So, what problem has NASA been working on for 2 years?

[spanone]

The foam insulation acted the same way it did two years ago when it brought down the previous shuttle, so it appears that in two years NASA didn't fix a thing.

[DrGonzoLives]

1. Well

as soon as you get an advanced physics or material engineering degree and figure out and solve the problem once and for all, please, by all means, let us know.

[spanone]

2. Sorry, not on NASA staff. Perhaps you are?

Enlighten please.

[DrGonzoLives]

5. No

But being an engineer, I can tell you that just because you have two years to solve a problem doesn't mean that it will get done. Materials engineering is a difficult line of work - you can't just say "Well, this didn't work...voila, here's the perfect foam!"

They need to create a sturdy material that can withstand both high temperature and impacts from small particles. Know of any offhand? No? Neither do NASA engineers.

What this is is another OMG NASA THEY R SO DUM post made by someone who thinks that the fraction of a percent of the national budget that they take up should be spent elsewhere (and ignore massive Pentagon corruption, but anyway).

[soothsayer]

6. they said they didn't reeingeer or work on the part that flew off this

time.

[PATRICK]

8. It does sound simple though

Same problem, same old deteriorating technology. Same alternatives more energetically applied. Get a mirror and look under the wing and guess.
And wish for the best.

Odd how the drawbacks and misgivings about aging shuttle technology predicted long ago have receded into oblivion. The most dire results have come true as the warnings were forgotten. The marvels in advanced new patches on old technology dazzled the wise.

How long can they stay up? Who could rescue them them. Does the ship have to risk it anyway so put the best face on it for now?

No, we are not experts. Only in these times people get jumpy, you know, because what looks like, smells like and repeats is just not that complex. I personally worked with the father of the shuttle commander. Now he is deceased and doesn't have to worry like the rest of us. Was this a really vital mission with a fundamentally overaged craft despite all the extra care and lessons learned? If something happens the upshot will be to construct something new anyway.

Usually I would bank on the engineers, but these days all bets are off. If a team of engineers said they could tune up my old chevette to get me to California I don't think I would be supremely confident.

I have a framed picture of our local astronaut Eileen Collins. I have every hope and prayer directed for the efforts to make this journey safe. Her last one certainly wasn't as easy as she made it appear.

[mtnester]

10. Dr, you don't happen to have your animated gif as a

screensaver do you? I am in love with it!

PM is OK.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

3. Best of luck finding out.

I know a guy who worked on it. Confidentiality agreements are in place.

[vicman]

4. They should cover the whole damn thing...

in Saran Wrap. That shit's amazing :D

[napi21]

7. I heard someone on cspan say that NASA did not follow the

recommendations of the investigation committee. They did a lot of research on the foam, and there were several other companies that submitted alternatives to using the foam. NASA recognized that changing to something else would have required a complete redesign of a major part of the shuttle, and sould be very expensive, so they turned away from those suggestions and dtuck with the foam.

Apparently,it all boiled down to $$.

There was another post on DU yesterday that suggested that Morton Thiacol was the supplier of the foam, same ones who supplied the failed O rings in the disaster years ago. I don't have any confirmation of that though.

[Tesha]

9. Remember: the entire shuttle program is built by the low bidders

The entire Solid Rocket Booster system (the cause of the Challenger
disaster) as well as the specific segmented-rather-than-one-piece
design of the SRBs used can be laid at the feet of people cost-
reducing the program while trying to expand its "mission" beyond
the original designs.

Foam on the fuel tank probably also falls into this category (as you
don't rememeber LOX/LH₂-fueled Saturn V rockets falling apart,
do you?

Tesha

[mtnester]

12. I hear you, our building had to go to low bidder

we had to sue to get things done, and the quality of the building is LESS than even acceptible IMO...it took us many thousands of dollars to fix it to keep the ROOF from leaking (when it was newly built)

Low bid sucks, it really does. Even though prevailing wage was paid, the workmanship was absolutely cheap and inferior.

[bullimiami]

11. apparently martin marietta are the supplier of the ext tank

quote

""There were four highly liquid publicly held companies that were prominent contractors on the shuttle. Rockwell International made the shuttle and its engines, Lockheed handled ground support, Martin Marietta made the external fuel tanks, and Morton Thiokol made the shuttle's solid fuel booster rockets""

[napi21]

14. The tank, but not necessarily the foam. I don't know who

supplies that, and I have no idea how to find out. I guess the only reason I mentioned it was because if it was a supplier who's products had failed in the past, wouldn't ya think someone might consider CHANGING SUPPLIERS?

[napi21]

15. There was another change that was made to the way the foam

was applied. I can't find a date, but the EPA banned the use of a specific propelant that had been used to apply the foam due to CFC's. They did the same thing with paints, refrigerants etc.

I know that change made a big difference to the operation in auto A/C systems, and to auto paint applications as well.

I wonder if that change isn't playing a part in this problem too?

[walkon]

13. Took two years

to figure out camera configuration.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/07/27/MNGA5DU94Q1.DTL

Who says they were fixing the shuttle? I hate to be sooo cynical but what better August distraction than stranded astronauts?

[sinkingfeeling]

16. I also heard that it cost us taxpayers $1 billion to 'fix' the foam

problem.

[MGKrebs]

17. Why don't they cover the whole shuttle with

the gray stuff that covers the nose only?

[bpj1962]

18. Shuttle Problems

NASA has been having problems with the shuttle since Columbia first lifted off in 1981. They used the old Apollo launch pad 39-A for liftoff and they nearly burned it to the ground. The thrust needed to launch the shuttle into space is enormous. I don't think that they will ever be able to fix the problem.