"f86sabre" (f86sabre)
02/26/2014 at 20:55 • Filed to: Spacelopnik, Columbia
4
9|
"f86sabre" (f86sabre)
02/26/2014 at 20:55 • Filed to: Spacelopnik, Columbia | 4
| 9 |
I was reading the comments on !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! and I am surprised at the number of people who seem to think that NASA knowingly, and willingly, let Columbia be destroyed after the foam impact. Reading the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! eports it is clear that while NASA knew Columbia had been hit by foam that it was believed to be within scope of what had happened before. They did not believe the shuttle was in imminent peril.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
It blows my mind to think that there are people out there who think the people who work at NASA knew the shuttle was doomed and would just let them go like that. I know people who work at JSC, I know the mindset of people in the industry as it is related to the one I work in, and the amount of care they have for the astronauts and the shuttles is unbelievable. They would do anything to take care of them. Now, looking back with 20/20 hindsight could other things been done? Sure, but that is the way hindsight works. To say that NASA knowingly let those people die is crap.
desertdog5051
> f86sabre
02/26/2014 at 21:17 |
|
Haters, conspirators, whatever.
Those people at NASA are always looking out for the best welfare of the equipment and the astronauts. Tiles come off on just about every launch. You cannot predict when it will become a hazard.
Jayhawk Jake
> f86sabre
02/26/2014 at 21:31 |
|
I suspect a lot of it has to do with the controversy around Challenger, the idea that NASA was pressured into launching even though they weren't comfortable with the temperature
jariten1781
> f86sabre
02/26/2014 at 21:38 |
|
I work with Capt. Wolfe who was on the investigation board (then a LCDR). He is an incredible stand up person and he stands by the report without reservation. In his opinion it was tragic with lessons to learn from, but in the end it was an accident.
spanfucker retire bitch
> f86sabre
02/26/2014 at 21:42 |
|
Leave it to your typical Gawker commenters to completely screw up the message that ArsTechnica was trying to deliver. I guess that level of journalism is above what they're normally used to.
For those who haven't, I highly recommend going to read the source article on Ars. Also, the comments section is worth a going through as well, there's a commenter named STS_Engineer who has been giving amazing insight into the inner workings of NASA. Apparently the guy was working on STS-400 shuttle launch (which never happened) which would have been launched to rescue the crew that went up to do the last repairs on the Hubble Telescope.
He mentioned how that planning alone took 18 months.
WarShrike
> f86sabre
02/26/2014 at 22:21 |
|
I got a frantic phone call from my college friend in DC that morning and told me to turn on the news, "We've lost the shuttle."
I cried that day.
I'd actually spent a full year of distance learning with NASA at JSC with mentors and other students that were (like me) all Juniors in HS. I loved NASA and what it was all about at that time and had started my freshman year at Texas A&M as an aerospace engineering major. I knew of some of the people that went on that mission, and I knew through association some of those that helped with the logistics in JSC for some of the other projects.
I've had a lot of barriers in the road since then, mostly financial with some stupid choices here and there, but I'm finally getting close to my goal of getting my engineering degree (Mechanical now) at Texas Tech.
I don't know if I'll ever get into the aerospace industry. My outlook on some things changed for me after that incident and the way our govt. muddled things and shuffled their feet.
The shuttle was long overdue for replacement and the programs that had been in place to do so kept getting cuts or mothballed.
It's a "Porch-uh"
> f86sabre
02/26/2014 at 22:37 |
|
I read (and met) Edward Tufte, who is cited by the Columbia Accident Investigation Board. Basically, he blames it on a shitty Powerpoint.
NASA executives drew unintended conclusions from the Columbia engineers' bullet points. But if those points had been described in detail, Ralph Roe (director of the Engineering and Safety Center) thinks it's more likely that the executives would have comprehended them.
Destructive Tester
> f86sabre
02/26/2014 at 22:49 |
|
I personally can't stand these bullshit armchair conspiracists...
The simple fact is Challenger was the unfortunate result of institutional arrogance and complacency. Columbia was the unfortunate result of rolling the proverbial dice one time too many. Unfortunately NASA was left with two options with regards to the tile damage, leave the crew up there to definitely die of carbon dioxide poisoning or try to bring them back and hope Columbia could hold together to either land or at least make it to exac. altitude... Personally, if I had to choose between certain death or likely death, I'm taking likely every damn time.
Kaltrop
> desertdog5051
02/26/2014 at 23:47 |
|
A plan... invite all these conspirabots (include the 'moon landing was a lie!' crowd) into a large tall building for "dinner". Its actually a rocket. Launch them into the sun. Profit!
|
desertdog5051
> Kaltrop
02/27/2014 at 22:22 |
|
Works for me.