----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 3:47 PM Subject: Re: Shuttle Debris Trail
> Robert Seeberger wrote: > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Nick Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 3:02 PM > >Subject: RE: Shuttle Debris Trail > > > > > >>>----- Original Message ----- > >>>From: "Andrew Crystall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> > >>... > >> > >>>Thats what I am thinking. Even the Challenger explosion left > >>>large sections > >>>of airframe intact. > >>>I'm really interested in hearing the explainations behind the totality > >>> > >of > > > >>>Columbias destruction. > >>> > >>The speed and altitude of today's crash were much, much higher than > >>Challenger, I believe (not sure of the speed of Challenger, anybody got > >>it?). A lot of high-speed, high-altitude breakups leave only very small > >>pieces. Look at the weird stuff that happens in tornados and it becomes > >>more obvious that at extreme wind speeds, things become rather > >>unpredictable. At least that's what I think. > >> > >You are the second to posit that explanation, but I dont think it is very > >good actually. There are literally thousands of pieces on the ground only > >some of which have that burnt/scorched look. It looks to me as if there was > >a significant explosion during the descent that broke the ship into pieces. > > > >The shuttle is designed to withstand the stresses of reentry. I would expect > >the airframe to withstand most damage even after losing a wing. Remember > >that the wings are behind the center of the shuttle. Most of the damage > >would be concentrated aft, and the forward sections would still be protected > >by heat tiles. > > > >I expect that larger sections of the airframe should have come down. That > >not a single section larger than 1 meter has survived suggests a greater > >catastrophe than air friction can explain. > > > Except that once the wing is lost, the aircraft probably begins to > tumble exposing surfaces not designed for thermal or mechanical stress. > I think yall are missing my point. The shuttle is built with many pieces such as beams and struts that are several meters in length. Sure, the craft will tumble, all its guts will fall out, most or many of the joints will fracture and break. But there are a lot of structural elements that should not have broken into small pieces. Even though the shuttle is only a 3G airframe, it should have had larger pieces survive. Its possible that these pieces just havent been found yet. But I seriously doubt that reentry pressures alone turned Columbia into confetti. rob _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
