NASA finds gouge on Endeavour's belly

[Xipe Totec]

Source: Associated Press

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. - NASA discovered a worrisome gouge on Endeavour's belly soon after the shuttle docked with the international space station Friday, possibly caused by ice that broke off the fuel tank a minute after liftoff.

The gouge — about 3 inches square — was spotted in zoom-in photography taken by the space station crew shortly before Endeavour delivered teacher-astronaut Barbara Morgan and her six crewmates to the orbiting outpost.

"What does this mean? I don't know at this point," said John Shannon, chairman of the mission management team. If the gouge is deep enough, the shuttle astronauts may have to patch it during a spacewalk, he said.

On Sunday, the astronauts will inspect the area, using Endeavour's 100-foot robot arm and extension beam. Lasers on the end of the beam will gauge the exact size and depth of the gouge, Shannon said, and then engineering analyses will determine whether the damage is severe enough to warrant repairs.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070811/ap_on_sc/space_shuttle_99

---

More news from the awshit department.

[Poll_Blind]

1. Damn! n/t

PB

[defendandprotect]

2. Sounds kinda familiar, eh???

[Xipe Totec]

3. Not to mention unbelievably ironic

The PAO who referred to Morgan as Christa McAuliffe's backup shortly after throttle up is probably kicking himself right now.

[tridim]

5. I think it's happened every flight since the last explosion

I'd call that a fundamental flaw.

[OKIsItJustMe]

9. Actually... tile damage happened on the very first flight

They just sort of got used to it. It is a fundamental flaw.

This is what the shuttle should have looked like:
http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4221/ch5.htm

This is how the "tiles" were introduced.

...

Within the industry, a standard engineering solution called for the use of hot structures. This approach had a background that included the X-15, Dyna-Soar, ASSET, as well as the Lockheed SR-71 that was flying routinely above Mach 3. Hot structures typically called for titanium as the basic material, covered with high temperature insulation and an outer skin formed of metallic shingles. The metal was molybdenum or columbium, to withstand extreme temperatures while radiating away the heat. Like the shingles on a roof, those on the surface of a hot structure were loosely attached, to expand and contract freely with temperature change.

Such structures were complex, and the shingles posed difficulties of their own. Columbium and molybdenum oxidize readily when hot, and required coatings to resist this. The Dyna-Soar had been designed to use such thermal protection, and Faget declared that "the least little scratch in the coating, the shingle would be destroyed during re-entry." In turn, lost shingles could bring the loss of a vehicle.

NASA and Lockheed now were developing a new surface material: an insulation made of interlaced fibers of silica that could be applied to the outside of a vehicle. These could withstand temperatures of 2500 degrees Fahrenheit, making them suitable for all but the hottest areas on a reentering shuttle. The outer surface would radiate away the heat, in the fashion of the shingles. The thickness of the silica then would prevent most of the heat from reaching the vehicle's skin. This material would not oxidize. It also was light, weighing as little as 15 pounds per cubic foot, or one-fourth the density of water.

This material would form the well-known "tiles" of the Shuttle program, being attached to the skin in the form of numerous small shapes somewhat resembling bricks. In 1969, their immediate prospect lay in simplifying the design of hot structures. These might now dispense with their shingles; engineers instead would use titanium to craft an aircraft structure, with skin covering an internal framework, then provide thermal protection by covering the skin with the tiles.

The design studies of 1969 raised another tantalizing prospect: that these tiles might offer enough heat resistance to build the basic structure of aluminum rather than titanium. Titanium was hard to work with; few machine shops had the necessary expertise. Moreover, its principal uses in aerospace had occurred within classified programs such as the SR-71, which meant that much of the pertinent shop-floor experience itself was classified. This metal could withstand higher temperatures than aluminum. Yet, if tiles could protect aluminum, the use of that metal would open the shuttle to the entire aerospace industry. In Silveira's words, building aluminum airplanes was something that "the industry knew how to do. The industry had, on the floor, standards-things like, 'What are the proper cutting speeds?' They knew how to rivet or machine aluminum."

Hot structures, built of titanium, would continue to represent an important approach in shuttle design. As early as 1969, however, Lockheed took the initiative in designing a shuttle orbiter built of aluminum and protected with tiles. General Dynamics added its own concept, featuring aluminum protected by shingled hot structures that could keep internal temperatures below 200 °F.

...

[Octafish]

13. Manned re-usable liquid engine booster...

...cheapened down by Nixon and his cost-cutting, liberal-libeling, JFK-hating crew.

Ironically, if they'd gone with the original design, they'd have saved a whole lot of money.

More importantly, they'd have saved 14 human beings' lives.

[Xipe Totec]

15. Let's not forget the military

that insisted the shuttle had to handle polar orbits (otherwise they would not support the project) and a larger cargo compartment (to handle special military payloads)

That made the SRBs mandatory.

Of course after all this, the military didn't use the shuttle and stayed with their disposable rockets, leaving NASA high and dry.

[jimlup]

20. The Orbiter should have been designed to be above the boosters!

The tiles are obviously a delecate partial solution to the heat shield problem BUT
both diasters and all these missing tiles would be prevented if the Orbiter were ABOVE the
booster complex.

In my opinion placing boosters strapped next to the Orbiter IS the fundamental flaw here!

[OKIsItJustMe]

21. You have a point, but...

I find it difficult to believe that anyone could have survived the Challenger explosion; regardless of where the orbiter was placed relative to the boosters. The G-forces...



The design was compromised in so many ways, it's hard to point to any particular one and say, "That's the culprit." However, for me, the beginning of it all was the choice to abandon the "mother craft-daughter craft" design in the first place.

When I see SpaceShipOne and White Knight...

[jimlup]

26. The Challenger Crew survived the explosion!

Yeah, you are right about that. The Challenger explosion was caused in the booster/external tank configuration. Though the O-ring was specifically to blame, I think launching a rocket with solid rocket's strapped to it's side is always a bad idea on a manned vehicle.

But the crew survived the explosion! Judy Resnick, who sat behind the copilot, switched on his emergency O2. And both the pilot and copilot emergency O2 was partially breathed, consistent with the ride down the surface of the Atlantic ocean. They died when the crew compartment hit the water. I've argued for years that the crew compartment should be a survivable escape module... but anyway it's all mute. The shuttle program is dead. Hopefully no more crews will be lost before they mothball the thing.

I would fly into space aboard the Russian Soyuz but I would never ride the shuttle!

[ChairmanAgnostic]

29. the original plan ignored the need for insulation

THEN, they ignored the fact that it could fall off.

I have seen drawings of the next gen shuttles, and they sit the orbiter on top as you suggest.

[flaminbats]

37. so did the X-20..

The ET was once coated with latex paint, making it appear white. but wasn't the latex there to provide thermal protection? my understanding for having thermal protection, it prevents ice from collecting on the external tank. ice collecting on the ET causes chunks of foam to break off and hit the orbiter during launch.

under pressure from Washington, NASA stopped doing that in 1982..claiming that the latex only improved the external tank's appearance and that removing it would eliminate 600 pounds from the Shuttle's weight. thankfully the Shuttle will be retired by 2010, but if we lose another I think Congress should end the program immediately! NASA should stop pinching pennies during these last Shuttle years, and provide the external tanks with their originally intended thermal protection.

in 2004 Bush proposed an ambitious plan to replace the Shuttle, but how can anyone take this seriously as he attacks Democrats for plotting to repeal his taxcuts? his dad was very supportive of the Space Program, but at least Bush1 accepted some criticism for raising the needed revenue!

[Up2Late]

40. I think the paint was there originally for both aesthetics and to provide a...

...thin, smooth, protective coating to protect the foam from weathering, because they knew the first one or two would probably sit out on the launch pad for a lot longer than the later flights, which they expected wouldn't sit on the pad for very long, definitely not the weeks or months like they sometimes do now, or at least that's what someone in the DU Science forum said the last time I brought up the issue of just painting the tank, which I agree would probably help fix the problem. I think it was also supposed to save turn around time. Typical Reagan/Bush solution, rather than pay over-time or hire more painters, they meet the deadline by doing a half-ass, not to design specifications, job.

I was reading an old issue of National Geographic last night, and according to the March 1981 issue of National Geographic,
"...By the late 1980's this fleet of orbiters could be making about 50 flights a year...,":spray: (The article reads like a Science Fantasy novel, it's amazing reading this and remembering all the BS the convinced us of back then).

Btw, if you look at the first Hi-Res photo of the External tank separating at this link: <http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/shuttlemissions/sts118/multimedia/fd1/fd01_gallery.html>

You can see the Popcorn foam problem, (which think painting the tank would fix) is still happening. It's labeled with this caption:

STS118-E-05003 (8 Aug. 2007)-- This medium close-up picture showing the bottom aft portion of the STS-118 external tank was photographed by a camera positioned in Endeavour's umbilical well seconds after separation from the space shuttle Endeavour on launch day. Engineers, managers and flight controllers have carefully studied this image and other frames from this series as well as a number of pictures showing the falling ET as photographed by a handheld digital still camera in the shuttle's crew cabin.

[madhoosier]

4. Hopefully since it's on the shuttle's belly it won't be as

exposed to heat and friction as the damage to the leading edge of Columbia's wing was.

[bananas]

6. How many left after this one gets toasted?

[madhoosier]

10. There are three remaining,

Endeavour, Atlantis and Discovery

[OKIsItJustMe]

7. Photos

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/shuttlemissions/sts118/news/msb_081007.html

[Xipe Totec]

11. That does not look good

I can see why they're worried.

That's a very deep gouge. Each tile is roughly 6"x6"

[Up2Late]

23. What are you seeing? That three tile chip on the left side of the last frame?

Is that what the "news" is calling a "Gouge?":shrug:

[Xipe Totec]

27. That's the one.

it's not the "media" that's calling it a "gouge"; That's NASA's description of the damage.

There's two tiles involved, the black mark in the middle of the tile to the left is the one with the gouge.

[Up2Late]

39. They just did a new mission update with new pictures...

<http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/shuttlemissions/sts118/news/msb_081107.html>

Here's a few of the more interesting ones:


This is the current damage


This is what's under the damage spot. They said it's over a strut, which is a good thing. There is another picture a the link above that show what's inside the wing there, which is nothing (no wires, computers, sensors, just bracing, ribs and struts).


This where damage of this type has been found on ALL of the previous flights


This is similar damage (but much larger) scrape from a previous flight which landed safely.

They are still going to have a look at it to see how deep it is, but they said, as long as they still have half the tile thickness there, it'll be fine, but they might put some new coating on it anyway after they look at it.

[Divine Discontent]

12. um....

not good. that's a lot of work if I'm not mistaken, there's about a dozen tiles screwy there from what I saw.

my prayers begin right now...

[Botany]

16. Oh no .....

.... looks like 25 tiles are gone. Any doubt about their quality means
real doubt about the return trip.

Space flight is risky business and there is no way around that but to keep
sending the shuttle up is a fool's game. I hope the space station can
hold "them" and they can come back via another shuttle and or the Russian
ship.

[Xipe Totec]

18. Not missing, thank God

some of the tiles along the edges of the landing gear doors are darker because they are carbon composite and not sintered silica. They use different materials depending on the expected heat load and temperature.

But the gouges in the other tiles are bad enough.

[defendandprotect]

30. Great concern for the crew . . . but looks like more Bush privatizing and greed re NASA --

In other words . . . a typical "Bush" job -- incompetence.

[Up2Late]

25. "...tiles are gone?" Where are you seeing that?

You mean the ones that look dark? Those are the brand new, recently replaced tiles, I don't see any that a gone.

Looks like a few minor chips to me. It's good that they are going to do a closer inspection, but I think they've landed with much worse.

[alfredo]

31. Irregularities could cause a heat buildup.

[Up2Late]

34. It looks to me like a minor problem. I'm fairly sure they've returned safely with more...

...damage than that in the past.

I was just reading up on the tiles, last night, in one of my old National Geographic Magazines (March 1981, Vol. 159, #3, Page 324) which says that the Black coating (which is only about 1mm thick) dissipates 95% of the heat, but the tiles themselves are not really tiles, they are more like little blocks that are 2 to 4 inches thick.

The amazing part is, you can superheat one until it's glowing red, yet as soon as you take the flame away you can pick it up with your bare fingers (while it's still glowing red), I haven't done that personally, but I saw it done live, in person, when I was at Kennedy Space Center in 1978. Plus, all those other tiles will spread out any hot spot that might develop, that's what they are engineered to do.

If they have to fix it, it's not a difficult fix, thankfully, they now train for that and have the equipment they need now (something they didn't have before the Columbia Tragedy), but even if they don't fix it, they would probably still be O.K.

That's a tiny chip, very far back on the ship, it only gets about 20% to 30% as hot as the other parts of the heat shield back there.

[alfredo]

35. I'm not too concerned over it. If it is bad enough they will fill it with

bondo and forget about it.

I had a friend who was on guard duty guarding the first shuttle after it landed. He said the tiles were falling off the lander. He made it a point not to walk under it.

[Up2Late]

36. Yep, they lost at least 4 or 5 white ones on the first flight...

...and those were just the ones you could see on T.V., I don't think they ever really said if they lost any black ones from underneath. They learned a lot after that flight.

I'd love to FOIA that info.

[alfredo]

38. He said it spooked him when they hit. I remember they had to

re glue a lot the first years.

[applegrove]

8. Terrible news.

[Blue_Tires]

14. i hope everything works out for the best

and they come home safe

[bahrbearian]

17. Blame it on the Movers or the Truck Driver,

Personaliy I think Chimpy hit with his Segway scooter.

[ramapo]

19. Not funny

The shuttle is an obsolete and poor excuse for space transport. Our space program, which I believe is absolutely vital, has become another unfortunate sinkhole. The only reason the shuttle is still flying is because of the politics and poor decisions that forced the cancellation of superior and more modern spacecraft. This is just another crime of incompetence to add to the many of the past quarter century.

[bahrbearian]

22. Hey ,I'm a Truck driver and a Mover, I get blamed for everything,, do you

think I was blaming them? No I wasn't.

[Phoonzang]

24. Unfortuate that NASA funding and leadership

is so inadequate that our astronauts have to fly in that antiquated deathtrap. I know Endeavor was "refurbished" but the design is fundamentally flawed. The state of our space program is depressing, and I'm skeptical about the future of it, as laid out by Bush. Of course none of the Dem candidates (and Dems in general) feel strongly about advancing the space program, but Bush set a high goal and then didn't fund NASA. We could be on Mars for a fraction of what is being wasted in Iraq.

/Rant off

[MilesColtrane]

28. This should be a major concern.

NASA was working on a tile repair program as far back as 1980, but dropped it as being too expensive and risky.
They've been trying to catch up ever since the Columbia disaster.

The damage to Columbia was to the leading edge of a wing where higher temperatures are generated during reentry. I don't think that matters though.
The aluminum part of the shuttle can't take exposure to more than 350 degrees fahrenheit.

NASA was concerned enough about protruding gap fillers on a Discovery flight in 2005 to initiate a repair mission.

I know that in-flight tile repair experiments have been conducted since Columbia, but I don't know if there is a repair kit on Endeavour, or an astronaut trained to make a repair.

I'm not a rocket scientist, but that damage looks like it would make a reentry potentially catastrophic.

[IDemo]

32. They have a repair kit with 3 options

Further inspections are planned and astronauts have three viable repair options: a kind of heat-resistant paint, a thermal overlay or a heat-resistant goo.

http://www.floridatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070811/NEWS02/708110327

[MilesColtrane]

33. If I were up there, I'd vote for slapping goo in there, cover it with the overlay,...

...then painting over it!

Seriously though, those astronauts are some brave souls.

I'm glad they've got some options. I wish them well.