Foam and rescue possibilities
- From: "Allen Thomson" <thomsona@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 22 Jun 2006 07:55:02 -0700
[IMO, the last four paragraphs are, to say the least, remarkable. And I
wonder whether it's realy a good idea to fly a full crew of seven on
this flight.]
http://www.flatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060622/NEWS02/606220341/1007
Foam would threaten shuttle rescue
BY TODD HALVORSON
FLORIDA TODAY
June 22, 2006
CAPE CANAVERAL - NASA could not fix a serious foam-shedding problem in
time to launch a rescue mission if Discovery suffers severe damage
during its July 1 launch, the agency's top safety officer said
Wednesday.
Atlantis, the rescue vehicle, might be damaged by the same design flaw
that Discovery now faces.
Neither Bryan O'Connor nor NASA Chief Engineer Christopher Scolese plan
to appeal a decision to proceed with the launch, because the shuttle's
crew could seek safe haven on the International Space Station in that
case.
"That's a done deal. That decision has been made. We now go forward and
we look to see if we can get this vehicle off the launch pad next
week," O'Connor said.
A former shuttle pilot and mission commander, O'Connor added that he
was "not going to lie down in the flame trench or throw my badge down"
in protest.
In a flight readiness review last Saturday, O'Connor and Scolese voted
to delay the launch until NASA could redesign external tank foam covers
that could shed insulation chunks large enough to severely damage
shuttle heat shielding.
Dubbed "ice-frost ramps," the foam covers are designed to keep ice from
building up on
metal brackets that secure pressurization lines on the outside of the
tank. Ice also could cause critical damage to shuttle heat shields.
NASA Administrator Mike Griffin decided to press ahead with the launch
so the agency can resume construction of the half-built station on
another mission in late August.
NASA faces a 2010 deadline to finish the job. Sixteen more shuttle
missions will be required.
The decision to proceed with the launch despite a finding of
"unacceptable risk" by the engineering and safety offices is
unprecedented.
Scolese said he ultimately agreed with Griffin's rationale for flight:
The chance of damage is remote -- about one in 100 -- and Discovery's
astronauts could try to make repairs or stay on the station until a
rescue mission could be launched.
"Given the fact that we do have many options available to us to protect
the crew and the orbiter, the (engineering) community is not against
the decision to fly," Scolese said.
Three alternative designs for the ice-frost ramps are being developed.
But none would be ready to field in time to fly a rescue mission.
O'Connor said a decision to put another shuttle and another crew at
risk would be a tough call.
"At the very least, there would be a big discussion about whether we
are ready to go do that," he said. "But we would have people we would
need to bring back. So I'm sure that would color our discussion as
well."
Contact Halvorson at 639-0576 or thalvorson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Foam and rescue possibilities
- From: Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)
- Re: Foam and rescue possibilities
- From: Jorge R. Frank
- Re: Foam and rescue possibilities
- From: Vlad
- Re: Foam and rescue possibilities
- From: simple_language@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Foam and rescue possibilities
- From: Jeff Findley
- Re: Foam and rescue possibilities
- Prev by Date: Re: Discovery will fly against the advice of its engineering and safety chiefs
- Next by Date: Re: Foam and rescue possibilities
- Previous by thread: sci.space.policy impact on policy
- Next by thread: Re: Foam and rescue possibilities
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|