NewsMine — deceptions — nasa — shuttle-columbia — no-photos — Viewing Item

Unsent nasa email sought photos Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)    http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/03/31/sprj.colu.shuttle.investigation/ http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/03/31/sprj.colu.shuttle.investigation/ Unsent NASA e-mail sought photos of shuttle Engineer: Foam damage 'could present grave hazards' HOUSTON, Texas (CNN) --A chief engineer in NASA's shuttle program drafted, but never sent, an e-mail to complain that not seeking outside help to assess damage to the orbiting shuttle Columbia's left wing was "bordering on irresponsible." "Remember the NASA safety posters everywhere around site stating, 'If it's not safe, say so?' Yes, it's that serious,'" wrote Alan R. "Rodney" Rocha, chief shuttle engineer in NASA's structural engineering division. The e-mail message, drafted around January 22, was included in several hundred pages of documents that NASA released Monday under a Freedom of Information Act request from news organizations. It's not clear why the message was never sent, but a handwritten notation on the document says Rocha discussed the contents with the management of his division. On February 1, Columbia broke apart while returning to Earth, killing all seven astronauts aboard. An independent investigative team has focused on damage to the shuttle's thermal tiles as the possible cause of the disaster. When Columbia took off January 16, pieces of foam from its external fuel tanks hit the underside of the shuttle orbiter, where sensitive heat-resistant tiles were located. The problem was discovered after film footage of the launch was reviewed. Rocha's e-mail wanted NASA to seek an outside agency's help to photograph possible damage to the shuttle. Rocha wrote that the decision "not to request additional imaging help from any outside source" was "wrong" and "bordering on irresponsible." He also said that damage to the orbiter caused by falling pieces of foam insulation at liftoff "could present potentially grave hazards." But after analysis both inside the space agency and by an outside contractor, Boeing, NASA officials eventually concluded that the possible damage caused by the foam was not significant enough to threaten the orbiter upon re-entry. NASA decided not to have the shuttle photographed while in orbit by the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, which could have used its satellites to look for damage. Officials have said they doubted the satellites could have found any damage. Even if they had, Columbia crew members would have had no way to repair it. In his draft e-mail, Rocha acknowledged that photographing the shuttle "might not achieve definitive high-confidence answers." But he argued that it should be done anyway because not doing so would "guarantee" that any damage wouldn't be found. E-mails and documents released by NASA during the course of the Columbia investigation have revealed that lower-level engineers in the agency were expressing serious concerns about what might happen to the space shuttle if the heat panels were compromised. In another document released Monday, Rocha sent an e-mail notifying other NASA staff that he planned to be on hand at Mission Control early February 1 to monitor temperature data from sensors on Columbia as it landed. Data from the doomed shuttle showed that temperatures were rising abnormally on the left wing and wheel well before the orbiter disintegrated -- leading investigators to theorize that a failure in Columbia's thermal-protection system compromised the shuttle's structural integrity during the intense heat of re-entry. Find this article at: http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/03/31/sprj.colu.shuttle.investigation

Fuzzy pictures third camera { July 1 2003 } No satellite photos { March 13 2003 } Shuttle needs better cameras { July 2 2003 } Third camera not working Unsent nasa email sought photos Files Listed: 5

Correction/submissions

CIA FOIA Archive

National Security Archives

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purpose of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.