Space Shuttle Columbia - What could they have done?

[garyw]

AThe Astronaut has to round the docking bay and go out to the wing (no handholds there). I guess the chance of getting lost in space would be negligible if they had a rope, but I don't know if a piece of rope is standard payload for a shuttle. to make things worse, the astronaut might as well have damaged something with it. If there was no rope, the whole action is too dangerous to even think about without an RMS. That would be like freeclimbing on a plaster wall...

They had tethers on board and two or three EVA suits in case of problems closing the ET umbillical doors. That's a contigency EVA which is always practiced.

In the case of an EVA to look at the wing leading edge you'd have to get over the payload bay doors, across the surface of the wing and then down, not at all easy. The proposed EVA had one astronaunt holding the legs of another whilst on a tether anchored to the payload bay.

The problem here is even if the damage was known about would you risk an eva which could lose one or both astronaunts and/or could make the damage worse?

Worst case scenario - the damage was a hairline crack, the astros EVA for a look, a mistake happens and the hairline crack is now a gapping hole...

Space missions are a risk numbers game. STS-51-L and STS-107 got the numbers wrong.

 

[jedidia]

The proposed EVA had one astronaunt holding the legs of another whilst on a tether anchored to the payload bay.

Outch. I totaly understand that you wouldn't want to pull off such acrobatics on the basis of feint suspicion.

 

[Keatah]

mmu weighs more than rms??

 

[Urwumpe]

Please go back and read my earlier post. NO shuttle has RMS "built in". Columbia had her RMS REMOVED as a weight saving measure for STS-107. There never was an option to use RMS or to put an astronaunt on the end of an RMS arm to have a look.

Additionally, STS-107 didn't have an airlock or space suits. It was a SpaceHab mission.

---------- Post added at 10:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:11 AM ----------

mmu weighs more than rms??

Yes. The MMU is not only the propulsion unit, that is alone a very heavy thing, but also the cradle at the side wall, which contains support gear.

 

[garyw]

STS-107 did have an airlock. The exit was in the transfer tunnel between the flightdeck rear wall and the spacehab module. Suits were carried in case of a contingency EVA for closing the ET Umbillical doors or payload bar doors.

Finally. MMU also had propellants which if they had leaked could have caused all sorts of problems for the delicate science experiments carried by 107.

 

[Urwumpe]

They had tethers on board and two or three EVA suits in case of problems closing the ET umbillical doors. That's a contigency EVA which is always practiced.

The always practiced contingency EVA is about closing the payload bay doors. You can't get below the Shuttle without RMS, and even the Columbia EVA plans are pretty risky, if you look how much stuff has to be disassembled to be used in McGyver manner.

---------- Post added at 10:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:25 AM ----------

Finally. MMU also had propellants which if they had leaked could have caused all sorts of problems for the delicate science experiments carried by 107.

Nitrogen .. not more. The Nitrogen actually comes from the shuttle ECLSS system.

 

[Jamesep3]

Well they could have done many things. The fact is they didn't. They don't say they knew what to do because at the time they didn't know it was going to happen. If you don't know about it you can't stop it!

 

[Keatah]

Well they could have done many things. The fact is they didn't. They don't say they knew what to do because at the time they didn't know it was going to happen. If you don't know about it you can't stop it!

What are some of the things that could have been done?

 

[garyw]

Already answered in this thread but in brief:

• RTLS
• Atlantis could have sent up for a resuce mission
• EVA to pack the hole with ice or other items to add protection
• Jettison the spacehab module
• Change the entry angle to put more stress on the undamaged wing and underside

Pretty much every option would have resulted in the loss of Columbia though.

 

[Keatah]

Can you explain how this "ice/foam block" shot out from between the wing and et, upwards, stopped, and arced back down to hit the rcc wing panel??

Where did it come from, certainly not from the top of the tank!

http://dementedmind.org/Last Words on Columbia.htm
http://dementedmind.org/Assets/flicks/E212.mpg

Something else hit the shuttle, certainly not foam. And foam would not be deflected so sharply!

Anyone want to take a guess. Prior to hearing my explanation?? Go on!!! Take a guess!

 

[garyw]

To understand what happens you need to understand how some foam is applied to the tank. There are akward parts of the tank where the foam is applied by hand. The bipod ramp was one such place.

Now, what sometimes happens is voids get into the foam, when the tank is pressurised with liquid fuel it gets very cold so you start getting an expansion/compression cycle, this can lead the voids to join together causing cracks.

When STS-107 launched a crack in the bipod ramp caused that entire block of foam to fall away. Because the foam is so light it immediately decelerated in the airstream. Meanwhile there was a rapidly accelerating shuttle right in the way.
The shuttle ran over the foam block and the rest is history.

Something else hit the shuttle, certainly not foam. And foam would not be deflected so sharply!

Anyone want to take a guess. Prior to hearing my explanation?? Go on!!! Take a guess!

No it didn't and a panel of experts along with a staff of hundreds of experts backed up with scientific testing confirm the root cause as the bipod foam.

 

[Keatah]

Already answered in this thread but in brief:

• RTLS
• Atlantis could have sent up for a resuce mission
• EVA to pack the hole with ice or other items to add protection
• Jettison the spacehab module
• Change the entry angle to put more stress on the undamaged wing and underside

Pretty much every option would have resulted in the loss of Columbia though.

yes of course, thanks..

The only viable solution might have been rtls, as the velocities would not have created high temps. And it would have been economically viable. Sending up atlantis would have cost too much, and disrupted a schedule for months to come. Typical cost cutting like the bp oil spill. Dumping spacehab would not have made nearly enough weight difference and heating would be reduced by like 3%, nowhere near enough. It wasn't the stress that caused the failure, the hot plasma ripped apart internal systems, electrical and hydraulic.

RTLS could not have ever been considered - As this was found out after the film was developed and the shuttle already in orbit.

 

[Urwumpe]

Can you explain how this "ice/foam block" shot out from between the wing and et, upwards, stopped, and arced back down to hit the rcc wing panel??

The foam moves in the local airflow around the Shuttle. Or did you think this happened in a vacuum?

The Shuttle stack was already traveling itself at 2300 ft/s, the foam did not shoot out, it did slow down.

Where did it come from, certainly not from the top of the tank!

Left bipod ramp - right at the forward attachment of the Orbiter.

http://dementedmind.org/Last%20Words%20on%20Columbia.htm
http://dementedmind.org/Assets/flicks/E212.mpg

ooooooook. Where is my tinfoil hat?

I love such sentences like "These last three undeniable facts completely invalidate the causal findings of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board Report." If the guy would be talking about facts, it would be nice, but he stops at interpretations. He doesn't even waste a second considering that he doesn't know the position of the foam, only the projection of the foam in the field of view in the camera. It is always in all frames of the movie, just on a line from camera through the foam, since the camera image is 2D not 3D. This is a complete beginners error which usually only "UFO experts" do.

Something else hit the shuttle, certainly not foam. And foam would not be deflected so sharply!
!

if something else hit the shuttle, the foam did very well hide it.

http://caib.nasa.gov/news/report/volume1/default.html

 

[DaveS]

Can you explain how this "ice/foam block" shot out from between the wing and et, upwards, stopped, and arced back down to hit the rcc wing panel??

Where did it come from, certainly not from the top of the tank!

http://dementedmind.org/Last Words on Columbia.htm
http://dementedmind.org/Assets/flicks/E212.mpg

Something else hit the shuttle, certainly not foam. And foam would not be deflected so sharply!

Anyone want to take a guess. Prior to hearing my explanation?? Go on!!! Take a guess!

It was foam. It came from the lefthand bipod ramp. They had similar incident on STS-112 where a similar chunk of foam from the lefthand bipod ramp impacted the left SRB aft IEA box causing a good sized dent in it.

See a photo of the ET with damaged bipod ramp here: http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/2157main_sts112_et_hi.jpg

Videos of the foam impact testing done at the Southwest Research Institute can be found here: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/video/shuttle/sts-107/html/investigation.html

---------- Post added at 01:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:13 PM ----------

You should really read the final report of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board(CAIB): http://www.nasa.gov/columbia/home/CAIB_Vol1.html

 

[garyw]

Aiflow around a shuttle when the shuttle is past Max-Q is a fascinating subject probably worthy of several papers. Now that the fleet has cameras all over the place there have been some interesting footage of small pieces of foam/ice/something being liberated from behind the shuttle stack then accelerating forwards and impinging on the the rear tank.

Certainly the airflow around the rear of the shuttle stack once supersonic is very interesting and dynamic place but that's a little off-topic :lol:

If you watch the video carefully you'll see the foam break off, tumble then arc down. that's it.

Remember that the shuttle is already at an interesting angle relative to the ground so it might look a little odd but that's what happend.

As an example, go and stand in an empty field and watch a plane fly over. As it get's closer to you it looks like it's climbing but it will be holding a constant altitude - that's just our perception of these things and the same is on that video.

 

[Keatah]

One other thing why did NASA not take satellite photos? Did they already know they had a stricken bird? Not want to alarm the public? Did they not *want* to *have* to launch a rescue mission due to cost? This isn't frakking wal-mart here!!

 

[garyw]

Keatah - READ the reports. All of this is covered in there including the request for DoD imaging assets.

 

[DaveS]

Keatah - READ the reports. All of this is covered in there including the request for DoD imaging assests.

Yes. The complicating factor for those was that only very few high-level shuttle program managers had the appropriate Top Secret clearances required to even see the photos!

One of those few was then the Shuttle Launch Integration Manager at KSC Wayne Hale, who did initiate a request with the DoD to examine opportunities for on-orbit photography of the orbiter.

But due to that the request did not come from the appropriate chain-of-command, the request was terminated by the chair of the on-orbit Mission Management Team(MMT).

 

[Urwumpe]

Yes. The complicating factor for those was that only very few high-level shuttle program managers had the appropriate Top Secret clearances required to even see the photos!

Which is quite a miracle, considering that 850,000 people in the USA have top secret clearance.

 

[DaveS]

Which is quite a miracle, considering that 850,000 people in the USA have top secret clearance.

Isn't that number consisting mostly of DoD personnel?