the moon landing hoax and Columbia cover up

[rajeev shagun 15]

Hi-

It seems still many people are totally positive about moon landings like I was 9 years back until one former NASA employee( I won’t disclose his name until I will be sure of safety of him and his family) told me that he is 1000% sure they never been to the moon.

In July 2001 one person who’s job was to maintaining the cables ,he told me his job was 1969 to deploying telephone cables between Nevada desert to Houston mission control and he said what was the damn reason to put telephone lines from HMC to Nevada Desert ? All people have been wondering why first very important moon landing telecast was so bad quality and poor resolution, this is the reason because they used telephone lines to transmit TV signals from Nevada to Houston mission control that’s why quality was so poor.

He said they used it to boost television signals of this drama from desert to Houston M.C.

That person was as well a witness of Apollo-1 fire. He said they took us 25 k.m. far bunkers along with 250 other technicians and an hour later brought us back saying opps it burnt! He said out of three astronauts one was against bogus landing program so they burnt three of them by breathing them pure oxygen which is flammable and making opening hatch towards in-side so once you pressurized the cabin it can not be open in case of emergency.

What about LEM’s exhaust nozzle metal, wouldn’t it change the color or loss the polish after running rocket engine 20 to 30 minutes? whole LEM looks brand shining new and unused on so called moon surface(even nozzles are unused and shining)That person told me that liquid propellant rocket engines produce extreme heat that it almost can weld the metal.

I am personally effected by NASA What happened on day of 16 Jan 2003 when I was watching tv news they showed Columbia launch (by normal front of launch tower camera) in Hindi news and I saw a huge piece of insulation foam (may be 5 by 12 feet) felling off from liquid fuel tank and did hit the left wing but in news they said “There was a problem of felling off piece of foam but launch was okay” but straight away I thought about ceramic tiles damage and scared about re-entry disaster but I thought may be there is a misunderstanding in news room so I waited for English journal but same sentence ,So I thought they are only paying attention on ascent of shuttle BUT this foam must damaged few tiles and you will need tiles during reentry and I was 100% sure of total explosion of shuttle if they come back with out home-work.

I had been trying for 4 days to email NASA but that time connection in our small town was bad so I couldn’t then i tried to convinced my self come-on Rajeev there are 10000 of scientists and they went on the moon, they must notice it and sort it out.

But unfortunately I couldn’t send the mail and nobody else cared of it, we lost shuttle and 7 people. I wrote an article about it and one leading news paper RAJASTHAN PATRIKA published it 3 weeks after on 9th march 2003 addition.

Now in November 09 at discovery TV NASA showed documentary series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH in episode of Columbia they said “There was only chance of saving Columbia if some body could see the felling off piece of foam and then could inform us ?! The fact is the whole world saw it including me and they mentioned it on TV news as well.

So doubtlessly NASA can cover up any shortcoming or negligence I feel so frustrated about it and some how I feel bit of responsible for it as well like if I could email them.

I have forgotten to debate about some more facts.

About Engine noise in LEM ,When moon landing advocates said that microphone was mounted in the space suit and was isolated from LEM’s` cabin atmosphere ,If you watch carefully the film you will observe that During computer overload the 1201 and 1202 alarm rang in the cabin and this could be heard loudly by same microphone so how it is possible to not hearing loud rocket engine noise in lunar module’s cabin ?

So I have more reasons to mistrust NASA.

What do you think about it?

Rajeev Shagun

[Lilly 33,262]

Ok, there's already a thread covering the notion of a hoaxed moon landing: "Did We Land On The Moon?". Please keep the 'moon hoax' discussion there. I suggest that Mr. rajeev shagun needs to do a bit of reading so as not to repeat content that has already been addressed.

Any discussion regarding Columbia can be here.

[Czero 101 2,700]

I am personally effected by NASA What happened on day of 16 Jan 2003 when I was watching tv news they showed Columbia launch (by normal front of launch tower camera) in Hindi news and I saw a huge piece of insulation foam (may be 5 by 12 feet) felling off from liquid fuel tank and did hit the left wing but in news they said “There was a problem of felling off piece of foam but launch was okay” but straight away I thought about ceramic tiles damage and scared about re-entry disaster but I thought may be there is a misunderstanding in news room so I waited for English journal but same sentence ,So I thought they are only paying attention on ascent of shuttle BUT this foam must damaged few tiles and you will need tiles during reentry and I was 100% sure of total explosion of shuttle if they come back with out home-work.

I had been trying for 4 days to email NASA but that time connection in our small town was bad so I couldn’t then i tried to convinced my self come-on Rajeev there are 10000 of scientists and they went on the moon, they must notice it and sort it out.

But unfortunately I couldn’t send the mail and nobody else cared of it, we lost shuttle and 7 people. I wrote an article about it and one leading news paper RAJASTHAN PATRIKA published it 3 weeks after on 9th march 2003 addition.

I find it interesting that you claim to have seen the foam strike the day of the launch when the hi-resolution film that actually SHOWED the foam strike wasn't even available to NASA or anyone else until the day after the launch.

As to the size of the foam strike, your estimate is way off. NASA concluded that the size of the foam block that came off the Left Bipod Foam Ramp was roughly the size of a briefcase or small suitcase. Given that the Bipod Foam Ramp itself is only 3 feet long, so your "5 by 12 feet" estimate is far from accurate.

Also... the foam strike didn't occur until 82 seconds after launch, with the orbiter about 13 miles away from the tower. You couldn't have seen the foam strike from "normal front of launch tower camera".

Now in November 09 at discovery TV NASA showed documentary series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH in episode of Columbia they said “There was only chance of saving Columbia if some body could see the felling off piece of foam and then could inform us ?! The fact is the whole world saw it including me and they mentioned it on TV news as well.

So doubtlessly NASA can cover up any shortcoming or negligence I feel so frustrated about it and some how I feel bit of responsible for it as well like if I could email them.

You may want to watch the episode of "When We Left The Earth" that talks about Columbia again. Its the 3rd episode, and near the end of it Storey Musgrave says:

"The only thing that would have saved Columbia is someone looking at the strike and saying 'something got hurt'".

So, unlike what your misquote of the episode implies, they did know that there was a strike. They knew the day after it happened. They just didn't know how damaging the strike really was, despite having a radar track of part of the wing leading edge separating from the shuttle while on orbit. The launch was filmed and the foam strike was immediately picked up on when the hi-res film was viewed the next day. One of NASA's main failures was not acting on it quick enough. They delayed with meetings and teleconferences, but came to the unfortunate decision that the shuttle was safe. "Foam shedding" and strikes had been a somewhat regular occurrence during launch but had to that point not resulted in any major damage, so they felt justified in their decision. They also felt that there was little they could do if it was discovered that there was major damage. The whole decision-making process was faulty and major changes came about as a result of this disaster.

Have you read the Columbia Accident Investigation Board's findings? I have. I downloaded, printed and read the entire thing. They were quite critical towards NASA Shuttle management team. Your accusations of NASA covering up "shortcomings or negligence" is ridiculous and shows that you have very little knowledge about what actually happened and what the investigations turned up.

Cz

[Obviousman 1,098]

Czero,

I'm not sure why you bother. If you succeed, then I give you hearty congratulations. I doubt it though. I see a pattern and I am not hopeful. Still, I hope I am proven wrong.

[MID 364]

Hi-

It seems still many people are totally positive about moon landings like I was 9 years back until one former NASA employee( I won’t disclose his name until I will be sure of safety of him and his family) told me that he is 1000% sure they never been to the moon.

Hmmm...

Another phantom NASA employee blowing the whistle.

Heard that before.

In July 2001 one person who’s job was to maintaining the cables ,he told me his job was 1969 to deploying telephone cables between Nevada desert to Houston mission control and he said what was the damn reason to put telephone lines from HMC to Nevada Desert ? All people have been wondering why first very important moon landing telecast was so bad quality and poor resolution, this is the reason because they used telephone lines to transmit TV signals from Nevada to Houston mission control that’s why quality was so poor

.

If you actually believe that, there may be no hope.

Television signals via telephone lines, eh?

Television was broadcast using radio waves, in the 54-900 Mhz range. It was not transmitted via telephone lines.

That person was as well a witness of Apollo-1 fire.

A guy who allegedly laid telephone lines for NASA (?) was also coincidentally at Pad 34 at Cape Kennedy for the Apollo 1 fire, and witnessed it?

He was a pad crew member, demoted to telephone worker two years later?

He said they took us 25 k.m. far bunkers along with 250 other technicians and an hour later brought us back saying opps it burnt! He said out of three astronauts one was against bogus landing program so they burnt three of them by breathing them pure oxygen which is flammable and making opening hatch towards in-side so once you pressurized the cabin it can not be open in case of emergency.

I think you read too many fantasies.

Oxygen is not flammable.

Apollo 1 is well understood.

What about LEM’s exhaust nozzle metal, wouldn’t it change the color or loss the polish after running rocket engine 20 to 30 minutes?

I don't know, but no Apollo LM engine operated for more than about 11 minutes (DPS). The APS fired for ~ 7 minutes.

whole LEM looks brand shining new and unused on so called moon surface(even nozzles are unused and shining)That person told me that liquid propellant rocket engines produce extreme heat that it almost can weld the metal.

You don't actually understand anything about rocket engines, do you?

The LM DPS engine bells were matte finished. They didn't shine.

Just how did you expect a brand new LM to look after being landed? Old and worn out, perhaps?

I am personally effected by NASA What happened on day of 16 Jan 2003 when I was watching tv news they showed Columbia launch (by normal front of launch tower camera) in Hindi news and I saw a huge piece of insulation foam (may be 5 by 12 feet) felling off from liquid fuel tank and did hit the left wing but in news they said “There was a problem of felling off piece of foam but launch was okay” but straight away I thought about ceramic tiles damage and scared about re-entry disaster but I thought may be there is a misunderstanding in news room so I waited for English journal but same sentence ,So I thought they are only paying attention on ascent of shuttle BUT this foam must damaged few tiles and you will need tiles during reentry and I was 100% sure of total explosion of shuttle if they come back with out home-work.

I had been trying for 4 days to email NASA but that time connection in our small town was bad so I couldn’t then i tried to convinced my self come-on Rajeev there are 10000 of scientists and they went on the moon, they must notice it and sort it out.

But unfortunately I couldn’t send the mail and nobody else cared of it, we lost shuttle and 7 people. I wrote an article about it and one leading news paper RAJASTHAN PATRIKA published it 3 weeks after on 9th march 2003 addition.

Now in November 09 at discovery TV NASA showed documentary series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH in episode of Columbia they said “There was only chance of saving Columbia if some body could see the felling off piece of foam and then could inform us ?! The fact is the whole world saw it including me and they mentioned it on TV news as well.

So doubtlessly NASA can cover up any shortcoming or negligence I feel so frustrated about it and some how I feel bit of responsible for it as well like if I could email them.

You saw no such thing on your TV. Neither did anyone else who might have been watching.

The debris in question was no where near 5 x 12 feet, and no one could see it during launch TV coverage.

We know who is responsible for the STS-107 tragedy. It isn't you.

And the fact is, once it happened, there was nothing anyone could do about it.

I have forgotten to debate about some more facts.

You're not going to have much success debating, since you aren't presenting any facts.

About Engine noise in LEM ,When moon landing advocates said that microphone was mounted in the space suit and was isolated from LEM’s` cabin atmosphere ,If you watch carefully the film you will observe that During computer overload the 1201 and 1202 alarm rang in the cabin and this could be heard loudly by same microphone so how it is possible to not hearing loud rocket engine noise in lunar module’s cabin ?

There is no film of Apollo 11's descent to the lunar surface.

The microphones were inside the sealed helmets of the crewmen. No extraneous noise was heard inside the helmets.

So I have more reasons to mistrust NASA.

What do you think about it?

I think there is some strange agenda here that I can't put my finger on.

As Lilly said, there is a thread devoted to Moon Hoax nonsense already present.

I'm suggesting you read it before posting again.

[rajeev shagun 15]

I find it interesting that you claim to have seen the foam strike the day of the launch when the hi-resolution film that actually SHOWED the foam strike wasn't even available to NASA or anyone else until the day after the launch.

As to the size of the foam strike, your estimate is way off. NASA concluded that the size of the foam block that came off the Left Bipod Foam Ramp was roughly the size of a briefcase or small suitcase. Given that the Bipod Foam Ramp itself is only 3 feet long, so your "5 by 12 feet" estimate is far from accurate.

Also... the foam strike didn't occur until 82 seconds after launch, with the orbiter about 13 miles away from the tower. You couldn't have seen the foam strike from "normal front of launch tower camera".

You may want to watch the episode of "When We Left The Earth" that talks about Columbia again. Its the 3rd episode, and near the end of it Storey Musgrave says:

"The only thing that would have saved Columbia is someone looking at the strike and saying 'something got hurt'".

So, unlike what your misquote of the episode implies, they did know that there was a strike. They knew the day after it happened. They just didn't know how damaging the strike really was, despite having a radar track of part of the wing leading edge separating from the shuttle while on orbit. The launch was filmed and the foam strike was immediately picked up on when the hi-res film was viewed the next day. One of NASA's main failures was not acting on it quick enough. They delayed with meetings and teleconferences, but came to the unfortunate decision that the shuttle was safe. "Foam shedding" and strikes had been a somewhat regular occurrence during launch but had to that point not resulted in any major damage, so they felt justified in their decision. They also felt that there was little they could do if it was discovered that there was major damage. The whole decision-making process was faulty and major changes came about as a result of this disaster.

Have you read the Columbia Accident Investigation Board's findings? I have. I downloaded, printed and read the entire thing. They were quite critical towards NASA Shuttle management team. Your accusations of NASA covering up "shortcomings or negligence" is ridiculous and shows that you have very little knowledge about what actually happened and what the investigations turned up.

Cz

Hi again-

It is very painful to know that some time people don’t even believe honest man’s truth. The whole story of Columbia from the day of launch and 16 days later re-entry explosion runs front of my eyes like it happened yesterday.

Indian media and TV took it on very priority because an Indian borne woman Kalpna Chavla was on the board of Columbia may be that made Indian national television “DOORDARSHAN” showing it on priority in Hindi news and 20 Minutes later in English news. Now after when you good people don’t even trust me, I am regretting That why didn’t I take the still picture of that frame?( I didn’t have video camera that time so only option was still camera) what actually happened… as soon as i heard on TV that there was a bit problem during the launch of Columbia which was taking Kalpna Chavla (it is a big name in India like nobody even mentions 6 other astronauts name) to the space, They clearly said on news that “piece of insulation foam came off but there was no harm to the shuttle’s ascent and this made me very worried about importance of tiles during re-entry but if they would had said “they will perform EVA after docking with ISS and check if there is any harm to the one or some tiles” then I would be relaxed and thought “alright they acknowledged it” but in both Hindi and English news the story was dangerously same this made me very unrest that I didn’t even thought to take picture and top of it I did not even know that in future this common footage will be so rare at least NASA do not show it at all.

The size of foam can be the meter of debate (and the time and date I could see it on TV can be differ caused by time difference between INDIA and USA) because all I and all other Indians who ever has bit interest in this, could see That it was very normal Engle TV camera which shows you always back of the shuttle and liquid fuel tank and two booster rockets. I still try to remember that big tall piece of foam I compared it to the huge liquid oxygen and hydrogen fuel tank and that was looked to me even bigger then human height and it was rolling (may be 2-3 revolutions a second) from right to left or anti clockwise and very quickly passed under the left wing of shuttle (left wing when you watch the shuttle standing upright and you can not see the bottom of shuttle)when it passed under the left wing just before that I could see it was having curved shape may be due to shape of tank where it was mounted before. I am 100% sure it was longer piece then a square piece. That time I decided to email NASA because in 2003 we didn’t have many news channels if there would be so many news channels as many as we got now then I could of thought to call these channels and let convey my message to Kalpna Chavla’s parents so they can convey it to her. I knew the day after the explosion by news paper that the safety engineer of Cape launch tower Mr Robert Duarte took this piece of foam seriously and emailed many time to Houston mission control to take immediate action but they did not care of it but he did not think of total explosion which I was 100% sure.I still can not escape from my responsibilities that I knew shuttle and 7 precious lifes was going to finish and still I acted lazily may be because I over trusted NASA’s team.i kept telling my self come on Rajeev don’t bother they will sort it out.

I wonder if Indian national TV “Dordarshan” still keeps that night’s news telecast footage? All the evidence I have that I knew that Columbia is going to explode if they come back with out performing Home work in the low orbit, is the article I wrote right after explosion and published in very choosy and very strict excellent reputation news paper called ‘Rajasthan Patrika’s 9th march 2003 Sunday addition ( I have sent you the scanned copy of that article I wish if you can read Hindi because if I translate it in English you won’t believe me will you?) I send it again to you and same time try to contact DOORDARSHAN if they can provide that footage.Have you watched the launch of Columbia that same day on TV if you have then you might have seen that piece of foam.

Now we talk about NASA’s man, I intentionally kept detail hidden because of his and his family’s safety. During 1967 when this Apollo-1 fire incident took place, he was deployed at cap and his job was to change cables on launch pad many of you don’t even know that during rocket launch the rocket’s nozzles exhaust very hot gases and fire burns the cables on launch tower so you have to change the cables after every launch. The further story of this incident has already sent to you. Yaah… during 1969 he has been deployed to put these telephone lines between Nevada and HMC so he was kind of transferred to Nevada-Houston telephone lines site.

About Apollo-1 pure oxygen pressurized cabin-

about pure oxygen flammability, if there is Nickel metal in contact then it is flammable and obviously there was metal Nickel in the capsule of Apollo-1.

The NASA’s series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH on discovery TV, when I could watch it, it was translated in Hindi by discovery TV and it exactly sounds what I wrote to you previously( I made the video of TV screen and I have all important footage of this series.)when I heard they are going to telecast such a series I prepared my self for Columbia disaster, I would like to see if arrogant NASA apologize for that negligence but stead of that they hid the normal footage on series and acted like nobody could see the Piece of foam.

If they are honest why they need to hide this footage though I hope to find it sooner or later from DOORDARSHAN TV.

I think there is a serious problem is in side NASA if least important man Rajeev could see the problem straight away and they can’t then NASA has to seriously review their management and then go for further space programs.

About what can be done during 16 days of period when Columbia had been docking with ISS, if astronauts could perform extra vehicular activities and check what no. of tiles were missing or damaged( there are 30000 tiles stuck under the belly and wings of shuttle and they are different to each other in shape and size) so they could tell mission control the number of tiles they needed, the Russian supplies unmanned craft Progress, which was launched day after of shuttle disaster on 2nd Feb.,could have launched before at bring spare tiles to Columbia.

There is even very spatial adhesive always on the shuttle which can be used to make a shift filling of gapes which is made by loss of tiles.

Even shuttle could be left docking with ISS and Astronauts could be brought by Russian Soyuz space craft like they did after Columbia disaster.After this shuttle crash they had to bring rest of astronauts those were left on International space station back to earth by Soyuz space craft

About Boosting TV signals via telephone lines ,except only when Neil has to put his foot on moon and him and Buzz’s activities every thing else was on good resolution color TV signals via radio waves but that most important event was on 320 lines a frame and only 10 frames per seconds and it was projected on 10 inches monitor and then they focus vidicon camera on it and showed the images on 30 frames/sec. and 525 lines/frame slandered TV so that kind of 1950’s TV quality signals could be boosted by telephone lines.

About Lunar module exhaust nozzles, yes they weren’t made by shiny metal but what I meant that once you run the rocket engine no Metter where it is solid motor or liquid motor the nozzle looks used due to extreme heat of exhaust gases and yes I know bit about rocket engines because I do make solid motor rockets.

What do you think ?

Edited June 14, 2010 by Waspie_Dwarf

[Obviousman 1,098]

It is very painful to know that some time people don’t even believe honest man’s truth.

That would be because some people lie. It is better to rely on empirical data, which does not depend on character or truthfulness.

They clearly said on news that “piece of insulation foam came off but there was no harm to the shuttle’s ascent and this made me very worried about importance of tiles during re-entry but if they would had said “they will perform EVA after docking with ISS and check if there is any harm to the one or some tiles” then I would be relaxed and thought “alright they acknowledged it” but in both Hindi and English news the story was dangerously same this made me very unrest that I didn’t even thought to take picture and top of it I did not even know that in future this common footage will be so rare at least NASA do not show it at all.

EVAs are not to be taken lightly, and NASA didn't think there was a problem. they were wrong, and they were highly criticised for this in the accident report.

The size of foam can be the meter of debate (and the time and date I could see it on TV can be differ caused by time difference between INDIA and USA) because all I and all other Indians who ever has bit interest in this, could see That it was very normal Engle TV camera which shows you always back of the shuttle and liquid fuel tank and two booster rockets.

The size is quite clear from the launch data analysis videos.

I still try to remember that big tall piece of foam I compared it to the huge liquid oxygen and hydrogen fuel tank and that was looked to me even bigger then human height and it was rolling (may be 2-3 revolutions a second) from right to left or anti clockwise and very quickly passed under the left wing of shuttle (left wing when you watch the shuttle standing upright and you can not see the bottom of shuttle)when it passed under the left wing just before that I could see it was having curved shape may be due to shape of tank where it was mounted before.

Without high speed cameras, how could you have ascertained this? Normal film is at about 24 frames per second. television doesn't really allow for this frame rate to be properly seen.

I am 100% sure it was longer piece then a square piece. That time I decided to email NASA because in 2003

Coulkd we see proof you sent the e-mail? Did NASA acknowledge your e-mail?

...we didn’t have many news channels if there would be so many news channels as many as we got now then I could of thought to call these channels and let convey my message to Kalpna Chavla’s parents so they can convey it to her. I knew the day after the explosion by news paper that the safety engineer of Cape launch tower Mr Robert Duarte took this piece of foam seriously and emailed many time to Houston mission control to take immediate action but they did not care of it but he did not think of total explosion which I was 100% sure.I still can not escape from my responsibilities that I knew shuttle and 7 precious lifes was going to finish and still I acted lazily may be because I over trusted NASA’s team.i kept telling my self come on Rajeev don’t bother they will sort it out.

See my previous response regarding NASA's actions.

I wonder if Indian national TV “Dordarshan” still keeps that night’s news telecast footage? All the evidence I have that I knew that Columbia is going to explode if they come back with out performing Home work in the low orbit, is the article I wrote right after explosion and published in very choosy and very strict excellent reputation news paper called ‘Rajasthan Patrika’s 9th march 2003 Sunday addition ( I have sent you the scanned copy of that article I wish if you can read Hindi because if I translate it in English you won’t believe me will you?) I send it again to you and same time try to contact DOORDARSHAN if they can provide that footage.Have you watched the launch of Columbia that same day on TV if you have then you might have seen that piece of foam.

I'd like to see the newspaper report and get someone to independently verify it. people in the past have claims things which were not true (e.g. the coke bottle claim).

Edited June 14, 2010 by Obviousman

[Obviousman 1,098]

Now we talk about NASA’s man, I intentionally kept detail hidden because of his and his family’s safety. During 1967 when this Apollo-1 fire incident took place, he was deployed at cap and his job was to change cables on launch pad many of you don’t even know that during rocket launch the rocket’s nozzles exhaust very hot gases and fire burns the cables on launch tower so you have to change the cables after every launch. The further story of this incident has already sent to you. Yaah… during 1969 he has been deployed to put these telephone lines between Nevada and HMC so he was kind of transferred to Nevada-Houston telephone lines site.

I have spoken extensively with a person who was there at the time, who fought the fire, etc.

About Apollo-1 pure oxygen pressurized cabin-about pure oxygen flammability, if there is Nickel metal in contact then it is flammable and obviously there was metal Nickel in the capsule of Apollo-1.

The details of the fire are covered in the AS204 report.

The NASA’s series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH on discovery TV, when I could watch it, it was translated in Hindi by discovery TV and it exactly sounds what I wrote to you previously( I made the video of TV screen and I have all important footage of this series.)when I heard they are going to telecast such a series I prepared my self for Columbia disaster, I would like to see if arrogant NASA apologize for that negligence but stead of that they hid the normal footage on series and acted like nobody could see the Piece of foam.

They didn't hide anything. I have that series on DVD, recorded from the Discovery Channel.

If they are honest why they need to hide this footage though I hope to find it sooner or later from DOORDARSHAN TV.

I think there is a serious problem is in side NASA if least important man Rajeev could see the problem straight away and they can’t then NASA has to seriously review their management and then go for further space programs.

No footage was hidden, per se. There was footage taken with classified imagery cameras, but that was later released. It was made available to NASA officials at the time.

About what can be done during 16 days of period when Columbia had been docking with ISS, if astronauts could perform extra vehicular activities and check what no. of tiles were missing or damaged( there are 30000 tiles stuck under the belly and wings of shuttle and they are different to each other in shape and size) so they could tell mission control the number of tiles they needed, the Russian supplies unmanned craft Progress, which was launched day after of shuttle disaster on 2nd Feb.,could have launched before at bring spare tiles to Columbia.

COLUMBIA was never docked with the ISS on that mission, nor did it have the RCS fuel to do so.

There is even very spatial adhesive always on the shuttle which can be used to make a shift filling of gapes which is made by loss of tiles.

Even shuttle could be left docking with ISS and Astronauts could be brought by Russian Soyuz space craft like they did after Columbia disaster.After this shuttle crash they had to bring rest of astronauts those were left on International space station back to earth by Soyuz space craft

Even if the problem had been discovered, rescue was impossible. They could not reach the ISS. PROGRESS could not dock with the Shuttle. It is doubtful that a PROGRESS craft could have been sent to them. SOYUZ only carries three people, so that option was also out.

About Boosting TV signals via telephone lines ,except only when Neil has to put his foot on moon and him and Buzz’s activities every thing else was on good resolution color TV signals via radio waves but that most important event was on 320 lines a frame and only 10 frames per seconds and it was projected on 10 inches monitor and then they focus vidicon camera on it and showed the images on 30 frames/sec. and 525 lines/frame slandered TV so that kind of 1950’s TV quality signals could be boosted by telephone lines.

It was B&W TV, the SSTV.

About Lunar module exhaust nozzles, yes they weren’t made by shiny metal but what I meant that once you run the rocket engine no Metter where it is solid motor or liquid motor the nozzle looks used due to extreme heat of exhaust gases and yes I know bit about rocket engines because I do make solid motor rockets.

Neither was the descent engine claimed to be shiny.

[mrbusdriver 383]

http://www.nasa.gov/columbia/home/CAIB_Vol1.html

Here is a copy of the Columbia accident report.

Indeed, aside from the limited capability of ground based cameras, there was no way for the shuttle crew, or NASA, to get a look at the outside of Columbia during it's mission. It had no RMS (the arm with the camera), and it was certainly never near the ISS, nor could it have gotten there, it was in a completely different orbit and altitude. Your lack of basic knowledge about the shuttle, and this particular flight, makes us question your claim here.

[MID 364]

Hi again-

It is very painful to know that some time people don’t even believe honest man’s truth. The whole story of Columbia from the day of launch and 16 days later re-entry explosion runs front of my eyes like it happened yesterday.

Indian media and TV took it on very priority because an Indian borne woman Kalpna Chavla was on the board of Columbia may be that made Indian national television “DOORDARSHAN” showing it on priority in Hindi news and 20 Minutes later in English news. Now after when you good people don’t even trust me, I am regretting That why didn’t I take the still picture of that frame?( I didn’t have video camera that time so only option was still camera) what actually happened… as soon as i heard on TV that there was a bit problem during the launch of Columbia which was taking Kalpna Chavla (it is a big name in India like nobody even mentions 6 other astronauts name) to the space, They clearly said on news that “piece of insulation foam came off but there was no harm to the shuttle’s ascent and this made me very worried about importance of tiles during re-entry but if they would had said “they will perform EVA after docking with ISS and check if there is any harm to the one or some tiles” then I would be relaxed and thought “alright they acknowledged it” but in both Hindi and English news the story was dangerously same this made me very unrest that I didn’t even thought to take picture and top of it I did not even know that in future this common footage will be so rare at least NASA do not show it at all.

The size of foam can be the meter of debate (and the time and date I could see it on TV can be differ caused by time difference between INDIA and USA) because all I and all other Indians who ever has bit interest in this, could see That it was very normal Engle TV camera which shows you always back of the shuttle and liquid fuel tank and two booster rockets. I still try to remember that big tall piece of foam I compared it to the huge liquid oxygen and hydrogen fuel tank and that was looked to me even bigger then human height and it was rolling (may be 2-3 revolutions a second) from right to left or anti clockwise and very quickly passed under the left wing of shuttle (left wing when you watch the shuttle standing upright and you can not see the bottom of shuttle)when it passed under the left wing just before that I could see it was having curved shape may be due to shape of tank where it was mounted before. I am 100% sure it was longer piece then a square piece. That time I decided to email NASA because in 2003 we didn’t have many news channels if there would be so many news channels as many as we got now then I could of thought to call these channels and let convey my message to Kalpna Chavla’s parents so they can convey it to her. I knew the day after the explosion by news paper that the safety engineer of Cape launch tower Mr Robert Duarte took this piece of foam seriously and emailed many time to Houston mission control to take immediate action but they did not care of it but he did not think of total explosion which I was 100% sure.I still can not escape from my responsibilities that I knew shuttle and 7 precious lifes was going to finish and still I acted lazily may be because I over trusted NASA’s team.i kept telling my self come on Rajeev don’t bother they will sort it out.

I wonder if Indian national TV “Dordarshan” still keeps that night’s news telecast footage? All the evidence I have that I knew that Columbia is going to explode if they come back with out performing Home work in the low orbit, is the article I wrote right after explosion and published in very choosy and very strict excellent reputation news paper called ‘Rajasthan Patrika’s 9th march 2003 Sunday addition ( I have sent you the scanned copy of that article I wish if you can read Hindi because if I translate it in English you won’t believe me will you?) I send it again to you and same time try to contact DOORDARSHAN if they can provide that footage.Have you watched the launch of Columbia that same day on TV if you have then you might have seen that piece of foam.

You say you saw something at liftoff.

Nothing coming off at liftoff could've harmed the orbiter. There is a zone in which debris shedding can have impact on the orbiter structures. Liftoff is not in that zone.

The debris coming off of the vehicle which impacted the wing of Columbia occurred at ~ 1:25 into ascent, in that critical zone where air velocty would impart high energy to an impacting particle.

We know what happened. In painful detail.

I am very well aware that you are concerned and pained about this because there was an Indian born astronaut on board in Kalpana Chawla. I smelled a nationalistic impulse in your OP.

I would like to point out to you that she was an American citizen, not an Indian citicen, and that there were 6 other human beings aboard that flight as well.

We were concerned equally with all of them, and we lost 14 of them during the Shuttle program.

There is no national agenda here...it's a matter of losing talented, and wonderfully special human beings. Anyone who's been involved appreciates that completely.

About Apollo-1 pure oxygen pressurized cabin-

about pure oxygen flammability, if there is Nickel metal in contact then it is flammable and obviously there was metal Nickel in the capsule of Apollo-1.

No...nickel burns in oxygen, as do many of the substances that were present in the Apollo 1 spacecraft.

Please tell me where nickel was in that spacecraft and what it has to do with anything.

The NASA’s series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH on discovery TV, when I could watch it, it was translated in Hindi by discovery TV and it exactly sounds what I wrote to you previously( I made the video of TV screen and I have all important footage of this series.)when I heard they are going to telecast such a series I prepared my self for Columbia disaster, I would like to see if arrogant NASA apologize for that negligence but stead of that they hid the normal footage on series and acted like nobody could see the Piece of foam.

If they are honest why they need to hide this footage though I hope to find it sooner or later from DOORDARSHAN TV.

I think there is a serious problem is in side NASA if least important man Rajeev could see the problem straight away and they can’t then NASA has to seriously review their management and then go for further space programs.

NASA had quite enough of trouble between 1986 and 2003. Every thing was exposed for what it was.

Your pices of foam at launch were not contributory, if they existed at all, to the STS-107 disaster.

About what can be done during 16 days of period when Columbia had been docking with ISS, if astronauts could perform extra vehicular activities and check what no. of tiles were missing or damaged( there are 30000 tiles stuck under the belly and wings of shuttle and they are different to each other in shape and size) so they could tell mission control the number of tiles they needed, the Russian supplies unmanned craft Progress, which was launched day after of shuttle disaster on 2nd Feb.,could have launched before at bring spare tiles to Columbia.

There is even very spatial adhesive always on the shuttle which can be used to make a shift filling of gapes which is made by loss of tiles.

Even shuttle could be left docking with ISS and Astronauts could be brought by Russian Soyuz space craft like they did after Columbia disaster.After this shuttle crash they had to bring rest of astronauts those were left on International space station back to earth by Soyuz space craft

You are truly not aware of the situation, are you?

STS-107 was launched at an orbital inclination of 39 degrees. No possibility of rendezvousing with the ISS. It did not go to the ISS. You are incorrect in your assumption about this mission. There were no provisions for tile repair (that wasn't developed until return to flight), no EVA, and no one was thinking about it.

STS-107 carried the SPACEHAB Double Module. There was no EVA airlock aboard.

About Boosting TV signals via telephone lines ,except only when Neil has to put his foot on moon and him and Buzz’s activities every thing else was on good resolution color TV signals via radio waves but that most important event was on 320 lines a frame and only 10 frames per seconds and it was projected on 10 inches monitor and then they focus vidicon camera on it and showed the images on 30 frames/sec. and 525 lines/frame slandered TV so that kind of 1950’s TV quality signals could be boosted by telephone lines.

It was 1969 TV signals, and telephone lines had nothing to do with converting it and broadcasting it.

About Lunar module exhaust nozzles, yes they weren’t made by shiny metal but what I meant that once you run the rocket engine no Metter where it is solid motor or liquid motor the nozzle looks used due to extreme heat of exhaust gases and yes I know bit about rocket engines because I do make solid motor rockets.

I know a little bit about rocket engines, and solid motors too.

Solid motors have no relation to a Aerozine 50/N₂O₂ throttleable hypergolic engine.

The LM DPS engine was cooled by quartz phenolic chamber ablation and a niobium nozzle radiator which never allowed nozzle temperatures to get super hot (the titaium combustion chamber casing remained at or below 800 degrees F). A solid model rocket motor chars, and leaves lots of residue. It's not quite so sophisticated a device as an engine...

Your understanding of the complexities of these things is a little slim.

The nozzles on the LM DPS engined looked just fine because they were designed to look fine after their 11-12 minutes of operating life. However, if you looked up and inside one...which of course no one ever has, you'd see evidence of operation to a degree in the cumbustion chamber.

[MID 364]

I'm not really sure what your point is in this thread.

You make a huge emphasis on STS-107, which is a well understood situation that has been fixed.

You also make a few references to Apollo technology that you don't understand...and I get the feeling you're claiming that somehow, there was a conspiracy and cover-up in the STS-107 case, and in the Apollo case.

There wasn't any such thing in either case.

You simply do not understand what happened to STS-107, and I have the feeling your understanding of Apollo is just as rudimentary.

Perhaps you should think about the fact that Dr. Chawla (PhD, Eng (Aerospace, U. of Co., 1988)) would be frowning on you for even suggesting such a thing...because she was fully aware that Apollo happened as advertised, and she wanted to be a part of that, God bless her...

[Obviousman 1,098]

I'm developing the impression that their point is to demonstrate their ignorance in this matter.

[rajeev shagun 15]

Hi again 3rd time-

I will never use the word “your knowledge is slim or you do not understand Apollo technology” I am here to debate gently not to prove that I know every thing, I would like to learn all my life.

Without high speed cameras how could I ascertained this piece of foam because

Please don’t forget that like all other liquid propulsion (though there were 2 solid boosters mounted on the tank of shuttle and give a big part of thrust) system Columbia or other shuttles are very slow in the beginning of lift off and roughly next 10-20 seconds, I guess that was the reason why me or anybody else could see it very clearly.

I really surprise that you haven’t seen that footage may be that day of launch or afterwards. When I started this discussion I never ever imagine that people will even question me about how could I see that piece of foam I thought if I saw it in the news then every body else might have seen it in the news(at least people who has a tiny bit interest in rocket flights) what I imagined that people will say that I didn’t know that it was going to explode. One English friend of mine who lives in Ireland said that may be thousands of people had seen that and may be even thought about reentry disaster, may be what he said wasn’t true.

I think you haven’t read my first letter where I clearly said that I had been trying to email NASA but couldn’t send it due to bad connectivity for 4 days in the small town. That’s why I kept condemning my self that I should had try even after 4 days to email them and I should not had over trusted NASA that there are 10000 scientists they will sort it out.

I have attached the scanned copy of that article which was published in Indian nation level news paper RAJASTHAN PATRIKA (or only PATRIKA ) 9th march 2003 Sunday’s addition with my first letter. If you want I can attach it to you again.

I think and guess almost every country has this mentality that their own people and own things are more important then others so doubtlessly in India media behaves no different

They give priority to things in which any Indian thread are linking what I mean anybody who achieves a bit in abroad and has Indian link then on top priority and I hate this mentality I always have been thinking and acting globally that’s why I am debating with you because humans are humans to me no matter which nationality they are.

You said they did not hide anything in that series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH to me they hide most important footage which I was expecting to watch third time, footage

In which you see Columbia ascending upright and you can see booth solid boosters and belly of shuttle is invisible all you see shuttles back. It is as well possible that may be that footage was shot by media’s camera or even Indian national TV DOORDARSHAN sends their on reporters with really heavy cameras with good resolution and very high power zooms and on important event like they did on the occasion of sending first Indian man to the orbit by USSR by help of SOYUZ-t space craft from Bikanour some time in 1985.

But even this footage can be from DOORDARSHAN’s camera still the TV crew I can not see them making them self this comment”there was a bit problem of coming off the insulation foam from shuttle’s tank but Columbia’s ascend was okay”.

The report of Apollo-1 fire called AS204 does it has to do something with Baron’s missing report?

When some people say that foam shedding was a no problem in lift off zone that’s exactly NASA thought and you see the result in the form of Columbia disaster We all have to be more practical then just theorist who just relied on data and static.

I never meant that Nickel burns it self with oxygen what I said that oxygen can be flammable if there is Nickel metal in contact.

About STS-107 had a rendezvous with International S.S. or this flight docked with ISS or not ,I read in the news paper the day or two days before the launch of STS-107 that as Indians only talk about Calpna chavla ,she is going to the space again and then their Columbia will dock with ISS and they will spend next 16 days on ISS…this gave me the impression that “they have to sort it out the problem in next 16 days on ISS…I have been checking all cuttings of news paper (almost entire week after disaster) they talked about Columbia and ISS and one American and 2 Russian astronauts on the ISS all together in same news.

I checked the video of series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH and same thing –they showed an ISSs American astronaut Can is coming out of the docking tunnel and keep showing Columbia and ISS astronauts one after other…so until I am not sure I won’t debate about it.

Yes you can not really compare solid motor and liquid motor rocket.

Yes i have read that Columbia Crash investigation report in the news paper.

I do not claim that there was a conspiracy involved in STS-107 but it was certainly some level of negligence involved.

Yehh…There is certainly footage available of Eagle’s in-side cabin activities during its power descent to so called moon surface and it was shot on celluloid film may be 16m.m.and this film was the part of documentary dvd which was released on 40th anniversary of moon landing by BBC and there is another documentary of the first man flight on the air 1903 write brothers story as well in to this same DVD. I have got that DVD.

What about The set of push-jet thruster those control the pitch and roll of Eagle and other lunar modules, if you watch carefully in side nozzles do you see any sign of exhaust gases and heat ?please watch carefully the downward thruster there is a spatial strip or plate attached to the eagle’s airframe or rod in order to avoid harming the eagle’s(I have attached the picture) airframe from thrusters nozzles exhaust-do you see any sign of flame or heat on it ?

What do you think about it ?

[Obviousman 1,098]

I am here to debate gently not to prove that I know every thing, I would like to learn all my life.

Then I'll be glad to help.

Please don’t forget that like all other liquid propulsion (though there were 2 solid boosters mounted on the tank of shuttle and give a big part of thrust) system Columbia or other shuttles are very slow in the beginning of lift off and roughly next 10-20 seconds, I guess that was the reason why me or anybody else could see it very clearly.

This is why I doubt you. The strike occurred at 82 seconds after launch, when COLUMBIA was about 66,000 feet in altitude and traveling at about Mach 2+.

There was no way you could have seen it.

The report of Apollo-1 fire called AS204 does it has to do something with Baron’s missing report?

Thomas Baron made his statement on record to the Review Board. His report was submitted. It was considered and although there were some valid claims, it was generally found to be baseless with respect to deliberate coverups.

About STS-107 had a rendezvous with International S.S. or this flight docked with ISS or not ,I read in the news paper the day or two days before the launch of STS-107 that as Indians only talk about Calpna chavla ,she is going to the space again and then their Columbia will dock with ISS and they will spend next 16 days on ISS…this gave me the impression that “they have to sort it out the problem in next 16 days on ISS…I have been checking all cuttings of news paper (almost entire week after disaster) they talked about Columbia and ISS and one American and 2 Russian astronauts on the ISS all together in same news.

Then we have shown your source to be wrong. What does that say about your conclusions based on it?

[rajeev shagun 15]

hi- There is no way i and other people could had seen that long piece of foam on that height.i have been checking the Footage (from series When we left the earth)though they used to show(or hide)camera footage which was mounted under the right wing probably to avoid showing us direct huge strike of foam BUT right after shuttle's lifting off 14-15 later you see a big jerk and you even hear the sound of strong strike to the one of the wing.i guess that was the time when that happened.it is as well possible that there were more then one piece of foam came off.because the piece of foam showed here in India was much bigger then the piece of foam they show by their high speed cameras. And this is developing misunderstanding among us.Do you have The footage of NASA series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH ?

Then I'll be glad to help.

This is why I doubt you. The strike occurred at 82 seconds after launch, when COLUMBIA was about 66,000 feet in altitude and traveling at about Mach 2+.

There was no way you could have seen it.

Thomas Baron made his statement on record to the Review Board. His report was submitted. It was considered and although there were some valid claims, it was generally found to be baseless with respect to deliberate coverups.

Then we have shown your source to be wrong. What does that say about your conclusions based on it?

[rajeev shagun 15]

hi- There is no way i and other people could had seen that long piece of foam on that height.i have been checking the Footage (from series When we left the earth)though they used to show(or hide)camera footage which was mounted under the right wing probably to avoid showing us direct huge strike of foam BUT right after shuttle's lifting off 14-15 later you see a big jerk and you even hear the sound of strong strike to the one of the wing.i guess that was the time when that happened.it is as well possible that there were more then one piece of foam came off.because the piece of foam showed here in India was much bigger then the piece of foam they show by their high speed cameras. And this is developing misunderstanding among us.Do you have The footage of NASA series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH ?

Then I'll be glad to help.

This is why I doubt you. The strike occurred at 82 seconds after launch, when COLUMBIA was about 66,000 feet in altitude and traveling at about Mach 2+.

There was no way you could have seen it.

Thomas Baron made his statement on record to the Review Board. His report was submitted. It was considered and although there were some valid claims, it was generally found to be baseless with respect to deliberate coverups.

Then we have shown your source to be wrong. What does that say about your conclusions based on it?

[Obviousman 1,098]

hi- There is no way i and other people could had seen that long piece of foam on that height.

But you said:

I am personally effected by NASA What happened on day of 16 Jan 2003 when I was watching tv news they showed Columbia launch (by normal front of launch tower camera) in Hindi news and I saw a huge piece of insulation foam (may be 5 by 12 feet) felling off from liquid fuel tank and did hit the left wing but in news they said “There was a problem of felling off piece of foam but launch was okay” but straight away I thought about ceramic tiles damage and scared about re-entry disaster but I thought may be there is a misunderstanding in news room so I waited for English journal but same sentence ,So I thought they are only paying attention on ascent of shuttle BUT this foam must damaged few tiles and you will need tiles during reentry and I was 100% sure of total explosion of shuttle if they come back with out home-work.

(My bolding)

I am sorry but I doubt what you say is true. So far everything either points to ignorance or fabrication.

[mrbusdriver 383]

hi- There is no way i and other people could had seen that long piece of foam on that height.i have been checking the Footage (from series When we left the earth)though they used to show(or hide)camera footage which was mounted under the right wing probably to avoid showing us direct huge strike of foam BUT right after shuttle's lifting off 14-15 later you see a big jerk and you even hear the sound of strong strike to the one of the wing.i guess that was the time when that happened.it is as well possible that there were more then one piece of foam came off.because the piece of foam showed here in India was much bigger then the piece of foam they show by their high speed cameras. And this is developing misunderstanding among us.Do you have The footage of NASA series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH ?

If I'm not mistaken, the footage you speak of is from cameras mounted on the ET and the SRBs, and these cameras were not used until after the Columbia accident. (specifically, they were mounted to watch the foam shedding for later analysis and focused inspection using the new OBSS, also introduced after Columbia.)

So any external mounted camera views you see are post-Columbia...

[flyingswan 820]

If I'm not mistaken, the footage you speak of is from cameras mounted on the ET and the SRBs, and these cameras were not used until after the Columbia accident. (specifically, they were mounted to watch the foam shedding for later analysis and focused inspection using the new OBSS, also introduced after Columbia.)

So any external mounted camera views you see are post-Columbia...

Afraid you are mistaken, the external cameras first flew on STS-112 in October 2002, a few months before Columbia.

[Agent X 2]

They too need to prove their claims with hard evidence.

[Hazzard 1,518]

I know that debating some of these claims can be tedious and annoying. But please do continue. If not for the concpiracy believers, then do it for the rest of us that are truly interested in this type of thing.

Thanks again for telling us the way it is.

[digitalartist 5]

Hi again-

It is very painful to know that some time people don’t even believe honest man’s truth. The whole story of Columbia from the day of launch and 16 days later re-entry explosion runs front of my eyes like it happened yesterday.

It is sad that some times people don't accept factual information because it conflicts with their carefully sustained belief.

[MID 364]

Without high speed cameras how could I ascertained this piece of foam because

Please don’t forget that like all other liquid propulsion (though there were 2 solid boosters mounted on the tank of shuttle and give a big part of thrust) system Columbia or other shuttles are very slow in the beginning of lift off and roughly next 10-20 seconds, I guess that was the reason why me or anybody else could see it very clearly.

Actually, a Shuttle is the most rapid ascent of any manned rocket we've ever launched. It's going over 100 MPH in a matter of a few seconds, and within 20 seconds they are at a significant fraction of 1 Mach. The thing hauls the mail...

I really surprise that you haven’t seen that footage may be that day of launch or afterwards.

I have seen every piece of launch footage of STS-107. A dozen or more camera views, repeatedly, in excruciating detail.

None of it shows a massive slab of something striking the orbiter at any time...let alone in the seconds after launch.

You said they did not hide anything in that series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH to me they hide most important footage which I was expecting to watch third time, footage

In which you see Columbia ascending upright and you can see booth solid boosters and belly of shuttle is invisible all you see shuttles back.

That is a standard KSC camera view, which is used by most media outlets, and which is available anywhere today to look at over and over. There's nothing there.

It is as well possible that may be that footage was shot by media’s camera or even Indian national TV DOORDARSHAN sends their on reporters with really heavy cameras with good resolution and very high power zooms and on important event like they did on the occasion of sending first Indian man to the orbit by USSR by help of SOYUZ-t space craft from Bikanour some time in 1985.

But even this footage can be from DOORDARSHAN’s camera still the TV crew I can not see them making them self this comment”there was a bit problem of coming off the insulation foam from shuttle’s tank but Columbia’s ascend was okay”.

The media is known for spouing off innanities concerning spaceflight.

If you heard that, you heard something unfortunately typical.

The report of Apollo-1 fire called AS204 does it has to do something with Baron’s missing report?

No.

Baron's report is not missing.

What does this have to do with anything?

When some people say that foam shedding was a no problem in lift off zone that’s exactly NASA thought and you see the result in the form of Columbia disaster We all have to be more practical then just theorist who just relied on data and static.

Engineers are not theorists.

They are pragmatic realists, and they are the "some people" whose field of expertise qualifies them to speak to these matters.

The disaster's root cause was a 1.7 lb piece of foam impacting the left wing's leading edge during the danger zone of ascent, at a relative velocity of ~ 800 FPS. No one saw it happen, and no one saw it at all until engineering analysis of long range imaging picked it up...and even then, it wasn't fully understood what damage the thing did.

I never meant that Nickel burns it self with oxygen what I said that oxygen can be flammable if there is Nickel metal in contact.

Oxygen cannot be flammable. Nickel can, paper can, almost anything can in the presence of high pressure O₂.

About STS-107 had a rendezvous with International S.S. or this flight docked with ISS or not ,I read in the news paper the day or two days before the launch of STS-107 that as Indians only talk about Calpna chavla ,she is going to the space again and then their Columbia will dock with ISS and they will spend next 16 days on ISS…this gave me the impression that “they have to sort it out the problem in next 16 days on ISS…I have been checking all cuttings of news paper (almost entire week after disaster) they talked about Columbia and ISS and one American and 2 Russian astronauts on the ISS all together in same news.

I checked the video of series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH and same thing –they showed an ISSs American astronaut Can is coming out of the docking tunnel and keep showing Columbia and ISS astronauts one after other…so until I am not sure I won’t debate about it.

OK, you're getting your information from media outlets. I think I understand where you're coming from.

They're wrong. I think this whole thing about STS-107 is based upon your media outlets and the impressions they give you.

The media is largely ignorant regarding the technical matters of spaceflight, and they often make egregious mistakes in reporting things before understanding them fully.

That appears to be your problem here.

Yes you can not really compare solid motor and liquid motor rocket.

Who did that? And, what's the relevance?

Yes i have read that Columbia Crash investigation report in the news paper.

No you didn't. Nor did anyone else.

Yehh…There is certainly footage available of Eagle’s in-side cabin activities during its power descent to so called moon surface and it was shot on celluloid film may be 16m.m.and this film was the part of documentary dvd which was released on 40th anniversary of moon landing by BBC and there is another documentary of the first man flight on the air 1903 write brothers story as well in to this same DVD. I have got that DVD.

Again...you trust too much media and understand too little.

There was NO FOOTAGE TAKEN INSIDE EAGLE, nor any LM during powered descent. There was 16mm film taken of the outside during landing approach by a small DAC mounted inside the starboard window looking down toward the base of the LM.

What about The set of push-jet thruster those control the pitch and roll of Eagle and other lunar modules, if you watch carefully in side nozzles do you see any sign of exhaust gases and heat ?please watch carefully the downward thruster there is a spatial strip or plate attached to the eagle’s airframe or rod in order to avoid harming the eagle’s(I have attached the picture) airframe from thrusters nozzles exhaust-do you see any sign of flame or heat on it ?

They're called RCS jets and plume deflectors, which, like the engine bells, are designed not to be affected by thermal energy, and to deflect the largely invisible plume away from LM structures. Engines operating in vacuum leave little or no visible plume when they operate. That doesn't mean they're not there, and they can't damage delicate, unprotected structures.

Is there a reason for your going all over the place and bringing up all these little picayune details?

What are you getting at here...?

[MID 364]

Afraid you are mistaken, the external cameras first flew on STS-112 in October 2002, a few months before Columbia.

You're right Swanny. 112 debuted the ET camera.

However, I don't think it was aboard another Shuttle until return to flight on 114.

[MID 364]

hi- There is no way i and other people could had seen that long piece of foam on that height.

You're right, and no one did.

i have been checking the Footage (from series When we left the earth)though they used to show(or hide)camera footage which was mounted under the right wing probably to avoid showing us direct huge strike of foam BUT right after shuttle's lifting off 14-15 later you see a big jerk and you even hear the sound of strong strike to the one of the wing.i guess that was the time when that happened.it is as well possible that there were more then one piece of foam came off.because the piece of foam showed here in India was much bigger then the piece of foam they show by their high speed cameras. And this is developing misunderstanding among us.Do you have The footage of NASA series WHEN WE LEFT THE EARTH ?

I think you're referring to a dramatization...

There was no under the wing camera on 107 (and there still isn't...you'd be referring to the forward looking SRM camera which views the underside of the wing, but that camera wasn't around for 107).

Further, no one ever heard this strike either. That would have been impossible, even through structural transmission. There was alot of cabin vibration going on with the two SRMs still belching a couple million pounds of thrust out, and the crew was on COMM caps, inside a sealed suit. Nothing recorded any sound of the impact that occurred on 107...

When We Left The Earth was a Discovery Channel presentation, not a NASA series.

The series is good...but as is typcial, they dramatize that which has no visuals with associated visuals, pieces of film from other times and places, dramatizations, etc...

I think you're not aware of that, and you're assuming that everything you see therin is a real film of the events being portrayed...