# Photos of shuttle underside? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 5, 2003, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820 "2003-02-05T00:22:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![bbeaty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/c0e974/32.png) [@bbeaty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bbeaty)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/1 "2003-02-05T00:22:07Z")
The underside of the shuttle is black: a carbon coating over the white tiles. Any really major tile damage would be plainly visible, white scars on black. All it would take is a glance out a port of the ISS. So, was the damage far too small to be obvious as the shuttle approached or left the space station? Let’s see some mission photos. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/2 "2003-02-05T00:35:28Z")
Um, the shuttle never went to the ISS. ---
**Author:** ![bbeaty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/c0e974/32.png) [@bbeaty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bbeaty)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/3 "2003-02-05T01:14:06Z")
DOH! Perfect answer! ---
**Author:** ![Smeghead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f1d935/32.png) [@Smeghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smeghead)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/4 "2003-02-05T01:19:45Z")
That’s just what you’re SUPPOSED to think… ---
**Author:** ![mnemosyne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c4cdca/32.png) [@mnemosyne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mnemosyne)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/5 "2003-02-05T03:08:50Z")
As for a photo from earth, wasn’t the Shuttle always “belly up” - with the black bottom pointing away from the planet? Wouldn’t that make photos impossible (or at least useless?) ---
**Author:** ![censored](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/35a633/32.png) [@censored](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/censored)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/6 "2003-02-05T03:10:23Z")
They have in the past used spy satellites to take pictures of the Shuttle, but the results were no good. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/7 "2003-02-05T03:43:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by censored \* > \*\*They have in the past used spy satellites to take pictures of the Shuttle, but the results were no good. \*\* Do you have a cite for this information? I heard something to that effect from the shuttle program director in reference to ground-based telescopes, but have heard nothing regarding spy satellites (or other space-based assets, such as the ISS). ---
**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, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/8 "2003-02-05T04:01:08Z")
_Supposidly_, during STS-1 (the first mission, Columbia 1981) a Keyhole satellite imaged Columbia, and the results weren’t that great. I am unaware of any other reported attempts other than that one, although maybe when that drogue-chute door came off during Glenn’s launch. ---
**Author:** ![Troy\_McClure\_SF](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troy_mcclure_sf/32/4150_2.png) [@Troy\_McClure\_SF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Troy_McClure_SF)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/9 "2003-02-05T04:16:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by mnemosyne \* > \*\*As for a photo from earth, wasn’t the Shuttle always “belly up” - with the black bottom pointing away from the planet? Wouldn’t that make photos impossible (or at least useless?) \*\* I think it’s the other way around- the tiles are more or less facing Earth, because the highest levels of pressure and heat are going to assault the incoming face harder than any other part of the ship. I’d imagine, especially at the speed and altitude of the Columbia, that any photography attempts from Earth would be futile. ---
**Author:** ![hobbes730](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/97f17d/32.png) [@hobbes730](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hobbes730)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/10 "2003-02-05T04:20:59Z")
Most of the time they travel “upside down”, or belly-up, right up until re-entry, but it wouldn’t be any trouble at all to flip it back upright to pose for a picture or two. ---
**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, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/11 "2003-02-05T06:58:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by hobbes730 \* > \*\*Most of the time they travel “upside down”, or belly-up, right up until re-entry, but it wouldn’t be any trouble at all to flip it back upright to pose for a picture or two. \*\* It would take fuel, and it might interfere with the experiments on-board. Plus, as has been discussed in other threads, the photos they’ve taken wouldn’t show the level of detail needed to ascertain the _amount_ of damage. ---
**Author:** ![aeropl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f05b48/32.png) [@aeropl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aeropl)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/12 "2003-02-05T07:31:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by robby \* > \*\*Do you have a cite for this information? > > I heard something to that effect from the shuttle program director in reference to ground-based telescopes, but have heard nothing regarding spy satellites (or other space-based assets, such as the ISS). \*\* That information is in pretty much every major newspaper spread about the incident. The NASA press conferences in recent days have explained that pictures from satellites have been of little use in the past. [Look at the first question in this USA today article.](http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-02-02-shuttleqanda_x.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Cillasi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/71e660/32.png) [@Cillasi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cillasi)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 7:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/13 "2003-02-05T07:57:48Z")
It may be a focusing issue. Spy satellites, even if in the vicinity of the shuttle, are probably set to focus at much farther distances on much smaller objects, so they’d just end up with a fuzzball trying to focus on the shuttle. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/14 "2003-02-05T15:46:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by aeropl \* > \*\*That information is in pretty much every major newspaper spread about the incident. The NASA press conferences in recent days have explained that pictures from satellites have been of little use in the past. > > [Look at the first question in this USA today article.](http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-02-02-shuttleqanda_x.htm) \*\* Granted, the question in the article does say “high-powered telescopes _or spy satellites_”: > [@](#): > > Q: Could NASA have inspected the tiles with high-powered telescopes or spy satellites before the Columbia attempted to land? > > A: Yes. But it probably wouldn’t have helped much. The last time NASA tried that, to check Discovery’s drag-chute compartment during John Glenn’s shuttle flight in 1998, the pictures were of little use, shuttle program manager Ron Dittemore said. However, I heard the actual question posed to Ron Dittemore the day of the accident, and his answer was only in reference to ground-based telescopes. The question may have been asked of him again since then, however, with the addition of spy satellites. I haven’t been totally keeping up with the press conferences since the weekend. (Got to work during the week, you know. :)) ---
**Author:** ![ohlssonvox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/5daacb/32.png) [@ohlssonvox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ohlssonvox)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2003, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/photos-of-shuttle-underside/152820/15 "2003-02-05T16:02:57Z")
I believe if NASA should start an R2D2 program. In the Star Wars movies R2 would be on the outside and check stuff out, fix stuff, and make cute “bleepo” sounds. Why doesn’t NASA have this? Would it really be that heard to make a little robot that can scurry around on the surface of the shuttle and check stuff out? If this doesn’t work, how about Magneto-shoes! ohlssonvox