Who else here thinks that nasa is involved with a major cover up. Sorry if this has been posted somewhere else but this is my first post on this forum. Anyway with each day that goes by I see more and more that I find disturbing. Frantic e-mails from people who concerned over the shuttles fate yet not reaching the top. I think Mr. O keepf has alot of explaining to do. The video of the flight deck doesn't pass the smell test as far as it burning up. That video comes in pretty clearly and those things are incased in burn proof, blast proof boxes and the tape survived for that very reason. It is very sensitive video forsure and obviously the family would not want to watch the actual demise of their loved ones. I believe that nasa released a PORTION of the tape to proove that the astronuats were not aware of any impending disaster plus it is a very classy way of showing some of their final moments looking jovial and at ease but still it doew not pass the smell test. Nasa is trying furiously to come up with an explanation that the shuttle was done in by something other than the foam debris, because this has been a problem on previous flights and it should have been corrected. Notice how right after all the e-mails started surfacing that they discovered there was a breach on top ofthe wing. That could have been made during the breakup as thousands of parts began to shatter. Fails the smell test on that one too. Only after the public gets knowledge of things under the freedom of information act do we see that the shuttle was hit not by one but by three piecesof foam. I have nofaith in this independent board of inquiry made up of a bunch of O keepf's croanies. i hope that someone keeps the pressure on nasa and the truth comes out. I know I sound like a conspiracy theorist but this is how I feel anyone eles?
Well... here is what I think. I am sure we didn't see everything in that video, but then again, I am not sure I would want to see it. Especially if it was a slow heat 'til death experience (in which case it would be horrible to view). In terms of the breach, I would guess that they didn't think this was a likely outcome. I think they may have known about the concern, but thought this result would be very remote. I think future launch/landings will check and re-check all remotely possible problems. I think this was probably a cross-our-fingers landing. But what was the alternative? MAYBE they could have done maintenance, but what if they didn't have the part? Would they send another shuttle with the part? How long would that take? Could they survive the wait? Thats a lot to think about. I would agree that we didn't see that entire tape, in fact, I would bet that it wasn't "tape" at all. It was probably digitally archived as most of thier other feeds are. If it was tape, it wouldn't have been "partially" damaged. If it had, we would have seen variation of quality throughout. But I don't think there is a conspiracy, it was all just an unfortunate mistake.
Of course, there's always the International Space Station sitting out there that everyone spent a whole lotta money on ... if not for something like this, for what?
An alternative could have been a race against time to get additional supplies up to them at the space station (if they needed it) and bring them back down when NASA could predict greater guarantees.
When I used the word conspiracy it probably soundedlike what I thought was that nasa knew all along that the shuttle would burn up and they did not tell the crew. I do not believe that NASA knew that the shuttle would not make it but I do think that somehow someone must have told the upper management that the ship might have been badly damaged. What I do feel is that O'Keefe and others might have become so concernedwith dollars that the thought of saving the crew at the expense of destroying the shuttle when it was not certain that it would not make it back would not be considered. Maybe it was just gross overconfidence. But the cover up in that case is when they say how safety is priority #1. I am also convinced that this independant board of inquiry will never reveal the truth if it means NASA looks real bad. too many of them are closely attached to the people and agency. Once they took over things they have been not forthcoming with their findings and when they do come out with something its pretty bland. One of the latest things is the discovery of all the heat build up on the left wing. Data and telemetry was telling us this before the ship broke up. they seem to be moving quite slowly with this. I agree this was a cross your fingers landing. What I don't understand was why their was zero effort to inspect the shuttle after they knew it had been hit and the next day they saw debris floating away from the ship. It might not mean much if the ship was badly struck but some sort of effort should have been made to save the crew. did they not want to know? Is it because that given three weeks they would not be able to come up with any type of rescue plan, that looks like a long time with three space shuttles and the ISS. It would be a long shot but to change the trajectory maybe not do the turns to slow the craft down enough to land and ditch in the Pacific would be atleast worth the effort as there were 7 people up there we owe it to them to give them every chance we can no matter how remote.
It's called a "calculated risk" - they took it, for whatever reason. They certainly can't feign ignorance. Someone reported a potential hazard, they checked briefly, dismissed it as a "calculated risk" - and they lost the bet with reality.
In order to deal with this in the future, NASA must either:
a) handle all reports with utmost attention and seriousness - this is expensive and time consuming and, in the context where shuttle missions are for commercial purposes, those costs would be relayed to the client and henceforth passed down to the consumer. Given the nature of the types of commercial things that the shuttle services, this could have a fairly broad economic impact on telecommunications, satellite TV, content feeds and other related things whose ripple effects could be more far-sweeping than one might imagine at first.
b) push forward the next RLV platform based on simpler, more efficient, more reliable, modern designs; cut the complexity. Improve redundancy. Heighten accuracy. Integrate fault tolerance and wrokable emergency procedures - and then switch to this program henceforth, leaving the shuttle program to history books.
03-01-2003 04:23 PM
