Re: That Interesting Foam Situation


"Cardman" <do-not@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:32hje1tjriphi3mq39nnuif6ds2n7ns066@xxxxxxxxxx
>
> The first thing I noticed about this launch was how much the camera
> coverage had improved. Then they did not quite do that for the TV and
> Internet viewers did they? I also noticed how nice looking the ET was
> these days, with a multi colour system.
>

No, they did that so they could study thefoam problem


> That camera on the ET is a very good thing for NASA publicity, but in
> this case there is also a down side. As I indeed noticed the live
> coverage of that foam chunk breaking off.
>
> The first case of the paranoid idiot syndrome crops up from those
> people who cannot even do a simple E=MC2 calculation.
>
> Columbia's foam problem came about due to using weaker CFC free foam
> that lead to foam breaking off while still thick in the Earth's
> atmosphere.

Thanks for playing. The bipod ramp was manually sprayed on using the old
CFC containing foam.


>
> I am also sure that it is true to say that foam breaking off in this
> weak spot is unlikely to hit the Shuttle anyway. Should it ever do so,
> then lets keep in mind that this is high atmosphere and low energy
> foam.

See, this is the thinking that doomed Columbia.

>
> So is this successful and safe launch reason to ground the entire
> Shuttle fleet? Let me guess. Paranoia over "killer foam" and not
> understanding the real risk to blame.

No, I don't think it's NASA that doesn't understand the true risks.

>
> Sure it would be nice to not have any foam break off, but lets keep in
> mind that this is "foam". One knock and it is off in other words. And
> even in the worst case situation, then does not NASA now do a post
> launch inspection for damage?

Which is part of what they are doing on this flight.

>
> So again, no problem.
>
> And so NASA is now back to the drawing board trying to solve a
> problem, that is not really a problem, and one that they are unlikely
> to (easily) fix anyway. Do I really need to point out a successful
> launch?

Columbia's launch was successful.


You'd be funnier if you weren't so tragically wrong about your facts.



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: GO FEVER IS WELL ENTRENTCHED:(
    ... Schedule pressure propels NASA ... Foam danger is unresolved, but agency moves ahead with launch plans ... NASA has delivered a revamped external fuel tank to Kennedy ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • OT NASA death glider. truly unbelievable
    ... Behind Chunks of Foam, ... NASA was never forced to attack shuttle debris peril, ... Discovery's external fuel tank during Tuesday's launch shows that the ...
    (alt.sports.basketball.nba.la-lakers)
  • Re: Foam Failure Causes?
    ... >They planned and expected to fix all significant foam shedding, ... >> foam loss is directly to do with the SRB separation. ... >> So NASA running ... Still, this launch provided a lot of data, where this may ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: NASA Shuttle Explosion On Independence Day Doubtful
    ... foam insulation covering the shuttle Discovery's external fuel tank, ... and NASA managers were deciding Monday whether to call off the ... scheduled Fourth of July launch. ... easy to hit the shuttle if a piece of foam came off. ...
    (rec.sport.pro-wrestling)
  • Re: NASA Shuttle Explosion On Independence Day Doubtful
    ... foam insulation covering the shuttle Discovery's external fuel tank, ... and NASA managers were deciding Monday whether to call off the ... scheduled Fourth of July launch. ... easy to hit the shuttle if a piece of foam came off. ...
    (rec.sport.pro-wrestling)