Quote from: Ben the Space Brit on 01/17/2013 12:02 pmInteresting question from one of Wayne's readers on his blog:QuoteQuick question; do new flight controllers in any way review the Apollo-1, Challenger and Columbia accident histories for historical and lessons learned perspectives as part of their training activities?I'm not sure about flight controllers.It is part of their training. In particular, issues of resource management (leadership, situational awareness, communication, and decision-making) are emphasized. That is a change from how Apollo 1 and Challenger were handled in training pre-Columbia; those earlier training lessons were more just recaps of the history.
Interesting question from one of Wayne's readers on his blog:QuoteQuick question; do new flight controllers in any way review the Apollo-1, Challenger and Columbia accident histories for historical and lessons learned perspectives as part of their training activities?I'm not sure about flight controllers.
Quick question; do new flight controllers in any way review the Apollo-1, Challenger and Columbia accident histories for historical and lessons learned perspectives as part of their training activities?
...And I've just seen one of the news stations here run 20 seconds saying NASA knew the crew were already dead, but decided to keep it secret. Oh dear.Phone call from me in two mins to correct.EDIT: And that's complete, as I know the copy editor on shift at Sky News, so that's all toned down
AP's gone after a sensationalist angle relating to informing the crew, per his blog posts.
In future similar procedures can be applied to other spacecraft.
If the press keeps asking NASA can say that after Columbia's accident NASA learnt to inspect Space Shuttles when they arrive at the ISS and to have a second spacecraft ready to fly as a LON (Launch On Need). In future similar procedures can be applied to other spacecraft.
Just had a phone call from a news media staff person who was so incorrect about space, the shuttle, or the loss of Columbia. No wonder the media gets so much wrong; no sense of history, no research, just zip out a half thought through sensationalist headline.There are plenty of responsible journalists, the goofballs make their job harder.Thanks for letting me vent.
https://twitter.com/waynehale/statuses/297149802481844225Wayne Hale @waynehaleSensationalist media have misunderstood some of my blog posts and now I get to try to clean up the mess. Oy vey!
AP's gone after a sensationalist angle relating to informing the crew, per his blog posts.AP, being the big wire feed, means this story will be in pretty much every mainstream paper and news site on the planet (we're talking 1000s buy into their feed as it's cheaper to run AP feed than hire writers), and some will not hold back on a snappy headline.And I've just seen one of the news stations here run 20 seconds saying NASA knew the crew were already dead, but decided to keep it secret. Oh dear.Phone call from me in two mins to correct.EDIT: And that's complete, as I know the copy editor on shift at Sky News, so that's all toned down
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/02/sts-107-remembering-columbia-crew/An amazing 5,000+ word feature by Chris Gebhardt covering STS-107's actual mission, as opposed to a focus on the EOM.
Our local news website just ran the AP feed, if that's what you're talking about.If it's any consolation, I've written AP about that particular writer in the past. Namely for misspelling the names of just about all of ISS Expedition 31 and calling Falcon 9 a spacecraft.
Here is a link including video footage of how the story was presented on the news in Houston.http://www.click2houston.com/news/Ex-employee-NASA-knew-about-possible-problem-on-Columbia/-/1735978/18361090/-/kx63x7/-/index.html
Jim Oberg: "Top 10 myths surrounding NASA's Columbia space shuttle disaster"http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/01/16804343-top-10-myths-surrounding-nasas-columbia-space-shuttle-disaster?lite(See #9.)1. The vehicle blew up when it hit the atmosphere.Columbia was lost when the air drag across its left wing, created by turbulence around a growing hole on the leading edge, jerked its nose to the left too strongly for steering rockets to overcome. It then turned end over end at least once before aerodynamic braking broke its back and tore it into pieces. The crew cabin was then crushed and torn apart by the severe deceleration.
Ben,The more pertinent question for the future is why was there not better ascent imagery?Keep digging.