Possible Foam Insulation falls off Discovery during launch

[21KO]

NASA says it's to soon to tell if it will matter...

Up to six pieces of debris fell off Discovery: NASA

Jul 04 5:04 PM US/Eastern

Up to six pieces of debris that could be foam insulation fell off Discovery's troublesome external fuel tank minutes after liftoff Tuesday, a top NASA official said.

Officials cautioned, however, that it was too soon to know whether the debris struck Discovery and that the pieces came off later than would normally endanger the shuttle.

Columbia's demise in February 2003 was caused by foam insulation that peeled off 70 seconds after liftoff and struck its heat shield.

"About two minutes and 47 seconds give or take (after the Discovery launch), we saw three perhaps four pieces come off (the fuel tank)," said shuttle program manager Wayne Hale, adding that it was unclear whether it was foam or "something else."

"We also saw another piece or two come off at about four minutes 50 seconds," he told reporters at the Kennedy Space Center.

He cautioned, however, that it was "very raw, preliminary data" and would have another report later Tuesday.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/04/060704210357.1hey9sif.html

fingers crossed here...

[Major Harris]

:fingersx:

i hope this is much ado about nothing.

[Pete]

I'll wager money that it's nothing to worry about. The interview I saw, they were saying that the air was so thin when the first foam came off, it has far less volicity to do any damage. More so for the pieces that came off later.

It was a great thing to stand in the front yard and watch the ploom of smoke rise from the horizon, and the little white dot disapear into the blue. Can't see much from this side of the state, but I love the sonic boom when they fly right over us on re-entry.

[Bonez3]

I pray it's nothing.

I feel the space program is the most collosal (sp) waste of resources in the history of civilization.

[cjcdaman]

Look, the media didn't give a damn about foam falling off until what happened a few years ago. After that tragedy, they go nuts about a small crack that was found before launch. Sorry for the semi-rant, but I hate the media!

[dfitzo53]

Look, the media didn't give a damn about foam falling off until what happened a few years ago. After that tragedy, they go nuts about a small crack that was found before launch. Sorry for the semi-rant, but I hate the media!

Actually, in this particular area I'm happy for intense media scrutiny. NASA has had technical and ethical concerns in the past, and I'm perfectly happy for them to feel the need to prove themselves to an overzealous media.

That doesn't mean that I'm against the space program. Quite the contrary, I'm a huge proponent of it. However, NASA has plenty of room for improvement.

[Bugs']

I hope there is nothing to worry about. I know NASA has taken a lot of hits over the years and most rightfully so, but I think that space exploration is vital to the future of our race.

[DeaconBlue]

Actually, in this particular area I'm happy for intense media scrutiny. NASA has had technical and ethical concerns in the past, and I'm perfectly happy for them to feel the need to prove themselves to an overzealous media.

That doesn't mean that I'm against the space program. Quite the contrary, I'm a huge proponent of it. However, NASA has plenty of room for improvement.

I understand your point of view. I also don't beleive that anyone thinks that NASA doesn't have room to improve especially in the area of safety. What I do believe is that the business of going into space is an inherently risky business. We are NOT talking about a trip to the end of your driveway here. I don't care how "zealous" you are or how much you scrutinize a launch you are never going to make a space shuttle trip into orbit completly safe. Its not going to happen. They will go on safely as they always have for the most part but the opportunity for catastrophe will always be there. As technology advances the catastrophies will occur farther apart but they wil still happen. Does this mean we should abandon manned space flight? Hell NO! But what it does mean is that risk is always there and if you aren't willing to take a gamblethen you belong on the ground and not in space. YES you try to make it safer each and every time BUT if you every find that your efforts to make the exploration safer exceed the desire to explore, to learn then something is wrong. The astronauts involved understand the inherent risks. Maybe its time we did too.

[dfitzo53]

I understand your point of view. I also don't beleive that anyone thinks that NASA doesn't have room to improve especially in the area of safety. What I do believe is that the business of going into space is an inherently risky business. We are NOT talking about a trip to the end of your driveway here. I don't care how "zealous" you are or how much you scrutinize a launch you are never going to make a space shuttle trip into orbit completly safe. Its not going to happen. They will go on safely as they always have for the most part but the opportunity for catastrophe will always be there. As technology advances the catastrophies will occur farther apart but they wil still happen. Does this mean we should abandon manned space flight? Hell NO! But what it does mean is that risk is always there and if you aren't willing to take a gamblethen you belong on the ground and not in space. YES you try to make it safer each and every time BUT if you every find that your efforts to make the exploration safer exceed the desire to explore, to learn then something is wrong. The astronauts involved understand the inherent risks. Maybe its time we did too.

Certainly there are risks. Huge ones. But, there's a difference between calculated risks and launching a shuttle on a freezing-cold day when you know the o-rings are not designed to be used below 50 degrees.

[DeaconBlue]

Certainly there are risks. Huge ones. But, there's a difference between calculated risks and launching a shuttle on a freezing-cold day when you know the o-rings are not designed to be used below 50 degrees.

I agree. I Just hope that you and everyone else don't go so far the other way and become so obsessed with safety that it becomes more stifling to the exploration of space then the accidents themselves. It worries me.

[dfitzo53]

I agree. I Just hope that you and everyone else don't go so far the other way and become so obsessed with safety that it becomes more stifling to the exploration of space then the accidents themselves. It worries me.

Like I said, I'm a huge proponent of the space program. I just feel that we need to do everything we can to make sure that any disasters which occur cannot be blamed on shoddy workmanship, poor planning, or a lack of oversight.

[Pete]

I pray it's nothing.

I feel the space program is the most collosal (sp) waste of resources in the history of civilization.

I completely disagree. We have two frontiers to challange us. The under sea world, and outer space. These are the two places the our race may have to live some day, and you can't just wing it.

[Bonez3]

I agree. I Just hope that you and everyone else don't go so far the other way and become so obsessed with safety that it becomes more stifling to the exploration of space then the accidents themselves. It worries me.

Why would stifling the exploration of space be problematic? The resources wasted on this 'exploration' continue to sacrifice the current state of the union beyond any future rewards it may reveal.

Not to be arrogant, but how about the exploration of New Orleans.

[Bonez3]

I completely disagree. We have two frontiers to challange us. The under sea world, and outer space. These are the two places the our race may have to live some day, and you can't just wing it.

Again, we can start the under sea challenge by rebuilding N.O.

[DeaconBlue]

Why would stifling the exploration of space be problematic? The resources wasted on this 'exploration' continue to sacrifice the current state of the union beyond any future rewards it may reveal.

Not to be arrogant, but how about the exploration of New Orleans.

Or we could break REALLY new ground and have you start making sense!!

Actually that aint likely so in the interim why don't we work on exploring possible new resourses in our solar system, use the unique 0g environment to examine new ways to approach earth bound scientific problems and maybe learn a little about the universe we live in along the way? Yeah I know pointless but what the hey?You know what I'm done with you. I hope the rest of you out there put more thought to this than that.

[Bonez3]

Or we could break REALLY new ground and have you start making sense!!

Actually that aint likely so in the interim why don't we work on exploring possible new resourses in our solar system, use the unique 0g environment to examine new ways to approach earth bound scientific problems and maybe learn a little about the universe we live in along the way? Yeah I know pointless but what the hey?You know what I'm done with you. I hope the rest of you out there put more thought to this than that.

Ouch. I've been known to touch a nerve or two, but I think I make sense at least part of the time. Maybe even here.

It's noble in theory. I just strongly disagree with it at this point.

[ChocolateCitySkin]

I completely disagree. We have two frontiers to challange us. The under sea world, and outer space. These are the two places the our race may have to live some day, and you can't just wing it.

Bleh, it is a waste of resources -- Government resources. Privatize the outerspace!

[Bonez3]

Bleh, it is a waste of resources -- Government resources. Privatize the outerspace!

I suppose resources don't need property titles attached to them; government, private or otherwise. After all, at the risk of sounding aloft, the resources belong to no earthly entity.

[Larry]

OK, I was planning on (re-) posting this on the 20th, but I think I'll lead off with it now, instead:

They made it, we all made it, just a bit,

like vikings leaving runes and little more,

taking the lesser light where God placed it,

to show ourselves just what a heaven's for.

They loped like divingsuited kangraoos

over that serile world of one night stands,

driving moon bugs and golf balls to amuse

the children, while the stars slipped through our hands.

They're gone now, to their shrinks and shrunken space.

The praise is theirs; it's ours to wonder why

the world's still flat, and dreams are out of grace.

So I, believing less each sumer, pry

open that lost last year to see the bright

earth jewel smooth and blue in velvet night.

W. W. Cooper. Written for the tenth aniversary of the Apollo 11 landing.

[Larry]

Re: "wasting money in space"

America's space program (back when we had one) spent a lot of money. (By some standards. Remember that "a lot of money" means different things inside the beltway.)

However, not one dime of that money got spent in space. Every single bit of it got spent on earth, and the vast majority of it got spent in the US.

To me, even if you were to claim (falsely, IMO) that the space program is simply government welfare for a bunch of engineers and aerospace copmpanies, it still could be claimed that it makes more sense than a welfare program for, say, farmers who aren't farming.

[Larry]

Re: Nothing usefull up there:

It's probably time for me to make my regular post about (no, not Rock Cartwright's short-yardage statistics) Space Colonization.

It's a proposal that would allow this country to become completely energy independant, with zero polution (not even CO2) in 20 years.

Using existing technology.

(It also has the side effects of giving us a permanent manned presence in earth orbit and on the moon, and a "base camp" from which we can begin to receive resourses from other places in the Solar System. (Geting metals from the asteroids could well become economically feasable.))

(And oh, BTW, it pays for itself, including the startup costs, interest, inflation, and a profit, in 17 years. From that point on, energy production becomes nearly free of cost.)

[chomerics]

Why would stifling the exploration of space be problematic? The resources wasted on this 'exploration' continue to sacrifice the current state of the union beyond any future rewards it may reveal.

What is a bigger waste of money, NASA's measly $17 Billion dollar budget, or the colossal $286 Billion dollar transportation bill? How about the $100 Billion dollar missile defense program which can be thwarted at less then 1/1000th of the cost of the program?

It is all relative, and space exploration is only PART of NASA's budget. To blatantly say it is the "biggest colossal waste of resources in the history of civilization" reeks of a mindset that doesn't understand scientific discovery. Thank god people like you weren't around when we were discovering quantum mechanics, and understanding the world around us BECAUSE of scientific breakthroughs.

Things like the Hubble and Chandra have led to a greater understanding of the world in which we live in. It gives us a better understanding of not only the cosmos, but how to utilize the world in a way to benefit mankind the most. To completely and blatantly ignore scientific discovery is the fastest way to destroy a great nation.

[Larry]

Bump.

(Since this topic has got to have more opinons/discussion that this.)

(Although, granted, it's more of a "discuss the space program" thread than a "pieces of foam" one.)

[Bonez3]

What is a bigger waste of money, NASA's measly $17 Billion dollar budget, or the colossal $286 Billion dollar transportation bill? How about the $100 Billion dollar missile defense program which can be thwarted at less then 1/1000th of the cost of the program?

It is all relative, and space exploration is only PART of NASA's budget. To blatantly say it is the "biggest colossal waste of resources in the history of civilization" reeks of a mindset that doesn't understand scientific discovery. Thank god people like you weren't around when we were discovering quantum mechanics, and understanding the world around us BECAUSE of scientific breakthroughs.

Things like the Hubble and Chandra have led to a greater understanding of the world in which we live in. It gives us a better understanding of not only the cosmos, but how to utilize the world in a way to benefit mankind the most. To completely and blatantly ignore scientific discovery is the fastest way to destroy a great nation.

Chom, I know from your posts you definitely have a certain fondness for all things space related.

I understand scientific discovery and the importance of it. But, to claim resources couldn't be better utilized is a stertch, only my opinion. 400 years ago they probably uncovered nearly as much info with a simple telescope that could be comparable to the data yielded (which I personally can say I have no idea what it is) today relating to physics and its contributions thereof.

[dwbiggs]

I may be watching to many Discovery programs but i would be throwing big money in a planetary defense system against things like comets and asteroids...or even the little green men.

And to add...any advances we can make in space travel can only benefit us in the future. The more we learn now the sooner we get our warp capable space vehicle and meet Vulcans.

Dan