 30 launches to the Columbia's 21).

Bombs are damned unlikely as NASA engineers have certainly gone through the shuttle with a fine-toothed comb fifty dozen times before launch, and a missile is just damned near impossible.

Was probably a random mechanical problem, or one part of it needed to be gone over another ten dozen times than it already was.

As far as shutting down the space program, who wants to stay on this boring planet forever? Just hope we don't forget about the poor guys in the ISS in the meantime, though they reportedly have a good 4-5 months of supplies.

Lord Kodos

February 2nd, 2003, 02:14 AM

Truely, this is a horrible tragedy.

I must say, though, that, I do not feel putting the space program on hiatus is a good idea either. IIRC When the whole Challenger fiasco occured, the space program was put on hold for a while, not good IMHO.

Yes, this was a HORRIBLE accident, and yes, some time should be taken for us to mourn those brave men and women who died, in the name of science and furthering our understanding of the world around us, but, we should not pause the entire space program.

When one falls off a horse, does one simply give up, or does one get back on the horse, and, try again?

minipol

February 2nd, 2003, 03:04 AM

I also saw it in the news. Even in Belgium almost the whole news was dedicated to this catastrophy.
I was amazed by some of the comments: Apparently NASA people are NOT worried if debris slams into the shuttle. It happens all the time they say. Huh? When are they worried???

I believe that space exploration might one day save this planet. Think about the asteroids that might (and will!) come our way. How are you going to defend against that when you are not knowing what you are dealing with? That's one of the reasons why space exploration is necessary.

Other comments on TV said this might delay the program by some 2 years. Off course this is pure speculation but that wouldn't be very positieve.

Also, imagine what an explosion this must have been when people on the ground could hear it. It's just unbelievable. *sigh* http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

sachmo

February 2nd, 2003, 04:50 AM

Originally posted by minipol:

Also, imagine what an explosion this must have been when people on the ground could hear it. It's just unbelievable. *sigh* http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif I wish I could forget it. Seeing the images on the local news of smoking debris on a field where I have played football is just too much. I can't stop thinking about it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Desdinova

February 2nd, 2003, 07:25 AM

i hope they dont cancel the space program. one thing that will help keep it alive is that the us does not use rockets to launch payloads very much anymore. also there are the 4, or is it now 3, independent companies/people trying ot win the couple million in prize money to make a new reusable vehicle. now that private enterprise is in this, we should see some new innovations in the future. hopefully.

Tenryu

February 2nd, 2003, 08:01 AM

Originally posted by Ruatha:
As previus stated, it's a sad day.

In sweden we built this great warship a couple of years ago, the Wasa. It sunk on it's maiden voyage out of the harbour!
There is always a risc, and sometimes it's worth taking. These people knew that.Ya, Ruatha, well said.
These people knew that.
Those people knew that.
Those people know that.

Instar

February 2nd, 2003, 10:35 AM

I wish I had words to say that would help, but I doubt any eloquence or verbosity can take away the suffering.

henk brouwer

February 2nd, 2003, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by minipol:

Also, imagine what an explosion this must have been when people on the ground could hear it. It's just unbelievable. *sigh* http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif That most likely wasn't the sound of the explosion but the sound of the debris breaking the sound barrier.

dumbluck

February 2nd, 2003, 12:08 PM

What a thing to happen on my birthday!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

CNCRaymond

February 2nd, 2003, 12:20 PM

This is strange. Each time Atrocities has been in the hospital, something bad has happened.

Sept 01, Twin Towers.
Oct 02, Washington Sniper
Feb 03, Columbia Shuttle.

I am sensing a pattern here. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

David E. Gervais

February 2nd, 2003, 01:10 PM

Originally posted by CNCRaymond:
This is strange. Each time Atrocities has been in the hospital, something bad has happened.

Sept 01, Twin Towers.
Oct 02, Washington Sniper
Feb 03, Columbia Shuttle.

I am sensing a pattern here. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif The Twin Towers fell on Sept, 11 (9,11) not Sept, 1.. The shuttle Columbia tradegy happened yesterday Feb, 1 (unless you meant the shuttle Challenger? which I believe happened on feb 14 {but my memory could be wrong on this!}) So much for your theory!

Originally posted by dumbluck:
What a thing to happen on my birthday!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Mt. Saint-Helen erupted on my birthday! but that was a 'natural' desaster so it's hard to compare!

[ February 02, 2003, 11:13: Message edited by: David Gervais ]

David E. Gervais

February 2nd, 2003, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by minipol:
Other comments on TV said this might delay the program by some 2 years. Off course this is pure speculation but that wouldn't be very positieve. I really don't think that this time arround it will suffer much of a delay, this time there is the space station, and I know that the astronaughts up there will not be abandonned. They will need supplies and can't stay up there for two years waiting for replacements!

If it were me, I'd try to get another shuttle up as soon as posible. This kind of 'action' would both reassure the people and honor the memories and dreams of the fallen heroes!

..after all, "Delay and demoralize" is a tactic most used on an 'enemy' why would anyone use a tactic like that on friends and family?

Have a good day, CHeers!

dumbluck

February 2nd, 2003, 01:27 PM

Challenger, IIRC, disintegrated on liftoff on January 19th. The Columbia astronauts (along with all other NASA personel) observed a moment of silence on the exact moment that Challenger exploded. This moment of silence took place whilst Columbia was in orbit.

edit: A quick google search finds that the challenger was lost on January 28th. So much for my memory... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

2nd edit: Mount St. Helens? Where's that, in Canada? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

3rd edit: Heres another theory for you. Apollo 1 fire tragically kills 3 astronauts on the pad: Jan 27. Challenger explosion: Jan 28th. And now Columbia on Feb. 1.

Conclusion: Don't be a NASA astronaut at the end of January/beginning of February.

[ February 02, 2003, 11:38: Message edited by: dumbluck ]

CNCRaymond

February 2nd, 2003, 01:39 PM

01 = 2001
02 = 2002
03 = 2003

oleg

February 2nd, 2003, 04:56 PM

ISS program will probably continue. Yesterday Russia sent a supply ship as it was planned. The major problem is how to procced with ISS construction. It would need 25 shuttle launches just to finish it. What will happen now - nobody knows.

AS of SA

February 2nd, 2003, 07:12 PM

I hope they keep the ISS going. I know the shuttle can keep it going, I suppose the old Russian rockets can also send up parts. I read the Saturn V Rockets could have deployed the whole ISS in one shot. It would have required some redesign since it doesn't need to go to the moon, but it has the "Umpfh!" factor to do it.

Personally I blame the rampant tax cutting and I hope China's space program triggers the next space race.

Humanity needs to be out there, in the stars.

DavidG

February 2nd, 2003, 07:23 PM

Anyone been to ebay lately? It is really nauseating how many Columbia items have been posted in the Last two days.

Arkcon

February 2nd, 2003, 08:27 PM

Originally posted by DavidG:
However the shuttle is not necessary to bring them home. They have a Soyuz (sp?) to do that. I also heard a theory they may launch one shuttle just to bring them home if they feel it is safer that the SoyuzThe way I heard it the Soyuz is a ballistic escape pod. Get in, fire it off, and hope you hit where you aimed. The shuttle was always considerd preferable.

Several yrs ago a soyuz landed flawlessly, with a crew of dead cosmonauts -- oxygen leak. Personally, I'd rather go in a hydrazine explosion than suffocated on re-entry. Assuming a sane person can presume to make an informed opinion on a decision like that.

At least a couple of sci-fi scenarios involve global mega corporations taking over the ISS when it's determined too expensive for governments to afford. That's silly, but maybe NASA needs to think small for a little while. Russia sure could use some time to pad it's CD's.

DavidG

February 2nd, 2003, 08:33 PM

Originally posted by Arkcon:
Several yrs ago a soyuz landed flawlessly, with a crew of dead cosmonauts -- oxygen leak.Wasn't that like 30 years ago? And the only failure of Soyuz on reentry? I don't know near enough about the space program to know which is safer. Only that a shuttle launch is not required.

Ruatha

February 2nd, 2003, 09:02 PM

The Last time some one died in the Russian space program was 1971 if my memory is correct.
So I'd trust them anyday to send me up, I'd jump at the chance directly.

tbontob

February 2nd, 2003, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by Ruatha:
The Last time some one died in the Russian space program was 1971 if my memory is correct.
So I'd trust them anyday to send me up, I'd jump at the chance directly.I'd jump at any chance to go up. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Including the French new booster that blew up a few months ago. Providing, of course, they had a capsul capable of supporting a human. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

And in spite of the catastrophe yesterday, one of the shuttles. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

oleg

February 3rd, 2003, 01:15 AM

Yes, the Last time Russian space programm suffered casualty was in 1971 - parashute did not open in time and crew died on impact. I trust Souz spaceship more than any other, especially because my farther works as a fuel engineer other there http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif The main problem with Souz as a major transport is not safety but its limited capacity - 3 people and no more than 2.5 tons of cargo. Shuttle can carry 7 people and up to 50 tons,IIRC.

Saturn V was not that powerfull, it could carry about 100 tons on low Earth orbit. The Russian rocket Energia, wich was designed for spaceshuttle Buran could carry 150 tons. Too bad the programm was canceled because of money. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Still, it would require several launches to assemble ISS.

David E. Gervais

February 3rd, 2003, 02:07 AM

2nd edit: Mount St. Helens? Where's that, in Canada?

Mt. Saint Helen's is in the US!

..2001, 2002, 2003! I guess I missinterpreted that one!

Shyrka

February 3rd, 2003, 02:26 AM

All newspapers in Spain show the disaster in its 1st page. How sad. Not only for the U.S., but for all the world http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

DavidG

February 3rd, 2003, 02:26 AM

Originally posted by David Gervais:
I really don't think that this time arround it will suffer much of a delay, this time there is the space station, and I know that the astronaughts up there will not be abandonned. They will need supplies and can't stay up there for two years waiting for replacements!
However the shuttle is not necessary to bring them home. They have a Soyuz (sp?) to do that. I also heard a theory they may launch one shuttle just to bring them home if they feel it is safer that the Soyuz

Atrocities

February 3rd, 2003, 03:07 PM

Who can't help but feel a loss here? The Columbia was they icon of the space shuttle fleet and NASA.

The seven astronoughts who were lost died doing what they loved, and I can think of no better way to go to the great beyond then doing it doing something that you love.

Taz-in-Space

February 3rd, 2003, 08:30 PM

I heard in the news about the shuttle. Tragic.
I hope this doesn't hold up the space program too much - it is already under-funded IMO.

At least NASA was more forthcoming with info this time. I guess they learned not to withhold
information too long with the Challenger.

By the way, did anyone catch the mis-information
that someone at NASA tried... it was stated that the pieces could be toxic and not to pick up and handle them. Some fable about fuel contamination. Imagine, 3000 or so degree heat on re-entry and some fool says that this fuel may still be there!

geoschmo

February 3rd, 2003, 08:59 PM

Originally posted by Taz-in-Space:
By the way, did anyone catch the mis-information
that someone at NASA tried... it was stated that the pieces could be toxic and not to pick up and handle them. Some fable about fuel contamination. Imagine, 3000 or so degree heat on re-entry and some fool says that this fuel may still be there!Not some fool, a rocket scientist. It's not mis-information, it's a fact.

To burn the fuel you have to mix it with oxygen. It is not extrodinary at all that measurable amounts of fuel would remain unburned when you consider the speed at which the ship fell apart, and the altitude. Very thin atmosphere at that point.

Pieces were getting blown off and flying off due to Ge forces. Once they got away from the oxygen in the fireball they would burn out from lack of oxygen. Explosions can put out fires as well as ignite them. That's why they use dynamite to stop oil well fires.

EDIT: But beyond that, they weren't saying the hydrazine fuel was the only dangerous substance in the debris. Many chemicals that are toxic are not flamable.

Geoschmo

[ February 03, 2003, 19:05: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

tbontob

February 3rd, 2003, 09:05 PM

Originally posted by geoschmo:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Taz-in-Space:
By the way, did anyone catch the mis-information
that someone at NASA tried... it was stated that the pieces could be toxic and not to pick up and handle them. Some fable about fuel contamination. Imagine, 3000 or so degree heat on re-entry and some fool says that this fuel may still be there!Not some fool, a rocket scientist. It's not mis-information, it's a fact.

To burn the fuel you have to mix it with oxygen. It is not extrodinary at all that measurable amounts of fuel would remain unburned when you consider the speed at shich the ship fell apart, and the altitude. Very thin atmosphere at that point.

Pieces were getting blown off and flying off due to Ge forces. Once they got away from the oxygen in the fireball they would burn out from lack of oxygen. Explosions can put out fires as well as ignite them. That's why they use dynamite to stop oil well fires.

Geoschmo<hr /></blockquote>Yes I caught it too! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

As you say the shear forces of the wind would be extraordinarily high. The friction would heat the pieces to almost molten metal and any residue would be boiled or burnt off before or on impact.

I just put it to the administration wanting to give souvenier hunters second thoughts. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Wardad

February 3rd, 2003, 09:10 PM

Originally posted by tbontob:
... I just put it to the administration wanting to give souvenier hunters second thoughts. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif [/QB]That, and avoid liability law suits in the highly unlikey event it did not all burn off.

Ruatha

February 3rd, 2003, 09:22 PM

Originally posted by tbontob:

As you say the shear forces of the wind would be extraordinarily high. The friction would heat the pieces to almost molten metal and any residue would be boiled or burnt off before or on impact.
Well. That did obviously not happen.
A lot of things have shown up that aren't molten metal. Helmets etc.

But I do also think the main reason is to sttop souvenir hunters. And a good reason aswell!

[ February 03, 2003, 19:23: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

tbontob

February 3rd, 2003, 09:46 PM

Originally posted by Ruatha:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by tbontob:

As you say the shear forces of the wind would be extraordinarily high. The friction would heat the pieces to almost molten metal and any residue would be boiled or burnt off before or on impact.
Well. That did obviously not happen.
A lot of things have shown up that aren't molten metal. Helmets etc.

But I do also think the main reason is to sttop souvenir hunters. And a good reason aswell!<hr /></blockquote>Thanx Ruatha http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

True, I didn't take into account the lightness and size of the object. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I stand corrected. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Baron Munchausen

February 4th, 2003, 02:33 AM

I don't think the government is spoofing on this. The violence of the break-up of the shuttle is no guarantee of safety. The hydrazine tanks are probably the strongest components of the shuttle. They had to be to contain the stuff. If a tank containing some residual hydrazine landed in the street near some homes the residents would have to be evacuated until they could bring in some HazMat team to remove it. Even a small leak could kill someone. It is VERY dangerous stuff.

And as Geo observed, Hydrazine is not the only toxic material that could have been in the shuttle. Many 'normal' things could be converted to toxic substances after being incinerated, too. Many pLastics produce dangerous fumes, for example. I think the government is on the straight-up on this one. The shuttle debris is dangerous.

minipol

February 4th, 2003, 01:57 PM

Originally posted by Atrocities:
Who can't help but feel a loss here? The Columbia was they icon of the space shuttle fleet and NASA.

The seven astronoughts who were lost died doing what they loved, and I can think of no better way to go to the great beyond then doing it doing something that you love.Right, but it was too early for them to go IMO.
I would love to die while doing something i love just not now. Let's wait another 50 years.

tesco samoa

February 4th, 2003, 07:14 PM

you know what drives me nuts...

Is that this is a photo op for so many people.

Fake grief because it is the 'in thing to grieve'

Where were these people Last week when that plane with 21 people aboard went down ??

And if these were 7 grunts in the field... Nothing.

Always has sickened me. The fakeness and circus aspect of it all.
But I guess thats what tv news is all about...

CNN is just brutal.... I don't know why they just don't change their name to eXtra or ET.....

My two cents on the horrible accident.

oleg

February 6th, 2003, 04:51 PM

As it is, NASA dismissed the theory about the piece of foam issolation. The current idea is that Columbia was struck by either meteorite or space debris. I wonder why no theory of UFO interference emerged yet. Or am I wrong ?

geoschmo

February 6th, 2003, 05:04 PM

You are wrong. They haven't dismissed it. They are simply backing off of it as the leading candidate becuase it is pure speculation at this point. It is no more or less likely than any of the other possible explanations. Except maybe the alien one. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

The problem is the press and the public are impatient and want an answer now. Whether it is the wrong answer isn't as important as getting it instantly.

Geoschmo

solops

February 6th, 2003, 05:05 PM

And who knows what they had on board for experiments? Radioactive sources, hazardous bio material, etc.... Nope, don't touch.

I live in SE Texas. A friend whose Dad lives a bit north of here had a chair come down on his farm and tiles hit next to his barn. Just thinking about the chair gives me the willies.

One Eyed Jack

February 6th, 2003, 05:25 PM

There is some information regarding Columbia's scientific payload, hazardous debris warning, contact information to report debris theft and location etc... listed at the NASA.gov Columbia site.

Web URL: http://www.nasa.gov/columbia/index.html

mottlee

February 6th, 2003, 06:31 PM

HAve you heard that people are posting things on Ebay!?

my opion, should lock-em up take there comp away and FINE the hell out of them!
then BEAT some sence into them

oleg

February 6th, 2003, 07:00 PM

Two people are arrested already.

[ February 06, 2003, 17:01: Message edited by: oleg ]

solops

February 6th, 2003, 07:13 PM

Wow...just checked the debris field map. Debris has been found North, East and West of us...guess I'd better check the yard and lot next to us.

Instar

February 7th, 2003, 03:27 AM

about the russian space program...
back in the bad old days a lot of cosmonauts died, and no one ever heard about it, because of the censorship. Russian rockets, though good today, were not so good in the early years, and many unsung cosmonauts died without many people knowing.

Greybeard

February 7th, 2003, 08:45 PM

Originally posted by geoschmo:

The problem is the press and the public are impatient and want an answer now. Whether it is the wrong answer isn't as important as getting it instantly.

Geoschmo[/QB]This is quite similar to the TWA Flight 100 explanation. People wanted a quick answer that didn't scare them.. So, the government blamed the fuel tank. Evidence that was suppressed clearly indicates that the plane was shot down by a missle. After the attacks on September 11, this is even more likely.

I expect that we will get an explanation, but it might not be true or completely accurate. Ignorance can be bliss, if you're not ready for the truth...Greybeard

geoschmo

February 7th, 2003, 08:57 PM

Uh, ok Greybeard. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Actually your example is backwards. TWA 800 was not shot down. The quick answer everyone wanted was that it was shot down. Only after thousands of hours of in depth research and analysis did the true cause, the fuel tank electrical problem, become known.

In fact the irrational hysteria around the "missle theory" has taken attention away from what really should concern people about the TWA 800 crash. The fact that faulty wiring that should have been taken out years before on all those commercial airliners wasn't. That's the real scary thing about it. But noone talks about it cause they would rather believe someone shot it down then believe the airliners they are flying in every day could blow up too because of the same faulty design.

Geoschmo

tesco samoa

February 7th, 2003, 09:27 PM