-for the second time in nasa s history, a space shuttle has been lost along with its entire crew. once again, we are asking ourselves, how could this have happened? -do you have any idea how big that piece of foam was that came off? -we d heard some reports that during launch there had been some concerns that some debris hit the wing. is that true and is that any cause of concern and that could have caused today s problems? -it is true. it was judged that, erm , that event did not represent a safety concern. -this happened under my watch, but i didn t have the answers. in every public forum i m gonna have to be in, how am i gonna explain this to anybody? at this time, we have no indication that the mishap was caused by anything or anyone on the ground. -nasa never wants to look stupid. nasa wants to be the agency with the answers. -my thoughts are on what we missed, what i missed to allow this to happen. -but if you overlook something, it will come to bite you one day or anot
-the pressure on the management team to stay on schedule and the concept of, it s just foam is leading the charge through all of this. -so, it wasn t like they weren t talking about issues at all, but there certainly was a big focus on the on the schedule. -here s an e-mail, it s tuesday january 21st, this was sent six days into the columbia mission. this is a private exchange between linda ham and ron dittemore, two of the top managers in the program. the rationale for flight for the sts-112 loss of foam was lousy. the rationale states, we haven t changed anything, we haven t experienced any safety of flight damage in 112 flights.
two missions before columbia it happened on sts-112 atlantis. a significant strike hit the skirt of the solid rocket booster and actually put a dent in it. -prior till the launch of columbia, and a couple of the meetings, the topic of foam coming off 112 came up. there s probably, erm. 15 to 20 people around the table and then there s a lot of other people at nasa in the room. we talked about starting to look into this a little bit more because we ve seen it come off on, you know, more than one flight now. we should understand if there s a way to prevent it. -late october of 2002, after sts-112 atlantis, i went to a meeting about that flight.
Before we schedule the next launch. In other words, again, they were thinking it was more of a turnaround issue. And so, it wasnt preventing Shuttle Flights from going forward. The pressure on the Management Team to stay on schedule and the concept of, its just foam is leading the charge through all of this. So, it wasnt like they werent talking about issues at all, but there certainly was a Big Focus On The on the schedule. Heres an email, its tuesday january 21st, this was sent six days into the columbia mission. This is a private exchange between Linda Ham and ron dittemore, two of the top managers in the program. The rationale for flight for the Sts112 Loss of foam
Hey, we see Foam Loss all the time. And it never did any damage to the vehicle. We dont have to worry about it, its only foam. Two missions before columbia it happened on sts112 atlantis. A significant strike hit the skirt of the solid Rocket Booster and actually put a dent in it. Prior till the launch of columbia, and a couple of the meetings, the topic of foam coming off 112 came up. Theres probably, erm. 15 to 20 people around the table and then theres a lot of other people at nasa in the room. We talked about starting to look into this a little bit more because weve seen it come off on, you know, more than one flight now. We should understand if theres a way to prevent it