Galt's Gulch

The audacious rescue plan that might have saved space shuttle Columbia | Ars Technica

Posted by $ nickursis 11 years, 2 months ago to Science
10 comments | Share | Flag

Interesting article describing how they "might" have done a rescue of Columbia before they lost her. Little discussed plan that was developed and some details on what changes were made to implement it if needed.
SOURCE URL: http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/02/the-audacious-rescue-plan-that-might-have-saved-space-shuttle-columbia/

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by Zenphamy 11 years, 2 months ago
    A lot of luck before the mission with the tiles and leading edges, a lack of money, and hubris. Thinking of the crew on re-entry with no knowledge of their danger - I hope it was fast. But it basically destroyed our manned missions and real explorations.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 2 months ago
    What I never understood was why it was not SOP that a second shuttle would be within a few days of being ready for a rescue launch. Given that there could be a scenario where a shuttle were stuck in space, and others were available, it would only be prudent that a second be in a status where it could be used in a rescue/recovery mission.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ nickursis 11 years, 2 months ago
      According to the article, it became SOP after this report. NASA was tasked with creating such a plan, and they showed pictures of one of the very few times they had 2 shuttles on pads, when they sent up the last Hubble servicing mission, due to the fact it would never have been able to make the space station. I think NASA had watched "Marooned" once too many times and thought they could whip something up.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 2 months ago
        But why wouldn't that have been the SOP from the point where there were 2 shuttles available? That would just have seemed prudent.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by $ nickursis 11 years, 2 months ago
          Robbie, I think it was the typical arrogant attitude of "we built it, we know it will work". The report indicated that there was a serious attitude issue after the loss, and that was several years after Challenger, which also was a result of bureaucratic arrogance. Columbia just was another hammer blow to their fragile egos. I don't think the average NASA dude was at fault, but the system of management had become Imperial in nature, and questioning was never encouraged. They knew of the foam thing, and gambled with every launch it would not bite them in the ass.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo