Re: OT shuttle problem
- From: lparker@xxxxxxxxx (Lloyd Parker)
- Date: 27 Jul 2005 15:19:07 GMT
In article <1122402700.731570.258250@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Ken Biggles" <georgebeer2@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>A profit? How? Launching satellites? This should be done by private
>contractors. I think most is already done by private contractors.
>
>NASA has become like more like the post office. You have a bunch of
>paper pushers and shuttle repairmen.
>
>Some of the engineers on the space probe projects are top notch. The
>space station was a huge waste of money. The shuttles are old and
>dangerous. The design is dated from the 1970s. It is silly to keep
>dumping money into an old milk truck.
>
>
>
>Regarding the main tank foam - NASA started using it in 1997:
>
>Thank fussy "environmentalists" from the Clinton administration for the
>substandard but politically correct foam that NASA thinks caused the
>Columbia disaster.
Again, that's a lie.
>
>"NASA engineers have known for at least five years that insulating foam
>could peel off the space shuttle's external fuel tanks and damage the
>vital heat-protecting tiles that the space agency says were the likely
>'root cause' of Saturday's shuttle disaster," the left-of-center
>Philadelphia Inquirer noted today in an article by Knight Ridder News
>Service.
Repeating a lie doesn't make it the truth.
>
>So why was such a crummy substance used in such a crucial capacity,
>with the lives of seven astronauts at stake? Because
>"environmentalists" fretting about their theory of human-caused "global
>warming" wanted to use it.
You're lying.
>
>In a 1997 report, NASA mechanical systems engineer Greg Katnik "noted
>that the 1997 mission, STS-87, was the first to use a new method of
>'foaming' the tanks, one designed to address NASA's goal of using
>environmentally friendly products. The shift came as the U.S.
>Environmental Protection Agency was ordering many industries to phase
>out the use of Freon, an aerosol propellant linked to ozone depletion
>and global warming," Knight Ridder reported.
>
>Insulation is sprayed on the shuttle's tanks to keep the super-cooled
>hydrogen and oxygen fuels at the correct temperature.
>
>Before the P.C. new insulation was used, about 40 of the spacecraft's
>26,000 ceramic tiles would sustain damage in missions. However, Katnik
>reported that NASA engineers found 308 "hits" to Columbia after a 1997
>flight.
>
>A "massive material loss on the side of the external tank" caused much
>of the damage, Katnik wrote in an article in Space Team Online.
>
>He called the damage "significant." One hundred thirty-two hits were
>bigger than 1 inch in diameter, and some slashes were as long as 15
>inches.
>
>Most frighteningly, some slashes cut three-quarters of the way into the
>2-inch-deep tiles, near the ship's aluminum skin, which burns at only
>350 degrees. More than 100 tiles had to be replaced - 11 times more
>than in a previous mission that had used foam made with politically
>incorrect Freon.
As others have pointed out, that mission still had the old tank.
>
>"As recently as last September, a retired engineering manager for
>Lockheed Martin, the contractor that assembles the tanks, told a
>conference in New Orleans that developing a new foam to meet
>environmental standards had 'been much more difficult than
>anticipated,'" Knight-Ridder wrote.
>
>The engineer, who helped design the thermal protection system, said
>that switching from the Freon foam "resulted in unanticipated program
>impacts, such as foam loss during flight."
>
And what's your source for this? (This ought to be good.)
.
- References:
- OT shuttle problem
- From: Peter
- Re: OT shuttle problem
- From: Ken Biggles
- Re: OT shuttle problem
- From: william lynch
- Re: OT shuttle problem
- From: Ken Biggles
- OT shuttle problem
- Prev by Date: Re: OT shuttle problem
- Next by Date: Tyre Rule Change/Clarification (Obfuscation)
- Previous by thread: Re: OT shuttle problem
- Next by thread: Re: OT shuttle problem
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|