Conspiracy Theory

[King]

I assume that most of you have seen the 13 minute digital video recording of the Columbia crew re-entering on February 1.

My question is, how does a digital video recording only burn up the last part and not the entire video.

The way NASA is putting it, it sounds like it was a reel type tape that burned the outermost part and protected the inner earlier part of the tape.

I think that there is more to the video that NASA and the government is not showing us.

What do you think?

King

[AAFO_WSagar]

King,

I've had problems digesting NASA's statements on this since the day it happened. Of course, it's a very sensitive subject for all involved.. but..

The biggest problem I've had was with NASA's statements on the day it happened and for the first few days to the effect that had they even known about the problems, assuming that there were tile problems (which seems the obvious conclusion) they would not have been able to do anything about it anyway.

That bothered me then, it bothers me more now that I just read that NASA is now saying that they would have stopped at nothing had they known there was a problem prior to firing the retros to come back down..

Which is true?

From where I sit at my desk in Oregon, I'm sure I know as little about this as anyone in the world but there do seem to be some glaring issues in what one can read in the statements from NASA.

For instance, there were some on the team who were firing off emails that they had great concern that there might be a problem with the tiles..

Could there have been something done if the damage, again, assuming that it was damaged tiles, was known about? Could the Souyuz have been sent up as a possible "resuce ship" or resupply vessel to allow time for another means to be found?

Hingsight is always 20/20 and I do not assume to know *anything* more than what I can gather from the various statements made by NASA. Nothing anyone can do will bring back those seven brave people. I can only hope that the total truth of this will be found and that in the end, they fix whatever it was that caused the problem in the first place and we never have to see this happen to anyone again.

Above is completely my opinion and is totally opinion.

Wayne Sagar

[King]

I agree

Sorry to post a nonconforming thread here, but seems that things have been quiet and I wanted to see a good debate occur.

I totally agree with everything you have written.

The engineering emails that I have downloaded and read from NASA points to many glaring issues that were brought up but never acted upon. Sure maybe the higher ups were not privy to the emails, but damn I sure would have raised some hell if it was me trying to get noticed.

The engineers had valid concerns and obviously feared that something was wrong with the orbiter. I believe that it was the Enterprise that was stacked and potentialy ready to go in Florida. It would have taken maybe a week or two to have a two man crew ready to go and they could have performed some kind of repair mission to Columbia or assisted with an abandon ship scenario.

Soyuz could have been sent to resupply while plans were made if needed. A Soyuz rescue would not have worked unless Russia had at least three ships ready to launch. My understanding is Russia hardley has two for the next several resupply missions to Alpha.

NASA asked the DOD to photograph Columbia so that they could see the damage and then the next day cancelled the request to the DOD saying things were alright.

We may never know the truth here, but I definately see a conspiracy theory working out here that will be forever talked about.

King

[dclemans]

Some comments...

While it's hard to say that nothing could have been done, there were some hard constraints.

The reports I've seen said that at the time of the descent, Columbia only had sufficient supplies to stay up another 2-3 days. To even have had a bare chance at sending up a rescue shuttle, they would have had to start right after launch.

Columbia didn't have enough fuel to change its orbit to match the space station. It didn't carry a space station docking system or the arm. It only had the standard two space suits for emergency eva's.

My understanding is that Russia's Progress ship isn't large enough to carry the bulk supplies that Columbia would have needed to stay up a few more weeks, assuming that some way could have been found to modify the Progress ship.

[AAFO_WSagar]

Conspiracy? CYA.. looks like it...

Originally posted by dclemans
While it's hard to say that nothing could have been done, there were some hard constraints.

I think all anyone can ask now is that we find out... did anyone screw the pooch here by not calling for an emergency EVA to assess the situation?

When Appolo 13 had its problem, I'm sure there were a lot of guys in NASA, had you asked them privately, would have told you that we had a pretty slim to no chance of getting those guys back alive..

They did it...

Again, as I said above, no amount of 20/20 hindsight, armchair or otherwise, can bring the Shuttle crew back.

What I think the space program needs to know is what in heck happened so it does not happen again.

The big BUT here is.. *could* *ANYTHING* have been done and how will we ever know.. nobody looked to see. We'll never know.

Don't want to even think about something like this happening again, as I'm sure NASA does not want either. I don't know if I'd go as far as coining the title that King picked for this thread, but there certainly seems to be a bit of CYA going on.

That ain't good..

Wayne

[King]

Back to my question

So.........back to my original question....

Are there any true experts here that would know how a digital video could only burn up certain parts of a video, and not the entire recording?

That is what really stumps me.

King

[Derrek]

I have a mini Dv camcorder from sony that records digitally to a tape, that could be it but it stranges. Another question, Why are the people ,IE NASA, that had the accident investigating the accident. Isn't that a huge conflict of interest?

[Leo]

Survival of the video at all has amazed me, considering the conditions. I've seen mangled tape media soaked in chemicals and heated yield usable information. I've seen hard drive discs salvaged after fires, so who knows? On the other hand, I've lost video for apparently no reason and we've all had disc failures that noboby can salvage.
It was'nt the accident that amazed or surprised me, but that there were so many safe flights before it. Cynicism about the CYA or conspiracy theories aside (cya seems to be a fact of human nature and the larger the beast, the more covering) the shuttle operated in an extremely violent and hostile environment, doing this safely and routinely with two tragic and notable exceptions for close to 30 years.
To look at it another way, the shuttle fleet undertook just over 100 flights. How many flights does a new aircraft achieve accident free until all the bugs are worked out and the problems solved? Even then, new, unseen or unthought of problems emerge. When they do, they are corrected and the testing continues until an aircraft is considered safe. Not everything is accounted for, that's why we have AD's. The shuttle was much more complicated than any other vehicle ever flown. And of all the possible failures and faults, only two have been fatal. Considering it's "test" conditions, I think this is a good achievement.
As far as the engineers E-mails are concerned, I'm sure a LOT of CYA is going on. Engineers live on what-ifs, it's how designs evolve. Most are just that, what-if. But there were real concerns that seem to have been ignored and the full extent of our abilities were not utilized to make sure the shuttle was safe for reentry once suspicion was arroused. What we don't know is how often this type of scenario has played out. How many times have the engineers cried wolf? How many times has this problem occured and disaster dodged?
Space travel is inherently dangerous and it was once again proven to us. Physically, we don't belong out there, and it's only thru our knoledge, and pursuit of knowledge, that we can explore.
I say find the problem, fix the problem and move on, always remembering and honoring those who took the risks to prove a new science.

Leo