WTF is wrong with NASA? A smoking gun has been found.

[Boyo_Jim]

This New York Times story reveals what IMO is a smoking gun pointed at Boeing, and ultimately at NASA.

There is a discussion of a computer program called “Crater”, written specifically to simulate debris hitting the shuttle.

Using a computer program called Crater written for this task, they considered nine possible trajectories for the debris. Crater calculated gouges from 19 inches long and 2.4 inches wide to 32 inches long and 7 inches wide. In each case, it predicted that the gouge would dip deeper than the thickness of the tiles on the left wing.

What did Boeing do? They discounted it. The story suggests the data was passed along to NASA, which also discounted it.

This AP story summarizes the debates within NASA’s engineering community. Here’s something I see as a relevant quote.

The shuttle’s program director, Ronald Dittemore, said the day Columbia burned there had been no way to repair damaged tiles in orbit. But days before the breakup, engineer Robert Daugherty proposed sending one of Columbia’s astronauts outside — “even on a crappy tether arrangement” — to hunt for damage. On Friday, NASA’s top official said, “I completely reject the proposition that nothing could have been done.”

I’m not sure what’s going on here. Either NASA’s top guns are lying about there level of awareness of the serious nature of the problem, or NASA’s culture is scarily effecient at quashing safety concern going up the line.

Here’s another bit from the Times story which in my mind represents nothing but a CYA spin by Riger Dittmore:

At a news conference on Feb. 5, Ron D. Dittemore, the space shuttle program manager, discounted the foam as the cause of the accident. He said that engineers had, in the computer simulations, doubled the speed of the foam to more than 1,000 miles per hour - which represents a quadrupling of the kinetic energy. Yet the results still indicated no serious issues, Mr. Dittemore said. “And so it’s difficult for us to believe as engineers, as management, and as a team, that this particular piece of foam debris shedding from the tank represented a safety of flight issue,” he said at the news conference.

Mr. Hartsfield said yesterday that the Boeing engineers did not double the velocities in their analysis and that Mr. Dittemore had misspoken.

[Squink]

"The Boeing team did not accept Crater’s predictions at face value. The program was 'designed to be conservative, they noted, and so has sometimes ‘overpredicted penetration of tile coating significantly.’

Another factor in their judgment was data from a 1992 Columbia mission that they believed had absorbed a ‘potentially’ similar debris impact. In that case, the debris left a gouge only a half-inch deep…

"There was a difference between the two flights, though. In 1992, the debris was thought to have struck at an angle of 3.2 degrees. This time, the predicted angles were far sharper, which the Boeing team was careful to point out would alone significantly increase the damage.

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/oped-03t1.html

[Satisfying_Andy_Licious]

The most obvious explanation for NASA’s troubles is that it is being run by Inspector Clouseau

[Boyo_Jim]

Pretty remarkable resemblance.