Re: The Challenger Cover-Up -- NASA's Unidentified 51-L Frustum

"ghost@xxxxxxxxx" <john.maxson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:1115242567.816262.169150@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

> David Skinner wrote:
>>
>> "ghost@xxxxxxxxx" <john.maxson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>> news:1114864931.799978.26380@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
>>
>> > Peter Joseph wrote:
>> >>
>> >> For example, the photos of black smoke coming from the Right
>> >> SRB at launch alone are so compelling to me as to preclude
>> >> any kind of hydrogen leak at SSME/SRB ignition.
>> >
>> > I'm quoting from my book, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L, at
>> > the bottom of page 35:
>> >
>> > "In the interim, investigators had accumulated comprehensive
>> > evidence about the source of the black smoke aft. Tests at Marshall
>> > had established that products used to insulate the external tank
>> > (and its adjacent fixtures) produce black smoke in the presence of
>> > burning hydrogen (Figure 41). More importantly, the tests had
>> > proved that neither O-rings nor O-rings and grease create black
>> > smoke when they burn in the presence of gaseous hydrogen. This
>> > scientific testing, though conclusive, had received almost no
>> > public attention."
>
> <snip>
>
>> Absolutely positively irrelevant... It doesn't matter if the O-rings
>> and/or grease could produce black smoke when burning in the presence
>> of gaseous hydrogen. How the hell could any leaked hydrogen (there
>> wasn't, but if there was) get to the O-rings or grease inside the
>> SRB? It couldn't, could it?
>
> There's no reason for you to make something illogical of my reply to
> Peter.

I did nothing of that sort, it was already illogical.

> He felt that he'd seen photos of black smoke which precluded a
> hydrogen leak.

I don't know about him, but I HAVE SEEN such images.

> I pointed to optical evidence of identical black smoke

No you haven't pointed to such "optical evidence"... Want to do that now?

> which was shown by investigators to *admit* a hydrogen leak.

Don't you mean "admit the POSSIBILITY of a hydrogen leak"?
And since there is [also] evidence that O-rings produce 'black smoke' when
burned by SRB exhaust, it also admits the possibility of an aft field joint
O-ring burnthrough.

>
>> What is relevant is whether the O-rings and/or grease
>> produce black smoke when burned by SRB exhaust...
>
> I think you mean by ignited SRB fuel,

No, I meant exactly what I said, "SRB exhaust"... Which is exactly what
would be coming out of an aft field joint O-ring burnthrough.

> but the investigators realized
> (and demonstrated by testing) that would be irrelevant if it proved to
> be the case that the cause of the black smoke was an aft tank leak or
> fracture

Maybe they did realize such, but that does nothing to prove that that's
what happened.

> -- for example, due to SRB thrust imbalance from LH2
> cold-soaking of the left SRB.

When are you going to get this through your head? There was no significant
thrust imbalance prior to SRB exhaust becoming visible emanating from the
aft field joint (approximately T+59sec). People here have been telling you
this for years.

>
> Challenger's Ghost
.

Relevant Pages