razorace Posted February 1, 2003 Share Posted February 1, 2003 What do you guys think of the space shuttle explosion? While it might seem like terrorism, the chances of terrorists planting a bomb or hitting the shuttle with a missile are basically nil. The shuttle is very carefully weighed since every pound of stuff on the shuttle costs thousands of dollars. Also, a normal AA rocket couldn't reach that far into the air. Still, with the first Israeli astronaut on board it was a tempting target.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoguePhotonic Posted February 1, 2003 Share Posted February 1, 2003 Just a fine example of why we need to get the new one in the air...that old piece of **** can't handle it anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted February 1, 2003 Author Share Posted February 1, 2003 That's easy to say but NASA's budget has been getting cut back every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted February 1, 2003 Share Posted February 1, 2003 I don't think it's was a terrorist attack. Too unlikely and illogical. If the Israeli did it, what would be the motive? To cut off Israel as USA's ally? Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted February 1, 2003 Author Share Posted February 1, 2003 I never even suggested that the israelies would consider bombing the shuttle! Where you pull that from?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted February 1, 2003 Share Posted February 1, 2003 Originally posted by razorace I never even suggested that the israelies would consider bombing the shuttle! Where you pull that from?! That was how I heard it on the news - They thought an Israeli onboard a US space shuttle was too good a chance... Sting'ering the shuttle is both impossible and unthinkable in US land. Planting a bomb in a tight-security shuttle sounds ludicrous as well. Let' put it this way: If it was indeed a terror attack, it has failed. People are passing it off as a structural failure (and rightfully so). For terror attacks to be effective, you need to show, with no inkling of doubt, that it's you who did that. 9/11 was a success because it was immediately apparent it was no mere flight plan gone astray. If it was a terror attack, I wonder how the terrorists are feeling right now, when no one are even thinking about connecting it to them. If it looks like an accident, smells like an accident and sounds like an accident, it probably is an accident. The terror attack has failed by now if there ever was one. Of course, I'm open to the possibility that the terrorists are going to appear on TV with a confession that it was them who did it. But I doubt they have the guts to do that, seeing what happened to Afghanistan. If it was Palestinians who did it, I seriously don't think they'd risk for the US to obliterate them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoguePhotonic Posted February 1, 2003 Share Posted February 1, 2003 No way "terrorists" as you call them did it...no point....you have to think strategy...they are up against such a big force....about the only way to win is to destroy key things in the U.S.'s economy..... What possible interest is there in a space shuttle flight? I know they make it out as it's all for the sole purpose to kill innocent lives....but that is complete bull****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted February 1, 2003 Share Posted February 1, 2003 Originally posted by RoguePhotonic What possible interest is there in a space shuttle flight? Space shuttles are a symbol of the US. "What possible interest is there in the Statue of Liberty?"... 'Thing is, if it doesn't get known that it's a terrorist attack, it has failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darklighter Posted February 2, 2003 Share Posted February 2, 2003 Very good point C'jais. I do not believe it was a terrorist attack, if it had been, it would have been made know that it was. Astronauts must always be prepared for danger or something going wrong when travelling to and from space, in a day and age when space travel is relatively new to us. They all take the risk, and risk their lives, just like these people did. I believe that it was a genuine accident, and a tragic one at that. All we can extract from this tradegy is what went wrong, and how we can stop it happening in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZBomber Posted February 2, 2003 Share Posted February 2, 2003 Razor, it cost more than thousands, try billions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted February 2, 2003 Author Share Posted February 2, 2003 I said, per pound, not per year. Check your math/source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jed Posted February 2, 2003 Share Posted February 2, 2003 It wasn't terrorists. We've already had reports and stories of what happened: During take off, a chunk of ice fell off one of the external fuel tanks and hit the wing, knocking off a few vital heat tiles. During entry to the atmosphere, the kinetic energy transfered to heat energy, heating up the structure of the shuttle beyond capacity, causing it to break up. Nothing extraordinary or terrorist related. However, if it was terrorists....one word. Bastards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted February 2, 2003 Author Share Posted February 2, 2003 Boy if that's true, the whole team that said that the shuttle was ok-dokie after some telescope checks are canned for sure. I'm not sure that's the case thou. If that's what caused the accident, ether that team is totally blind or it was a 1 in million chance that came up snake eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
^Invader Posted February 2, 2003 Share Posted February 2, 2003 Well either Terrorist got brave or a undetectable missile etc. So that counts them out...Personally I think on of the heat shielding had enough stress that it flew off CNN reported earlier today or yesterday that a few of them was getting ready to fly off. I think when that happened if it happened, the heat hit the fuel I mean like CNN.com said reentry can reach up to 3000 degrees. And yes most of the shuttle fleet needed alot of work redone you think with all the Technolgy we have now of days we could of at least come with a way to enter space alittle easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kstar__2 Posted February 2, 2003 Share Posted February 2, 2003 i have to agree with invader here, my thought exactely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCanr2d2 Posted February 2, 2003 Share Posted February 2, 2003 Let's clean up a few facts - Whilst Columbia was the oldest Shuttle, built in 1979, it had just gone through a 19 month retrograde, the first planned for the rest of the fleet. Whilst it's shell may have been 23 years old, many of the inner components were not, most of them being the latest and greatest pieces fitted to the Orbiter. Whilst it is 1970's design, that of the same era, or later than that used in Boeing 747's, F-14 Tomcats, F-15 Eagles, F-16 Falcons, E-6 Prowlers, SU-71 Blackbirds and U2 spyplanes, which are all currently operational US military hardware, it is agreed upon if the Shuttle had been designed now, the basic shape would still remain the same, the aerodymanic design is right. The speeds that it had to cope with meant that little changes would have been noticable if we had designed on recently. It is known that there was loss of hydraulic pressure to elevons on the left wing, which help control the shuttles descent in what is nothing more than an unpowered glide back into earth's atmosphere. Along with this is the change in pressure in the landing gear in that same wing, with the nitrogen filled tyres starting to feel the effects of what ever was going wrong up there. It is also known that a piece of foam insulation, which was most likely covered with ice due to the extreme cold needed to keep the propellants stable, did break off from the large external fuel tank. This fuel tank is no doubt already in NASA's hands, being examined along with any remaining debris. It did appear to hit the left wing, which was later examined via high quality footage, and telescopes from Earth, and engineers passed it fit. No one has confirmed, or denied that any tiles actually left the wingtip of the Shuttle Columbia. It is not actually rare for the shuttle to be missing some on return to earth. What may have been where this one that might've fallen off was positioned. On the leading edge of the wing is where most heat is built up, any heat allowed in through here would heat up the aluminium airframe. The wing would then most likely fall off, followed by an out of control Shuttle exposing areas to heat that they were not designed to handle. It may have been the piece of ice, or it may have just been that the hydraulics had failed, causing the computer controlled glide and slide, to end up destroying the craft as heat entered the airframe. Known current technology allows SAM's to reach 40 km altitude, along with the ability to track and hit targets that travel at approx Mach 3. This is approx where the SU-71's operating limit, at these heights, perhaps up to 50 km's from the earth's surface. The Shuttle was 63 km up, along with travelling at Mach 15 or more. I assume if it was AAM, the US would've detected the intruding aircraft or missile in their airspace. To even assume terrorism, or even mention this word in association with this event, is ludicrous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InTeRLoPeR Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 The left wing was missing some tiles. You can see it in the video. It doesn't matter if someone that said it was ok to return. Even if they didn't how in the world would the repair it up there? Send another shuttle and risk the two running into each other? It sickens me that one of the first things that was said by some news station(not sure which one) was that it was a terrorist attack. Even before anyone at NASA had said anything. They didn't check it will a telescope, the shuttle has tons of cameras on board that are used to check for something like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 Thank you BCanr2d2. I hate it when cowboy Americans (no offense to professional cowboys) go out and say things like "Its terrorists!" Without doing any scientific exploration of any sort... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCanr2d2 Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 Hate to see anyone go off at situations, and not even logically think about what is possible. Hard to understand that as NASA looks harder at the video of the piece of ice/foam falling off the external fuel tank, that NOW they see what it has done.... Anyway, it would be technically impossible to have cameras on the bottom of the Shuttle to look for any problems there. Not only would they burn up on re-entry, they would also give small areas on the bottom of Shuttle that would allow for heat leak into the main structure.... The cameras in the Shuttle are actually more associated with the cargo bay, so that they can monitor the astronauts and robotic arm. If NASA told them to look for damage, I am pretty sure there was a way to get around them not having to return. The Robotic arm with a camera, or an astronaut in a suit could've done it for them. The only reason they actually checked for the piece of foam hitting the wing, was that everything had gone so well, they had nothing else to do... After all, there is the International Space Station they could've docked with, and then send up another Shuttle to get them home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Groovy Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 The terrosist thing is pro-war propaganda. Why not blame every disaster on terrorists so we go into the middle east with flags a wavin' and guns a blazin'...... really! Pathetic! NASA makes mistakes people, alot. Space Exploration is dangerous, especially since I have known Navy ships that have been Decominished that are much younger than that old ass shuttle. I don't care how much maintenance you put into it, you cant make the damn thing last forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 Read and despair. (PDf. file) Just one question: Can we all agree that this zealot needs psychiatric treatment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 Just a comment to the notion of repairing in space: The damage was on the underside of the hull, which means that it was impossible to repair in space. As for sending up another shuttle: Without being an expert I don't think that they have the oxygen supply to hang around in orbit while another shuttle is prepared. Read and despair. Just one question: Can we all agree that this zealot needs psychic treatment? I doubt that they could even get a priest to back that. And that's saying something. And yes, he does need psychiatric treatment (or a firing squad detail). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Groovy Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 I too first questioned if this was perhaps God's way of telling us to stay out of space. I too am a Baptist, however after reading that, one cannot help to wonder if he had a nice tall glass of intolerance with his breakfast. What I was always tought, was that it was our mission to save people and forgive, not to condemn. Guess I didn't go to the same church this guy did. Thank God for that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 Originally posted by Darth Groovy I too first questioned if this was perhaps God's way of telling us to stay out of space. And if it is interpretted that way, it will prove once more that God doesn't know what he is doing. Seriously: We have to expand beyond Terra, or be destroyed in a specicidal war, or so I believe, at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted February 4, 2003 Author Share Posted February 4, 2003 Well, thinking long term here. We'll have to leave earth eventually. The sun isn't going to last forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.