Chatroom
 

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum > Space and Astronomy > Space Exploration
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

   

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-February-2003, 01:52 PM
Sleepy's Avatar
Sleepy Sleepy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: England
Posts: 202
Default

Quote:
A military radar system shows indications that an object might have separated from the shuttle Columbia in orbit, prompting a review of telemetry by NASA flight controllers to look for signs of anything - including impact by high-velocity space debris
quoted from

http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts107/030208object/

I thought that any impact severe enough to damage the orbiter would be felt/heard by the crew and that they made no such report. The article also mentions several other causes all of which are benign.

[edit typo]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Sleepy on 2003-02-09 08:53 ]</font>
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-February-2003, 02:21 PM
Donnie B.'s Avatar
Donnie B. Donnie B. is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 5,303
Default

On the network news last night (I forget which network -- I saw a Columbia segment on all three) it was reported that a debris impact on some area other than the crew compartment could go unnoticed and still cause enough damage to be serious, especially if it occurred in a critical area (such as a wing leading edge).

As we've discussed before, a lot of the orbiter can't be visually inspected, and there isn't enough structural sensor coverage to detect the sort of minor damage that might lead to a cascade of failures during reentry.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09-February-2003, 06:54 PM
nebularain's Avatar
nebularain nebularain is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Central MD
Posts: 2,049
Default

So, of the three possibilities we have so far - damage from the insulation during lift-off, lightning or sprite or elf or <the blue one>, or space debris - which would be the most unsettling or cause NASA the most difficulty to resolve for the shuttles to be allowed to launch again?

__________________
"As I lay beneath the Southern Cross, the stars tell more than I could" . . . David Meece
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 09-February-2003, 07:09 PM
SpacedOut SpacedOut is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 532
Default

For what its worth - my first guess in order from easiest to hardest:

1. Tile damage during lift-off from debris from the ET or SRB’s.
2. Damage from orbiting debris.
3. Lighting, sprite, elf.

My reasoning is that if debris impact from the ET or SRB is the problem the fix is within NASA’s expertise to find the solution. Damage from orbital debris, if caught, gives NASA time to react with repairs, alternate reentry profiles (not likely – see other threads) or rescue.

A lighting/elf/sprite hit during initial re-entry like we’re guessing might have happened to STS -107 that causes structural or electrical damage leaves no options – just no way to react to it.

However, on second thought, there might be ways to protect the orbiter from lighting/elf/sprites, to prevent structural damage but I don’t know. If so 2&3 might reverse but either way these two are the hard ones.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 09-February-2003, 09:40 PM
darkhunter's Avatar
darkhunter darkhunter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,139
Default

Quote:
On 2003-02-09 14:09, SpacedOut wrote:
However, on second thought, there might be ways to protect the orbiter from lighting/elf/sprites, to prevent structural damage but I don’t know. If so 2&3 might reverse but either way these two are the hard ones.
A thin, light, electrically conductie grid wick some beefy spikes (lightning rods) at the corners should do the trick. Remember reading somewhere that lightning rods prevent strikes by bleeding the exess voltage away from the protected structure, but that was an older book....

edit: the usual (spelling)
_________________
Words define reality, but they can't alter it.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: darkhunter on 2003-02-09 16:44 ]</font>
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 09-February-2003, 09:45 PM
g99 g99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Kingdom of Florida
Posts: 2,918
Send a message via AIM to g99
Default

But the shuttle should be protected anyways. Isn't the skin of the shuttle aluminum? Would this not dissapate the energy along the skin and protect the interior?
__________________
GIYUL :-)
"It takes Thousands to fight a battle for a mile, Millions to hold an election for a nation, but it only takes One to change the world." - Dan Sandler 2002
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 09-February-2003, 10:11 PM
darkhunter's Avatar
darkhunter darkhunter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,139
Default

I don't think the tiles themselves are conductive--the air (space?)frame would survive just fine in a lighning stike, but to get to the frame it goes through the tiles.

Wouldn't take a lot on the outside: in a thunderstorm you're safe in a car NOT because of the rubber tires insulating it, but because the electricity is conducted around the outside of the metal body when it's struck. (Saw it on Discoery Channel once--it was pretty cool). And a cars bodywork (especially the newer ones) isn't all that thick...
__________________
"Light thinks it travels faster than anything but it is wrong. No matter how fast light travels it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it." — Terry Pratchett, Reaper Man

441!!!! :)
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 09-February-2003, 10:15 PM
g99 g99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Kingdom of Florida
Posts: 2,918
Send a message via AIM to g99
Default

That is one problem that automakers are saying with the new plastic bodies of cars and planes. Plastic is not conductive and you are just as worse off as you were outside the car.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 09-February-2003, 10:17 PM
darkhunter's Avatar
darkhunter darkhunter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,139
Default

Quote:
On 2003-02-09 17:15, g99 wrote:
That is one problem that automakers are saying with the new plastic bodies of cars and planes. Plastic is not conductive and you are just as worse off as you were outside the car.
Also a pain to repair dents in [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]
__________________
"Light thinks it travels faster than anything but it is wrong. No matter how fast light travels it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it." — Terry Pratchett, Reaper Man

441!!!! :)
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 04:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.0.0
©  2006 Bad Astronomy and Universe Today