Shuttle Columbia STS-107 Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Shuttle Columbia STS-107

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Clarksterh who wrote (502)	2/12/2003 1:57:37 AM
From: Bill Jackson	Read Replies (1) of 627

Clark, That is partly true. How to think of unforseen things, like bad tile damage. With as many as 300 tiles damaged in one flight I would have thought a method of inspection would be a high priority. Apparently not. In addition, if they had some warning they could have chosen a less aggrssive drag regime for re-entry, more variables involved in landing. The steeper re-entry is more predictable. Going up and down in density to stretch out the path to allow a lower peak temperature is one way to allow for a damaged part of the shuttle to tolerate the heat by subjecting it to a lower peak for a longer time. The side to side swings being replaced by up and down excursions as needed. I still feel that such an easy thing as a pre flight exterior inspection should have been done. I consider the change from orbit to re-entry as the start of a flight. Bill

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next