Columbia Shuttle Crew Not Told of Possible Problem With Reentry

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 10:04 PM
link   

"After one of the MMTs (Mission Management Team) when possible damage to the orbiter was discussed, he (Flight Director Jon Harpold) gave me his opinion: 'You know, there is nothing we can do about damage to the TPS (Thermal Protection System). If it has been damaged it's probably better not to know. I think the crew would rather not know. Don't you think it would be better for them to have a happy successful flight and die unexpectedly during entry than to stay on orbit, knowing that there was nothing to be done, until the air ran out?"

A bleak assessment. Orbiting in space until your oxygen ran out. The dilemma for mission managers is that they simply didn't know if the space shuttle was damaged.


Source

Conflicted here. Don't know if I would want to know or not. It would have been a long time to contemplate your demise, on the other hand maybe I would have wanted to make my amends with my maker.

What would you have wanted if you were in their shoes??




posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by GrantedBail
 


I think they made the right call. It is properly merciful to spare them the anxiety, especially in their last moments.

Better to be surprisingly engulfed in a ball of flame with no prior knowledge than to spend days in agonizing anticipation of such an event.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Wow. This blows my mind. It's kind of huge news. It makes me wonder about other reporting of other events.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 10:29 PM
link   
They could of told their family one last good bye or something...



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Perhaps they could have done some sort of spacewalk and rigged up a repair? Might have been worth a shot at least.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by gangdumstyle
They could of told their family one last good bye or something...


They could've, perhaps. They could have had a blubbering good-bye, tearful and heart-wringing, then possibly have made the journey safely back home. Isn't it routine to have sustained some degree of damages during the flight and typically still have a safe return? Perhaps it is best to be going through the usual re-entry procedures with every expectation of landing safely rather than expecting a disasterous return to occur at any moment. John Glenn knew he had a warning of loose heat shield in a time where space flight was iffy at best. Space travel is never without risk, that much should be a given anyway.

The Shuttle is now a thing of the past. Maybe in the next generation It will be possible to more fully determine the condition of the craft and make necessary repairs before attempting re-entry. Perhaps there will even be accessory re-entry vehicles available at a space station if your own craft is too badly damaged to chance a return in it before more extensive repairs.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 11:00 PM
link   
From OP source:


But no one knew if there was damage. At that time NASA had no options for repair. The crew was on a science mission, nowhere near the International Space Station. They had no robotic arm to look at the wing, no way to repair the wing if they had damage, and it would take much too long to send up another space shuttle to rescue the crew.[

I am going to wait for heavies to weigh in on this one. I remember them discussing this. The question in my mind was did they know about the damage and ignore it or conclude it wasn't serious enough to warrant further investigation?

I am not sure about their "nothing can be done regardless", either. Did they have on board fuel to maneuver to the ISS? What about EVA suits to assess the damage and maybe come up with a solution that involved moving tiles on the shuttle around to generate a fix? At least try something... anything. Could other nations have helped?



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 11:04 PM
link   
Area 51 has a secret space pogram why cant they get them to go have a look and rescue the astronauts if need be.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 11:08 PM
link   
You'd think they'd give astronauts some kind of pill to take incase of things like this. Like a suicide pill or something?
I think that would have been a better soloution! I would have dropped the pill and then waited untill the end, floating around in space!



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 11:40 PM
link   
They could have went to the space station and had one of the astronauts there bring over a space suit and then ferried everyone over to the station. Then sent another shuttle to retrieve them. It was not hopeless. It was just easier to let them die.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Robonakka
They could have went to the space station and had one of the astronauts there bring over a space suit and then ferried everyone over to the station. Then sent another shuttle to retrieve them. It was not hopeless. It was just easier to let them die.


You make it sound like it would be easy.

Anyways, OT, I think they made the right call. I wouldn't want to know, my last days, moments would be absolutely terrifying, to say the least.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by samuel1990
 


I'm sure they do (or did) have a pill option. But when there is an 'if' scenario perhaps better not to take it.

I feel they did the right thing. Better not to know if death is imminent. Less time to dwell, less time to ponder. A slow form of torture.

I would rather not know.

/just my 2pence.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by AdamOver
 


I never even thought of that; having a pill option. I would imagine that would have been part of their protocols, now that you mention it. I have thought about this for a couple of hours now. I think I would have wanted to know and be able to make my peace and take my pill. But, hey that is just me.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 01:25 AM
link   
It all comes down to $. Do you really think Nasa would spend half a billion to rescue people that are cheaper to replace? IIRC the autopsies revealed that some actually survives the break-up of the shuttle? So it wasn't such a swift end. They couldn't see the exact area that was hit so, they never really knew if it was damaged. Nothing like this had happened before. I seem to remember a debate on whether to go EVA and visually inspect it, but they still had no way to fix it.
edit on 1-2-2013 by geldib because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 01:45 AM
link   
Somewhere on Youtube I saw what was supposed to have been video from inside the shuttle on reentry that basically just ends at the point where it should. It was hard to watch. I was wondering as I watched it if they had any idea what was happening.

I had the same sorts of thoughts about the Challenger. I think they eventually found that some of them were alive until they hit the water. That must have been just horrific if they were conscious.
edit on 1-2-2013 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 02:39 AM
link   
reply to post by geldib
 


Wrong Challenger. These were the people that burned up in front of all of us. You are thinking of another voyage, which was just as devastating. This one was 03.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Robonakka
They could have went to the space station and had one of the astronauts there bring over a space suit and then ferried everyone over to the station. Then sent another shuttle to retrieve them. It was not hopeless. It was just easier to let them die.


Research is your friend. In this case, the amount of research is remarkably small: A quick look at the orbits of Columbia and the International Space station, a quick look at the specifications for the Orbiter, and a quick visit to Atomic Rocket / Project Rho to consult a few tables, and you can do all the calculations needed to determine whether or not Columbia had sufficient delta-v to match orbits with the I.S.S. If that's more than you care to do, I can save you some time and mouse pad wear and summarize the results in three words: "Not even close".

Research short-comings aside, your proposition doesn't make logical sense. Even if NASA (or the ever-popular, ever-shadowy "they") didn't mind losing seven highly trained astronauts, and didn't mind yet *another* public relations disaster, why would "they" casually write off a Shuttle orbiter? The loss of Columbia disrupted every major civilian space project underway at the time, and did the same for at least three major military programs.

One of the things that defines most conspiracies is the idea that someone (or several someones) is manipulating events for some form of gain....so, exactly who gained from Columbia's loss? NASA certainly didn't (see above re: schedule disruptions and public relations problems). The US Military didn't (see above, part II). The defense contractors didn't (no replacement Orbiter was fabricated). So...what made it "easier" for "them" to let Columbia and her crew die?



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by BrianFlanders
Somewhere on Youtube I saw what was supposed to have been video from inside the shuttle on reentry that basically just ends at the point where it should. It was hard to watch. I was wondering as I watched it if they had any idea what was happening.

I had the same sorts of thoughts about the Challenger. I think they eventually found that some of them were alive until they hit the water. That must have been just horrific if they were conscious.
edit on 1-2-2013 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)


I read in at least one semi-official source that, according to what could be recovered from Columbia's flight data logs, the port reaction control system fired until it ran out of fuel. That tells me that Husband and McCool were fighting to keep her lined up long enough to decelerate, and just ran out of fuel. Once the Orbiter started to yaw, aerodynamic stress broke her apart.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Robonakka
They could have went to the space station and had one of the astronauts there bring over a space suit and then ferried everyone over to the station. Then sent another shuttle to retrieve them. It was not hopeless. It was just easier to let them die.


easier = cheaper

Just to clarify your well-made point.

ETA:

If I had people depending on me, difficult as it would be, I'd want to know so that I had the opportunity to share crucial information and say my goodbyes. I always thought that, in that type of scenario, it would be incredibly important to me that I have a chance to tell my husband that I demand that once he has time to grieve, he must move on and share his wonderful spirit with another who is deserving. So many in that type of turmoil feel like they need permission to move forward. I'd give it. I'm not saying it would be painless...

But if I had nobody depending on me, I'd prefer to not know. Let the IRS sort it out.
edit on 2/1/2013 by chasingbrahman because: (no reason given)
edit on 2/1/2013 by chasingbrahman because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by chasingbrahman
 


Wow! What a nice thought. I might just want to know so I could grind on the bastage one last time. LOL I would want to say goodbye to my kids though. We have community property in my state so I wouldn't be trippin on the IRS so much. Anyway...





top topics
 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join