NASA: Shuttle Temperature Rose Suddenly

[Dash_Riprock]

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. Feb. 2 —
Just before it disintegrated, space shuttle Columbia experienced an unexpected, 60-degree rise in temperature and automatically started adjusting its path, suggesting its heat-protection tiles were missing or damaged, NASA said Sunday.

Shuttle program manager Ron Dittemore said the engineering data showed a rise of 20 to 30 degrees in the left wheel well about seven minutes before communication was lost with the spacecraft. Then there was a rise of about 60 degrees over five minutes in the middle left side of the fuselage, he said.

________________________________________________

As I suspected, it was a relatively slow rise in temperature. That doesn't speak to a sudden, catastrophic failure (like a wing suddenly tearing off without any warning).

Shuttle Temperature Rise (http://www.abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20030202_1714.html)

[Warlady]

Could missing tiles on the left wing cause so much damage to the thermal protection system as to cause a change in attitude on reentry resulting in breakup?

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
Warlady said:
Could missing tiles on the left wing cause so much damage to the thermal protection system as to cause a change in attitude on reentry resulting in breakup?

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems to me that if the system got fried, there would be nothing to correct the attitude, and it would spin and break up. Remember they were at the hottest point in the re-entry when they were over Texas.

[Dash_Riprock]

The shuttle's computers would have adjusted the shuttle's attitude and trajectory to compensate for the unexpected rise in temperature in an effort to bleed off the excess heat, but it eventually would not have been enough.

I good analogy would be using a paint stripper that employs a hot air stream to remove paint. Once a small section of the paint is removed, the air can then creep in under the surrounding paint, quickly wearing away the adhesive that bonds the paint to the surface. As the spot grows larger, the speed and extent of the process grows exponentially.

I am becoming convinced that the astronauts had some time to become aware of what they were facing. Holes would have been burned into the shuttle before it broke into pieces. The decompression and heat would have killed them very, very quickly--but they still would have known what was happening to them in the seconds before that point. The initial vapor trail that we saw may have been the internal air supply being vented after the hull was compromised. I noticed in the videos that it was present for a moment (the internal atmosphere venting), then stopped, then resumed more prominently (metal burning)

I hope I'm wrong about all of this, but I don't think that I am.

[Warlady]

Dash contrails are normal with the shuttle. I'm not sure what you are referring to. I do understand your friction/zipper affect though.

[Chris]

They didn't sound like they knew anything was wrong on the tape that NASA played of them just before contact was lost.

[RayChuang]

[ QUOTE ]
Warlady said:
Could missing tiles on the left wing cause so much damage to the thermal protection system as to cause a change in attitude on reentry resulting in breakup?

[/ QUOTE ]

In my opinion, here's what I think happened:

1. Just after launch, chunks of ice hit the port (left) wing, damaging the heat projection tiles on the leading edge and possibly the bottom of the wing.

2. During the early phases of re-entry, the damaged tiles suffered additional stress and started to fall off (partially or completely). That explains what the astronomer saw in California when he saw the unusually bright plume behind the shuttle and small glowing streaks behind the shuttle.

3. Because the port wing has its heat protection compromised, the wing starts to heat up faster than normal. This leads to the zipper effect--the area where the tile(s) are lost expands from the origional points of loss.

4. As the heat builds up, its starts to cause unusual sensor readings. This explains why temperatures sensors on the port wing start to go haywire and fail starting at 0753 hours CST.

5. Around 0758 hours CST, the wheel well inside the port wing heats up at a high rate, prompting that last call from Mission Control to the astronauts.

6. Just when the astronauts start to respond, just before 0800 hours CST the port wing overheats and due to the thermal stress, parts of the wing break away from the shuttle. That explains the first track of large debris from the shuttle.

7. Because the wing breakage upsets aerodynamic stability, the shuttle at once starts to tumble out of control. The physical forces of the tumbling quickly overwhelms the structural limits of the rest of the shuttle, and the result is an explosive breakup that rips the entire shuttle first to several large pieces, then in a few seconds more into little pieces.

I think because the breakup happened at the speed of 12,500 mph, this explains why most of the remains are about one to two feet in size. They'll be very lucky if they can find 1/3 of the remains of the shuttle, that's to be sure. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

[Warlady]

Ray you could very well be right.

[Dash_Riprock]

"Dash contrails are normal with the shuttle."

Yes, contrails are normal for flying vehicles--at lower altitudes (I was career Air Force). They were at an altitude of about 40 miles where the atmosphere is far thinner. I don't know the specific physics associated with the phenomenon--so I don't discount the possibility. As I said, a contrail suddenly became visible, then disappeared after a few seconds, then it became visible a few seconds later--more pronounced this time.

Chris, you're right, radio communications gave no indication that the crew was aware anything was wrong from their end. I would only speculate that the heat compromised the communications system before it caused general structural failure. If the heat buildup were slow enough, then I believe there is a good chance of that.

Again, I hope I'm wrong. I'd shudder to think of those brave souls having to endure something like that for more than an instant.

By the way, I apologize for not being familiar with the board's features with regard to giving article links or making quotes. It's been a long time since I have posted here.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Sounds like what happened to me. No way to fix the tiles. Can't get Colombia up to the space station.

Now, we're short one orbiter, unless we can get the Enterprise flyable.

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
Dash_Riprock said:
By the way, I apologize for not being familiar with the board's features with regard to giving article links or making quotes. It's been a long time since I have posted here.

[/ QUOTE ]

You still need to provide a link for your article.

[Dash_Riprock]

The shuttles, in general, have the ability to reach the space station. That's how the current occupants got to the station. Whether or not Columbia could have made it to the station on that particular mission is another matter. It would have depended on the orbit it was launched into and the internal fuel supply that it held.

Still, if they had discovered the damage to the tiles while up there, then they could have waited for another shuttle to be dispatched to rescue them. I believe all missions are provided with enough supplies and air to last two or three weeks, regardless of the scheduled length of the mission. NASA would have been able to rush Atlantis into space.

[Dash_Riprock]

I will provide a link if someone tells me how... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif


Never mind, I see how now...

[Dash_Riprock]

Link now provided in the original post...sorry for the delay.

[Chris]

Thank you. You may want to review the Board Policy (http://www.freeconservatives.com/policy), especially the following -

"When posting articles, you MUST provide a link back to the original article or clearly define a searchable source. In accordance with the Fair Use Provision of the Copyright Act, we ask that you post ONLY the relevant portion(s) of the article, generally limiting your post to about 400 words of quoted material, and never exceeding 25% of the total article".

[Dash_Riprock]

The insulation striking the tiles--wherever it struck--may not have actually damaged the tiles themselves. It may have caused one or more them to shift ever so slightly in their alignment with the other tiles. That crease would have been enough to start the process upon reentry.

And it would have been virtually impossible to visually discern during a spacewalk around the underbelly. If it had lost tiles during the early launch phase, then they would have probably been seen by the NASA cameras. If they were lost in orbit, then NASA would have detected the tiles on radar (they track objects as small as a pen lost by one of the astronauts during a spacewalk years ago). However, if they came off later on during the ascent, then no one would have ever known.

Supposedly, the military has some very sensitive photographic ground equipment that can actually view the shuttle fairly closely while it is in orbit. But I don't know if it has that kind of visual acuity.

[Dash_Riprock]

Thank you. I'm familiar with the general policies on posting articles. I post on other boards. I simply hadn't posted here in some time, so I was unfamiliar with the some of the specific board functionality capabilities. I understand them now.

[DesertFox]

Dash, has somebody else been posting here on your computer? You sound like a reasonable and informed person. Somebody else with your handle was posting here awhile back who didn't come across that way at all.

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
Supposedly, the military has some very sensitive photographic ground equipment that can actually view the shuttle fairly closely while it is in orbit. But I don't know if it has that kind of visual acuity.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, to paraphrase Geraldo, if they can read your watch from space, we have to be able to see the shuttle from here.

You really should listen to those NASA press conferences. Maybe there's a transcript on one of the news sites or at the NASA site. They discussed this too. IIRC, they didn't think it was necessary because they had determined that the foam breaking off wasn't a problem. And, because they couldn't replace missing tiles in space anyway.

[Chris]

One more thing. Doesn't the shuttle fly upside down in space? We couldn't see the bottom of it anyway.

[DesertFox]

Imagine being on a shuttle and somebody determines that some tiles are gone. You get to choose dying in space when the air runs out and/or the food and water are gone, or burning up in the atmosphere.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

[Dash_Riprock]

Desert Fox,

Please don't tell me that jerk has been posting here!!! There is a "DashRiprock" (no space between the first and last names) who posts.

No, I ain't him!

Besides, I have a cool avatar! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[DesertFox]

Aha! Thanks!

I don't use the "show avatar" feature so I don't identify folks that way. The other guy, IIRC, is Australian.

[Dash_Riprock]

Chris--Yes, it normally flies inverted, but could be rotated if necessary.

DF--They could have gotten Atlantis to them in time (assuming the problem was discovered early on). What would have been horrific is if they had discovered the problem right before reentry. They had already been up there for 16 days. I don't think they would have been able to wait for Atlantis then... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

Yeah, I know he's an Aussie. I put up a post a while back saying that one of us should have to change our names--and that it shouldn't have to be me because I registered first. Hmmmm.... Hope not too many people confuse me with him.

[DesertFox]

They need a better way to get back, one that doesn't subject the craft to such heat stresses.

Could they fit retros and slow down before re-entry?

[Dash_Riprock]

I don't know if that's really an option. The shuttle has to enter at a very particular angle and speed. Too steep and it burns up, too shallow and it bounces off of the atmosphere. I don't know how artificially slowing down the vehicle would affect that process.

Let's just skip to matter transporters (a la Star Trek).

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
Dash_Riprock said:

Besides, I have a cool avatar! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea, but it's cool avatar of a bad guy. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif


DF,

Someone was talking about that on the news. There is always the possibility of sending another shuttle up for them too. Then they would have to figure out how to fix those tiles in space, or leave the disabled shuttle floating around up there until it fell out of orbit and came down who knows where.

I think it's pretty stupid that they never figure out how to repair something like that. After all, they put people in space. How hard could it be to come up with a system to fix them without causing damage to the rest of them?

[Dash_Riprock]

[ QUOTE ]
Then they would have to figure out how to fix those tiles in space, or leave the disabled shuttle floating around up there until it fell out of orbit and came down who knows where.


[/ QUOTE ]

After is was abandoned, NASA would simply command it to fly into the atmosphere at a very steep angle over the ocean (probably Indian Ocean).

As for my avatar--good, bad...I'm the one with the double-bladed light saber. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
Dash_Riprock said:
After is was abandoned, NASA would simply command it to fly into the atmosphere at a very steep angle over the ocean (probably Indian Ocean).

[/ QUOTE ]

That's true. I didn't think about that telemetry stuff.

[ QUOTE ]
As for my avatar--good, bad...I'm the one with the double-bladed light saber. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

The one with the double-bladed light sabre died in the movie by the hand of the good guy with the borrowed singled-bladed one though. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon4.gif

[Dash_Riprock]

If NASA was smart, they would have left it up there so that it could be cannibalized for parts through other shuttle missions to it. Maybe they could even park it next to the space station for some kind of use--fetching defective satellites, etc. Who knows, maybe they could try some experimental patch job on the tiles and then fly it in unmanned (it has that capability). Anyway, it's all moot. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

As for Kenobi...he was beaten fair and square, but got lucky. Obi-Wan would have had to stand on Qui-Gon's shoulders just to kiss Darth Maul's *** /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon3.gif

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
Dash_Riprock said:
If NASA was smart, they would have left it up there so that it could be cannibalized for parts through other shuttle missions to it. Maybe they could even park it next to the space station for some kind of use--fetching defective satellites, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

We could have a space station with a reeeeally big shed. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif


[ QUOTE ]
As for Kenobi...he was beaten fair and square, but got lucky. Obi-Wan would have had to stand on Qui-Gon's shoulders just to kiss Darth Maul's *** /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon3.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Darth's still dead dude! http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/appearingsoon/website/img47.gif

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif

[Timberwolf]

Hey Dash!! How's it been goin', bud?? I was wonderin' about the "other" Dash...he's a, well, you know...an Aussie. LOL

Welcome...glad to have ya aboard.

[Dash_Riprock]

Thanks, T-Wolf! I posted a 'hello' on another thread, but you probably missed it. Yes, I'll probably be here from now on. I got banned today from CHB.

Chris--There is no 'dead' when the force is with you!

[Dash_Riprock]

And, yes, I know about the other Riprock. I hope he hasn't tarnished the reputation of the name too much. I may have to have a talk with him about which one of us is going to have to compromise on the name.

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
Dash_Riprock said:
Chris--There is no 'dead' when the force is with you!

[/ QUOTE ]

There is for the dark side. http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/appearingsoon/website/img24.gif

[Dash_Riprock]

[ QUOTE ]
There is for the dark side.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yikes. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon29.gif

[Warlady]

Dash welcome back. I knew the other DashRiprock wasn't you. He's a jerk and you are not. I hope you stick around this time. What do you make of the increased tire pressure they reported before we lost contact?

[Dash_Riprock]

The increased tire pressure was probably the result of the heat buildup in the wheel well. The air in the tire expanded as a result.

And thank you for the welcome back. Yes, I'll be sticking around this time.

[2nd_Amendment]

Actually if left in orbit you wouldn't abandon it. A shuttle that could not be repaired for re-entry would still be a perfectly good orbital vehicle. Refuel it from the space station and use it for satelite maintenance, etc. Personally I always thought that, when the shuttles get too old, rather than retire them they should be based from the space station and used for the relatively stress-free work of open space. They'd have an indefinite life span in that kind of situation. A logical use of available assets. Which is why it'll never happen...

On slowing re-entry: We don't have an efficient enough source of power. You simply couldn't get enough controllable thrust from anything small enough to be practical. Controlled(powered) re-entry is still in the realm of sci-fi. Nuclear fusion, maybe. Antimatter, even better.

[Dash_Riprock]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually if left in orbit you wouldn't abandon it. A shuttle that could not be repaired for re-entry would still be a perfectly good orbital vehicle. Refuel it from the space station and use it for satelite maintenance, etc. Personally I always thought that, when the shuttles get too old, rather than retire them they should be based from the space station and used for the relatively stress-free work of open space. They'd have an indefinite life span in that kind of situation. A logical use of available assets. Which is why it'll never happen...


[/ QUOTE ]

I made the same suggestion in one my posts above. As far as reentry goes, if you want to get really exotic, then we could build space tethers--hollow tubes that stretch from the ground to low-Earth orbit. Then you would lift everything into orbit and bring things back using an elevator system. It sounds absurd, but it is theoretically possible. Anti-matter is way too dangerous.

[2nd_Amendment]

Actually, isn't NASA playing with the concept of space elevators? Another sci-fi concept whose time will come, perhaps.

Anti-matter is very dangerous. OTOH so is fission, solid rocket motors, jet fuel... Just a matter of creating the technology which will allow us to "control" it. We'll get there as well some day, if the pundits and hand-wringers don't have us all eventually living in padded apartments protected from all risk at all times.

[Dash_Riprock]

They've looked at the concept. Besides the enormous start up costs, they would have to overcome limitation of developing a polymer strong enough to withstand the strain generated by the length of the structure.

I don't ever want mankind trying to develop anti-matter as a power source. In the wrong hands, it would be a weapon without parallel. One small, make-shift bomb would be enough to obliterate the entire planet. And there are people crazy enough out there to want such a thing. Better to use something in the middle ground--like ion propulsion.

[2nd_Amendment]

There's no arguing that there are people stupid enough to want to use it to destroy. The flip side is, though, that there's nothing esle which could conceivably generate the kind of power necessary to take us to the stars. Even ion propulsion won't do it.

Oh, I remember reading a couple articles a while back detailing how they are already playing with anti-matter. I'd venture a guess that if we knew the half of that we'd either be stone cold terrified or overjoyed, or maybe both.