Challenger (STS-51L) Explosion Preventable?

[Lietome]

Ok Folks Here it is. Lacking a lifetime to search the forums and threads - was it a known weakness and was the failure preventable? I know for a fact it was. Comments?

[MID]

Ok Folks Here it is. Lacking a lifetime to search the forums and threads - was it a known weakness and was the failure preventable? I know for a fact it was. Comments?

This is not news, Lietome. You have knowledge that was made public in 1987.

It was a known problem that was responsible for Challenger's demise.

It was a problem that was, at several levels, ignored.

[Lietome]

Well Mid, I am aware of that as many are. The purpose of this thread was to expand it to the space program in its entirety. Point being that lives are reduced to a "cost of doing business" when it comes to a contract. Big business is in front of, behind and on top of every space enterprise there is, has and ever will be. Or are the names Lockhheed, Martin, Marietta, GE et al somehow missing from these venues?

What are a few lives compared to the billions of dollars made on these ventures?

That is the point, the whole point and nothing but the point.

Problem is, too many folks have seen Armegeddon and not enough have seen the internal emails/memos of NASA.

Or has Bob's Rockets suddenly sprung up somewhere?

[DONTEATUS]

Where can one buy one of these Bob`s Rocket`s ?

[aquatus1]

Well Mid, I am aware of that as many are. The purpose of this thread was to expand it to the space program in its entirety. Point being that lives are reduced to a "cost of doing business" when it comes to a contract. Big business is in front of, behind and on top of every space enterprise there is, has and ever will be. Or are the names Lockhheed, Martin, Marietta, GE et al somehow missing from these venues?

Question...how are we tying in a disaster that occurred a quarter century ago to the current space program? You do realize we have college graduates posting here who weren't even alive at the time.

Edited May 27, 2011 by aquatus1

[MID]

I see. Let's try and follow this whatever it is you're doing here.

You started over on the Moon hoax thread, sayinfg these rather strange things about "CT Bashers"...

However, the beauty of CT bashers is their knowledge that the number of people with the capabilities/resources to actually debunk such a thing is so small as to be nonexistent. When coventional wisdom dictates we believe a certain thing, such as the moon landing, it does so by the amount,quality and source of the information used to make it CW.

Maybe. As long as you don't let it become dogma. (oops too late) I do know that mankind has a tremendous capacity for achievement in all areas. At the same time I believe in "trust, but verify" to the best of my ability. Sometimes our government will put something out there that looks like a duck, quacks like a duck but walks like a goose.

Seemed to be a little CT oriented, but it wasn't really clear enough to explain what you were talking about.

Then it seemed rather just a passing statement of somewhat positive nature:

Still informative tho. More than a bit of knowlege can be gleaned here with a smile and a cup of coffee. Who says science is boring?

Carry on!

Then, more detail comes out--

More to the point tho the folks I know involved with the shuttle program, more than one of them left the program or took early retirement because they were part of design or production teams that knew the failure of STS-51L (or any flight for that matter) was going to happen because of a design/materials flaw. It was only a matter of time and temperature. NASA was informed as well but summarily dismissed those reports thus costing the lives of the Entire crew of Challenger was largely the reason for those exiting the program. But that is for another thread.

My reason for asking if anyone had been on the program was simply to see if a similar disregard for the safety of those crews had been evidenced in the previous program. That is information not gleaned from a textbook you see - hands on is handsdown everytime. Not, of course that anyone involved would admit it in a public forum........

Hmmm. A very different tone, and a completely different direction, one unassociated with a Moon hoax thread.

Then, you simply inserted a cutesy little comment in response to me:

Define "careful observer" for me wouldya? Someone that has the ability to keep his mouth shut?

And that one started painting you as a CT. But then you moved into the Spaceflight threads and started a new one...

Ok Folks Here it is. Lacking a lifetime to search the forums and threads - was it a known weakness and was the failure preventable? I know for a fact it was. Comments?

Something I pointed out was well known, and then you come back with this response, which reveals alot more.

Well Mid, I am aware of that as many are. The purpose of this thread was to expand it to the space program in its entirety. Point being that lives are reduced to a "cost of doing business" when it comes to a contract. Big business is in front of, behind and on top of every space enterprise there is, has and ever will be. Or are the names Lockhheed, Martin, Marietta, GE et al somehow missing from these venues?

What are a few lives compared to the billions of dollars made on these ventures?

That is the point, the whole point and nothing but the point.

Problem is, too many folks have seen Armegeddon and not enough have seen the internal emails/memos of NASA

You're very clear...

What are you playing this game for?

What you're saying is that ultimately, yes, this did belong in the CT section of the forum. Not the Moon hoax thread , but some other thread in CT land.

You're going to lay this big corporate evil business on us. You beat around the bush alot, and waste alot of time.

As if big corporations were somehow profiting from the destruction of Challenger, or perhaps from AS-204, or STS-107. Maybe you might try and show us how Thiokol profited specifically from Challenger's destruction and the deaths of seven people.

Maybe show how Rockwell International profited from STS-107.

I can't wait for that--especially since the responsible party in both of these cases was NASA.

And North American's windfall in the aftermath of AS-204 was what?

I wouldn't even bother trying that one...

And what's with all this holding launches back for piddling little weather concerns, like ceilings below 5000 feet or crosswind components, or lightening 30 miles away, or obscure electrical problems, or a minor leak in a hydrogen vent? Doesn't anyone realize that an incident, loss of crew, and or the destruction of the vehicle represents profit for the responsible big corporate contractors. What's the crew matter? They're a cost of doing business!

Now that you've managed to get around to what you're really about, you certainly have something to prove, I think.

Or has Bob's Rockets suddenly sprung up somewhere?

Why don't you ask Bob, and when you're finished, tell us all how Challenger's loss respresented a cost of doing business....

[DONTEATUS]

Its actually quite embarrassing to even read such nonsence. Mid is quite right the facts are just that ,The FACTS.

STS-51L was just what it was A NASA proof of possibilities. They all know this each day every second of each day.

Its an caculated risk Space travel. watch your step in the Tub "LIETOME" Sh.Haps