Every person that flies in space knows that they are sitting on a giant bomb. Further, they know that if they return to earth, it is because they were able to simulate a meteor successfully. They also understand that just plain old human error could be responsible for their demise. They do what they do because the thrill and scientific achievement out-weighs the calculated danger.

Those that control the flight and run the mission from the ground, also know this and, while their lives are not threatened, they love those brave souls as if they were part of them. Do not disrespect their judgement, when any one of a thousand mishaps can, and did happen. If any of those were human errors, then they are also included in this scenario as an accepted calculated risk that they all subscribed to beforehand.

If any of the astronauts could have been saved, it would have been attempted. Most of us do not understand it because we do not have the background , or intricate knowledge that only they possessed and understood.

If we trust them to succeed, then we must trust them when they fail as well.

You guys are getting it wrong! Don't you know? The Super Koch Brothers are behind all of this! They had their cronies infiltrate NASA's base before the mission begun, and just as the space shuttle launched, they hijacked the control room, gagged and tied up the staff, and had the spacecraft's emergency destruction unit initiated. And here's the reason you've never heard THIS story before: The cronies were, according to a random stranger on the street (if you know what I mean), using some kind of device which emitted radio waves at brain controlling frequencies to make everybody in the building forgot what happened, and remember an alternate version of the accident which apparently happened to be just an unfortunate disaster. It was all part of their plan to make the public fear space exploration and justify defunding NASA!

There was talk in the Air Force about putting together a big O2 tank, CO2 scrubbers, and food supplies in the top of a rocket and rather than jettisoning the protective shields (as they would during a satellite delivery in orbit), keep it together and have them pick it up like they would a satellite retrieval using the Canadarm.

The O2 and food would have held them over until a second Soyuz could have come up to the Space Station. Half of the Astronauts would have returned on it, and the other half would have returned to Earth on a shuttle sent up with Pilot and Commander only (as occurred during the first Shuttle flights), leaving enough room for the remaining astronauts to return to earth. Columbia would have remained in orbit, docked to the Space Station and used as storage until a repair plan could be executed.

In the end, it was determined to be too risky with too many untested elements that could put additional astronauts lives in jeopardy.

I would have liked to see them try though. There's a chance it could have worked. They made the ultimate sacrifice and the space program has changed dramatically as a result.

Originally posted by bpg131313
There was talk in the Air Force about putting together a big O2 tank, CO2 scrubbers, and food supplies in the top of a rocket and rather than jettisoning the protective shields (as they would during a satellite delivery in orbit), keep it together and have them pick it up like they would a satellite retrieval using the Canadarm.

The O2 and food would have held them over until a second Soyuz could have come up to the Space Station. Half of the Astronauts would have returned on it, and the other half would have returned to Earth on a shuttle sent up with Pilot and Commander only (as occurred during the first Shuttle flights), leaving enough room for the remaining astronauts to return to earth. Columbia would have remained in orbit, docked to the Space Station and used as storage until a repair plan could be executed.

In the end, it was determined to be too risky with too many untested elements that could put additional astronauts lives in jeopardy.

I would have liked to see them try though. There's a chance it could have worked. They made the ultimate sacrifice and the space program has changed dramatically as a result.

I havnt read every single page or reply, but was follwing this at first and I researched the Int. Space Station. Why do they not run out of air? Google "international space station oxygen supply" and learn. Type in "space shuttle oxygen supply" and you will learn that instead of a filter system using chemicals and recycling method, they held air on cylinders. Why!? Was it that much larger or heavier that they could not use the same system. It would seem to me that the shuttles were not retro fitted and were late 70 to early 80 tech,

I was a kid growing up wanting to be an astronaut out of many things and had a collection of pictures on cards of the early space shuttle launches. I always wondered in my more recent years why there were always two shuttles on the pads. So the second shuttle was launched or was it on standby for a rescue mission?

Most likely due to budget cuts with NASA did they stop using the second shuttle for a rescue, and for risk of more lives as you mentioned. Maybe they also figured it was a pretty reliable system, and in the only shuttle incident prior there was no chance of a rescue mission.

I think it is not right however to not tell the astronauts if this is the case. They could have had more contact with loved ones to say good bye, and they would of had more time to figure out a solution. Anyone see "Mission to Mars" I think it is where they have problems and end up using their maintenance rockets to get onto another space craft orbiting Mars to continue, and basically survive. Different and sci-fi circumstances, but humans are incredible, and astronauts are smart and ballsy as heck! Oh, and duh, why not hook up with the Space Station and hang out there once oxygen was out, and have a rescue mission send more oxygen tanks, plus return the crew as they could. I wish I could find it hard to believe this OP isn't true but I am not surprised, and hate to say it, but did they think the cost of a rescue mission or two wasn't worth saving their lives and they would just wing it and hope for the best?

Originally posted by bpg131313
In the end, it was determined to be too risky with too many untested elements that could put additional astronauts lives in jeopardy.

You are implying that many in mission control KNEW about the danger and considered other options, then disregarded the other options as "too risky".

This is nothing than conspiracy blah-blah, there is not one bit of evidence for that.

What we know is that very few individuals were concerned after they learned about the tile hit on start, but even THOSE people who voiced concerns about the tile hit ULTIMATELY decided that it does NOT pose any danger to the mission.

You can spin conspiracy tales as long as you want, fact is that at the point when Columbia was about to return NO ONE in NASA suspected a problem - therefore we can also assume that NASA did not play through certain scenarios to "save the crew" and disregarded them as "too risky". This just your fantasy.

Furthermore, be assured that *if* NASA at some point WOULD have determined there was indeed danger to the mission, I am 100% convinced that NASA, the crew and anyone involved would have done anything trying to save the crew, NO MATTER WHAT IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN, they would have attempted anything when it would have had only a slight chance of success.

All the rest is nothing but NASA conspiracy fairy tales.

***

The more interesting question is actually what IF many in NASA would have known that the re-entry would be disastrous - whether there WERE actually things to do which could have saved them.

I think reaching ISS was not possible, that's what i read.

But then I do think there were options, such as indeed sending a support capsule up there (Russians maybe)...attempting a repair from outside etc..etc... I mean I am not an astronaut so I don't know, but I THINK there would've been some options. And I don't think that NASA would have just said "Well..we can't do anything anyway, so let's just burn them up in the atmosphere". For many, many reasons not.

Furthermore, be assured that *if* NASA at some point WOULD have determined there was indeed danger to the mission, I am 100% convinced that NASA, the crew and anyone involved would have done anything trying to save the crew, NO MATTER WHAT IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN, they would have attempted anything when it would have had only a slight chance of success.

I agree, but there is a part of me that still wouldn't be surprised if they didn't. If anything after my last post, I thought of the movie Apollo 13 and Apollo 18. One more non-fiction, and one "fiction" and conspiracy. In Apollo 13 they do everything they can to save those brave lives. In Apollo 18 they do a top-secret flight and cut them off when they deem the return to risky with no chance of rescue. Different circumstances again, but you get the picture.

That's terrible, awful, unlawful and much worse than Burger King ever did.

Doesnt every mission has a rescue mission for backup? Also they dont have air they have co2 filters.

Its amazing they couldnt do much for these guys,
but for Apollo 13 that sustained serious damage, wow.

Its not like they got to go on the moon.... Or a planet or anything really cool..

They just went out of orbit and went around earth a few times, nothing they did
was revolutionary so with that thought, they deserved to know, to tell their families
and get their heart right if needed be... Maybe forgive someone they never go to, or say
sorry to someone they hurt really bad.... How is that nasa's decision. F nasa

If it were me on that flight, I would want to know about the damage to the Shuttle. At least then I would have the option of passing out as the Oxygen levels get low and never waking up, or suffering a painfully horrible burning death upon coming back. I'd rather my last words be " I'm feeling kinda tired... I think I'll take a nap!" but that's just my personal opinion.

It wasn't their superiors right to deny them saying goodbye to family.