 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI SpaceKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Space Forum / Shuttle / September 2003News: Managers refused engineer's requests for imaging
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/26/national/nationalspecial/26ENGI.html?hp Dogged Engineer's Effort to Assess Shuttle Damage By JAMES GLANZ and JOHN SCHWARTZ Published: September 26, 2003 HOUSTON - Over and over, a projector at one end of a long, pale-blue conference room in Building 13 of the Johnson Space Center showed a piece of whitish foam breaking away from the space shuttle Columbia's fuel tank and bursting like fireworks as it struck the left wing. In twos and threes, engineers at the other end of the cluttered room drifted away from their meeting and watched the repetitive, almost hypnotic images with deep puzzlement: because of the camera angle, no one could tell exactly where the foam had hit. It was Tuesday, Jan. 21, five days after the foam had broken loose during liftoff, and some 30 engineers from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and its aerospace contractors were having the first formal meeting to assess potential damage when it struck the wing. Virtually every one of the participants - those in the room and some linked by teleconference - agreed that the space agency should immediately get images of the impact area, perhaps by requesting them from American spy satellites or powerful telescopes on the ground. They elected one of their number, a soft-spoken NASA engineer, Rodney Rocha, to convey the idea to the shuttle mission managers. Mr. Rocha said he tried at least half a dozen times to get the space agency to make the requests. There were two similar efforts by other engineers. All were turned aside. <snip> > Virtually every one of the participants - those in the room and some > linked by teleconference - agreed that the space agency should [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > agency to make the requests. There were two similar efforts by other > engineers. All were turned aside. So what else is new this is old. The NASA managers with there typical arrogance refuse to looks at simple engineering requests. The manager ploy worked. By not allowing one to get the real facts the manager hide their head in the sand and then later cry if we had only known the facts then worked. No managers where blamed and fired that I see. None I know of are in jail. So the ignore the engineer apporoach was totally successful and will most likely be used in the near future when the next easily preventable fatal accident occurs. Its the most likely logical outcome since we don't seem to care enough to learn. David A. Scott  SignatureMy Crypto code http://cryptography.org/cgi-bin/crypto.cgi/Misc/scott19u.zip http://cryptography.org/cgi-bin/crypto.cgi/Misc/scott16u.zip http://www.jim.com/jamesd/Kong/scott19u.zip old version My Compression code http://bijective.dogma.net/ **TO EMAIL ME drop the roman "five" ** Disclaimer:I am in no way responsible for any of the statements made in the above text. For all I know I might be drugged. As a famous person once said "any cryptograhic system is only as strong as its weakest link" > So what else is new this is old. The NASA managers with there typical >arrogance refuse to looks at simple engineering requests. The manager [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >preventable fatal accident occurs. Its the most likely logical outcome >since we don't seem to care enough to learn. Have you read the CAIB report? D. SignatureThe STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found at the following URLs: Text-Only Version: http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html Enhanced HTML Version: http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html Corrections, comments, and additions should be e-mailed to om@io.com, as well as posted to sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for discussion. > > So what else is new this is old. Yeah great.....actually this is the first detailed article re the interaction at mission control. >Yeah great.....actually this is the first detailed article re the interaction >at >mission control. Rather sad how they handled it. But now we know why posters here talk of chicken little and call me that. Its their excuse to take unnecessary risk, ignore safety rules, and stick their heads in the sand, till someone gets killed. Is their now any doubt all the involved managers should be fired Right after the loss you said to wait for the facts. Please give us a honest appraisal of management now. Thank you. >> > So what else is new this is old. > >Yeah great.....actually this is the first detailed article re the interaction at >mission control. Actually, it's not. It's an amusing piece of fiction that has little do with the interaction at Mission Control. D. SignatureThe STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found at the following URLs: Text-Only Version: http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html Enhanced HTML Version: http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html Corrections, comments, and additions should be e-mailed to om@io.com, as well as posted to sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for discussion. >Actually, it's not. It's an amusing piece of fiction that has little >do with the interaction at Mission Control. HUH? Dogged Engineer's Effort to Assess Shuttle Damage. Published: September 26, 2003 (Page 3 of 4) "As their voices rose, Mr. Rocha recalled, Mr. Schomburg thrust out an index finger and said, "Well, if it's that bad, there's not a damn thing we can do about it."" http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/26/national/nationalspecial/26ENGI.html?pagewante d=3&th From: Robert Clark (rgregoryclark@yahoo.com) Subject: CAIB report: Change management. OK, by the way, get good managers too. Newsgroups: sci.astro, sci.space.policy, sci.space.history, sci.space.shuttle, sci.cognitive Date: 2003-08-28 10:25:42 PS http://groups.google.com/groups?th=b823b68b5ec8c1dd Bob Clark > http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/26/national/nationalspecial/26ENGI.html?hp > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > turned aside. > <snip> |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.