The hypothetical rescue of the Columbia - and its effects on NASA's future missions

in space on 2014-02-26 22:17 (#3EY)

Ars Technica writer Lee Hutchinson , who worked for NASA during the Columbia incident , writes about the 2003 destruction of the shuttle Columbia, and the questions asked afterwards. Could the disaster have been anticipated? If so, could a rescue have been performed before the shuttle's incredibly destructive re-entry? The answers to those questions hatched an incredible plan - and changed the way NASA handles shuttle missions to this day. It's worth a read not only for the historical perspective, but also for the account of practical project planning and the immense scope of such an endeavor. He calls it the untold story of the rescue mission that could have been NASA's finest hour .

Historyical footnote only (Score: 5, Insightful)

by caseih@pipedot.org on 2014-02-27 03:37 (#7B)

I'm not sure why this is actually making such a splash right now. The investigating committee went over this, and while it was always a possibility, for whatever reason (probably good reasons at the time), no rescue was ever mounted, so it's a bit pointless to take this theoretical rescue plan and make anything of it. Maybe in hindsight the engineering committee's decisions were wrong, but we can only know that now in hindsight. And it's not at all clear that a rescue would have been feasible. So at most it's an interesting footnote to history. Nothing more.

It's sad that the shuttle program ended; it was a fantastic machine. But I'm excited to see companies like SpaceX fill the gap, and probably do things that NASA needs better and cheaper.

Re: Historyical footnote only (Score: 3, Interesting)

by paddym@pipedot.org on 2014-02-27 05:02 (#7D)

Those were my thoughts as well. The Columbia crash was a tragedy, but there really wasn't enough information at the time to predict that outcome. It would have been very difficult to remedy had they known for sure. I feel like if they had attempted the rescue with so many corners cut for expediency, they would have most likely lost 2 shuttles instead of one.

Re: Historyical footnote only (Score: 4, Insightful)

by danieldvorkin@pipedot.org on 2014-02-27 15:31 (#7J)

I feel like if they had attempted the rescue with so many corners cut for expediency, they would have most likely lost 2 shuttles instead of one.

Maybe, maybe not. TFA makes it sound like it was feasible because of the launch schedule for Atlantis . In any case, I think this kind of "what we could have done" review could be useful in making safety plans for future missions.