A great (LARGE) image from NASA

[ShudderBug]

then the problem sounds even of more concern, but I admit to almost total ignorance about the design and operation. I don't know if they are prepared for that kind of repair which sounds like it may not be done in space anyway.

Wow.

 

[Doug Kerr]

Doug

 

[Kevin52]

I did (initially) hear a news report about a damaged/missing tile on the shuttle itself, subsequentially, that story seems to have changed to no tiles are damaged.

I'm just glad my 20D I loaned them (when they ran out of cameras to record the foam loss on launch) didn't lock up on them. Now if they'll just they clean the sensor...

shuttle itself

On Columbia the foam hit the leading edge of the wing and opened a
hole which allowed superheated gases to enter and destroy the wing.
So far they think Discovery was not hit by any of the falling foam.
The tiles are mostly on the underbelly of the shuttles and are not
connected to the foam problem (so far).
--
Joe Hawblitzel

 

[Joe Hawblitzel]

I think you are referring to Columbia, not Challenger. The tiles weren't damaged on Columbia. Quoting here from Wikipedia:

"The board report confirmed the immediate cause of the accident as a breach in the leading edge of the left wing, caused by insulating foam shed during launch"

Interesting read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Columbia_disaster#Debris_strike_during_launch

Doug Kerr wrote:
Yes, this is the External Fuel Tank.

The cincern is that if foam comes off the External Tank, it could
hit the body and damage the tiles, as happened to Challenger.

--
Joe Hawblitzel

 

[Doug Kerr]

Best regards,

Doug

 

[ShudderBug]

I'm concerned with which jeopardizes re-entry more, the missing foam or the damaged wing. I'm guessing it would be the wing.

Can they repair it?

 

[Joe Hawblitzel]

The foam is missing from the fuel tank (which fell back to earth after the picture was taken, so it's not a problem.) When the picture was taken the fuel tank had just separated from Discovery. The concern is that the shuttle might have been struck with the foam and damaged as happened with Columbia.
--
Joe Hawblitzel

 

[David I Hale]

Much!.. Looks like it's front focusing though, and soft.. in addition to the sensor atracting space dust... I think NASA should send it in to be calibrated...
--
http://www.pbase.com/davidianhale

 

[Joe Hawblitzel]

--
Joe Hawblitzel

 

[Joe Hawblitzel]

Here's a picture (top) of the foam chunk as it sheds from Columbia's fuel tank. It looks tiny, but was actually about the size of a brief case. In the bottom picture you can see a spray of debris just under the wing as the foam strikes it. NASA discounted it as a problem at the time, but of course it was a fatal issue.

http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts107/030513foamfilm/
--
Joe Hawblitzel

 

[Kevin52]

Hale noted that the area holding the tile has a redundant thermal barrier.

Footage of the launch also showed that the external fuel tank's nose cone hit a bird about 2.5 seconds after liftoff -- when Discovery was probably traveling too slowly to sustain any damage, he said>

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/07/27/space.shuttle/index.html

and we are looking at the fuel tank or what here? Isn't it the
tiles that the foam hit that are of concern? Can someone explain,
pls?

Yes, this is the External Fuel Tank.

The cincern is that if foam comes off the External Tank, it could
hit the body and damage the tiles, as happened to Challenger.

The foam that came off here did not hit the body or any tiles, but
might have.

So we don't have any pictures of damaged tiles on this mission, and
hopefully won't have any.

Best regards,

Doug

 

[ger@rdo]

I would really like to know what camera they used. All I heard from the NASA channel is that they used 400mm and 800mm lenses. Would surprise me if it was a 1DsII

--
Gerardo Nava

 

[Kiwi118644]

I would really like to know what camera they used. All I heard from
the NASA channel is that they used 400mm and 800mm lenses. Would
surprise me if it was a 1DsII

http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/metadata/camera.htm

--
'You can kiss my shiny metal ass'
C3PO

 

[Surfincb]

They've been saying on the news that this time they used over 100 cameras to view the shuttle during liftoff. I'm sure there are a lot of images that they aren't showing the public, just like they've always done!!

These pieces of foam are dangerous enough that they are likely shutting down the shuttle again until they can fix this issue!!

 

[Lee Jay]

The cincern is that if foam comes off the External Tank, it could
hit the body and damage the tiles, as happened to Challenger.

Columbia, actually. And the foam didn't damage any tiles, it damaged a reinforced carbon-carbon leading edge panel.

The foam that came off here did not hit the body or any tiles, but
might have.

Exactly.

So we don't have any pictures of damaged tiles on this mission, and
hopefully won't have any.

At least one tile was damaged on this flight. It was not struck by foam but appeared to simply chip. A tiny corner was caught in flight by the ET video camera after breaking off. There is concern about at least one other tile. The good news is that these are common and not believed to pose any threat to the shuttle during reentry.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 

[sonny c]

Why suddenly these foam are chipping off left and right? Except the Columbia, I don't remember anything like this happened before.

Did NASA change the type of foam they were using or they got a cheapo contractor due to all the budget cuts?

 

[Joe Hawblitzel]

Actually, foam had been shedding from the external fuel tank long before Columbia -- it was just thought not to present a serious problem. And since the tanks were never recovered, it was not possible to see how serious the problem might be. Columbia was still in orbit when engineers first saw the footage of the foam striking its wing. The thinking was that it had happened before with no problems, so they weren't that worried. Sort of a Russian roulette mentality.

Why suddenly these foam are chipping off left and right? Except the
Columbia, I don't remember anything like this happened before.

Did NASA change the type of foam they were using or they got a
cheapo contractor due to all the budget cuts?

--
Joe Hawblitzel

 

[ShudderBug]

Actually, foam had been shedding from the external fuel tank long
before Columbia -- it was just thought not to present a serious
problem. And since the tanks were never recovered, it was not
possible to see how serious the problem might be. Columbia was
still in orbit when engineers first saw the footage of the foam
striking its wing. The thinking was that it had happened before
with no problems, so they weren't that worried. Sort of a Russian
roulette mentality.

Did they or did they not switch foam because of pressure from the environmentalists over the original foam, or is that just more hype, do you know?

Why suddenly these foam are chipping off left and right? Except the
Columbia, I don't remember anything like this happened before.

Did NASA change the type of foam they were using or they got a
cheapo contractor due to all the budget cuts?

--
Joe Hawblitzel

 

[Doug Kerr]

Doug

 

[Andy Blanchard]

Must be the window in the corner. I'm wondering what camera they
use. Anyone?

NASA is primarily a Nikon customer as I recall, although they do have other manufacturer's equipment too; Hassleblad for sure.

Andy