# Columbia: Logistics of a Second Shuttle Staging a Rescue **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 2, 2003, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249 "2003-02-02T05:13:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![tsunamisurfer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a698b9/32.png) [@tsunamisurfer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tsunamisurfer)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/81 "2003-02-05T00:38:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tsunamisurfer \* > \*\*One of the principal investigators of the Challenger disaster, an individual technical command of space flight surpasses every poster in this thread combined, expressed his shock today that NASA did not bother trying to telescopically image the orbiter. > > He added that a second shuttle might have been able to rescue the crew, in a hail Mary operation. \*\* Make that: One of the principal investigators of the Challenger disaster, an individual **whose** technical command of space flight surpasses every poster in this thread combined, expressed his shock today that NASA did not bother trying to telescopically image the orbiter. He added that a second shuttle might have been able to rescue the crew, in a hail Mary operation. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/82 "2003-02-05T01:00:59Z")
If a rescue were possible, why didn’t they try? I have that same problem with a lot of the “should haves” people are saying. I don’t think NASA willfully destroyed this mission. ---
**Author:** ![bernse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@bernse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bernse)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/83 "2003-02-05T01:53:56Z")
> [@](#): > > If a rescue were possible, why didn’t they try? Because I don’t believe they honestly thought they were in any real danger, so why even consider a rescue if there is nothing to worry about? ---
**Author:** ![tsunamisurfer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a698b9/32.png) [@tsunamisurfer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tsunamisurfer)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/84 "2003-02-05T02:26:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by bernse \* > \*\*Because I don’t believe they honestly thought they were in any real danger, so why even consider a rescue if there is nothing to worry about? \*\* My own guess is that they knew that the loss of tiles constituted some unknown additive risk, but felt it was within operational parameters–and also believed they had no other choice. As with the Challenger disaster, I think a dangerous groupthink prevailed during the Columbia mission, leading to the consensus opinion that Columbia could return safely, even when a minority opinion expressed concern that the loss of tiles might prove catastrophic. Good decision-making depends on good data. NASA’s operations team didn’t realize how much key data they lacked. They gave it their best shot and came up short. In the final analysis, such dissenting opinions probably occurred on earlier missions, yet NASA managed to pull the rabbit out of the hat each and every single time before–with the glaring exception of the Challenger disaster–leading them to feel confident they could do so again, with their fingers crossed. Groupthink or not, I doubt the “let’s ditch Columbia and transfer to another shuttle sans EVA suits” was even on the decision board. Nor would it have squared well with the American taxpayer. In retrospect, Mission Control was damned if it did, damned if it didn’t. Ultimately, NASA’s options were circumscribed by tightfisted politicians and shrinking budgets. They engineered an incredible space vehicle, but not a perfect one. NASA’s technies, of course, are made the fall guys and the tightfisted politicians are now the SOBs getting media play by reading poems and batting their eyelids. ---
**Author:** ![Jojo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ecd19e/32.png) [@Jojo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jojo)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/85 "2003-02-05T02:34:43Z")
Now I think about it, it seems odd that there aren’t any photos of the shuttle. Imagine being one of the astronauts squatting on board the ISS, things must get pretty boring up there at times. The space shuttle floating past the window would be the most exciting thing that’s happened for weeks. I can’t believe one of the astronauts didn’t photograph it. I thought they were allowed to take up personal cameras or at least permitted to use the onboard cameras to take pictures of interesting things? ---
**Author:** ![tsunamisurfer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a698b9/32.png) [@tsunamisurfer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tsunamisurfer)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/86 "2003-02-05T02:35:31Z")
NASA Warned of Shuttle’s Vulnerability advertisement E-Mail This Article Printer-Friendly Version Subscribe to The Post \*\*The “minority reports” I cited weren’t so minority, after all… By MARCIA DUNN The Associated Press Tuesday, February 4, 2003; 8:36 PM NASA was warned nine years ago that the space shuttle could fail catastrophically if debris hit the vulnerable underside of its wings during liftoff \_ the very scenario that may have brought down Columbia. After receiving the warning, NASA made changes in equipment and flight rules to lessen the risk of debris breaking loose, Paul Fischbeck, an engineering professor at Carnegie Mellon University who conducted the analysis, said Tuesday. “There are very important tiles under there. If you lose the tiles on those stretches … it can cause the shuttle to be lost,” he said. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/87 "2003-02-05T03:35:50Z")
Rescue is in our genes, part of our pack instinct, and hard to resist. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/88 "2003-02-05T06:05:05Z")
On one of the previous launches some foam from the tank hit a window on the shuttle and all it did was leave some streaks. I can well imagine the folks at NASA saying that, “It looked like foam, so probably all it did was leave a dirty spot on the wing.” Heck, I’d say the same thing. ---
**Author:** ![Santos\_L\_Halper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/santos_l_halper/32/1_2.png) [@Santos\_L\_Halper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Santos_L_Halper)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/89 "2003-02-05T06:28:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jojo \* > \*\*Now I think about it, it seems odd that there aren’t any photos of the shuttle. > > Imagine being one of the astronauts squatting on board the ISS, things must get pretty boring up there at times. The space shuttle floating past the window would be the most exciting thing that’s happened for weeks. > > I can’t believe one of the astronauts didn’t photograph it. I thought they were allowed to take up personal cameras or at least permitted to use the onboard cameras to take pictures of interesting things? \*\* Uh, maybe the reason the ISS astronauts didn’t take any pictures of Columbia is because the shuttle never got within a hundred miles of the ISS on it’s last mission… 🙂 Eric ---
**Author:** ![audit1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ed8c4c/32.png) [@audit1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/audit1)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/90 "2003-02-05T07:07:00Z")
I am probably totally wrong on this but. when the foam fell off the fuel tank. the foam, the tank and the shuttle were all moving at the same accelleration. Therefore the speed of impact was not many thousand miles an hour but whatever the difference caused by the foam decelerating and the shuttle continuing to accellerate into orbit. ---
**Author:** ![GOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/5f9b8f/32.png) [@GOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GOM)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/91 "2003-02-05T07:55:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by minty green \* > \*\*You misunderstand spy satellite resolution. You may find a good refresher course in [a recent thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=153581). A license plate might be detectable as few pixels in a picture, but you ain’t gonna be reading the numbers. \*\* I’ve talked to a guy who worked on some spy satellites. The resolution capability at that time, and this was probably at least 10 years ago, was quite a bit better than what you claim. ---
**Author:** ![GOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/5f9b8f/32.png) [@GOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GOM)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 8:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/92 "2003-02-05T08:02:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tuckerfan \* > \*\*The possiblity of losing a crew on re-entry has come up before on John Glenn’s Mercury flight and on Apollo 13. In both cases NASA elected not to tell the astronauts about it. \*\* I disagree with their policy. I would want to know. It’s only fair to tell the people who have put their lives on the line. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 8:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/93 "2003-02-05T08:06:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by GOM \* > \*\*I disagree with their policy. I would want to know. It’s only fair to tell the people who have put their lives on the line. \*\* The astronauts know about it, and apparently don’t seem to be too bothered by it. You don’t hear them squawking over it. ---
**Author:** ![GOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/5f9b8f/32.png) [@GOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GOM)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 8:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/94 "2003-02-05T08:07:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Corbomite \* > \*\* > > There _will_ be another Space Shuttle launch and landing. \*\* Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe we should just ground the three that remain. Here’s an interesting quote about the Shuttle program from [Time.com](http://Time.com): " **in financial terms and safety terms no project has done more harm to space exploration."** [http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030210-418518,00.html](http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030210-418518,00.html) ---
**Author:** ![GOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/5f9b8f/32.png) [@GOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GOM)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 8:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/95 "2003-02-05T08:19:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tuckerfan \* > \*\*The astronauts know about it, and apparently don’t seem to be too bothered by it. You don’t hear them squawking over it. \*\* True. But then we don’t hear them squawking about much of anything… I don’t like NASA’s way of handling it. In a similar vein, I also don’t like it when doctors sometimes don’t tell their patients how serious their medical condition is. If I ever get a serious disease I want to know all the facts. Good or bad. But that’s just me. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 8:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/96 "2003-02-05T08:23:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by GOM \* > **True. But then we don’t hear them squawking about much of anything…** You must not be listening to them, then. All of the astronauts (present and former) have been pretty vocal any time someone suggests NASA should have it’s budget cut, and I’d say that Buzz Aldrin “squawked” Bart Sibrel’s face pretty loudly back in September… ---
**Author:** ![GOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/5f9b8f/32.png) [@GOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GOM)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 8:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/97 "2003-02-05T08:24:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Irishman \* > \*\*Ah, the joys of second guessing technical decisions after the fact with no technical training, no insight to what was done, no information about the process that was used, and no understanding of the concepts involved. > \*\* There is no joy in any of this… You seem to have some insight into the Shuttle program. Do you have any comments about this article? [http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030210-418518,00.html](http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030210-418518,00.html) “Unfortunately, the core problem that lay at the heart of the Challenger tragedy applies to the Columbia tragedy as well. **That core problem is the space shuttle itself.** For 20 years, the American space program has been wedded to a space-shuttle system that is too expensive, **too risky** , too big for most of the ways it is used, with budgets that suck up funds that could be invested in a modern system that would make space flight cheaper and safer.” ---
**Author:** ![GOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/5f9b8f/32.png) [@GOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GOM)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 8:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/98 "2003-02-05T08:27:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tuckerfan \* > \*\*You must not be listening to them, then. All of the astronauts (present and former) have been pretty vocal any time someone suggests NASA should have it’s budget cut, and I’d say that Buzz Aldrin “squawked” Bart Sibrel’s face pretty loudly back in September… \*\* Oh. I thought you meant about NASA’s policies. Yes. The budget is a problem. We need to double NASA’s budget, imo, and get serious about a manned space program. ---
**Author:** ![GOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/5f9b8f/32.png) [@GOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GOM)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 8:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/99 "2003-02-05T08:37:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jk1245 \* > \*\*1. I would assume NASA has rescue contingencies for just about any scenario. > > 1. Also, it seems that if loss of a few key tiles was so critical, there would be some sort of redundancy or safeguard built into those areas. \*\* 1. Shuttle loses tiles before reaching orbit. Shuttle reaches orbit. Now what? It would seem there was nothing planned for this scenario. 2. Apparently not. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 8:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249/100 "2003-02-05T08:39:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by GOM \* > \*\*Oh. I thought you meant about NASA’s policies. > > Yes. The budget is a problem. We need to double NASA’s budget, imo, and get serious about a manned space program. \*\* The astronauts _do_ bitch about NASA’s polices when it comes to matters of safety. Numerous design changes were made to the shuttles based on the astronauts complaints after _Challenger_. And while I won’t repost my comments here (they’re in [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2944391#post2944391)), I will say that the article you linked to only reaffirms what Robert A. Heinlein said about _Time_ magazine years ago: I’ve been to several major events where _Time_ was present, never did any of their accounts match what I witnessed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/columbia-logistics-of-a-second-shuttle-staging-a-rescue/152249.md?page=6)