sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) (03/13/86)
I was recently listening to the investigative committee's proceedings on
the radio when I heard an interesting theory by NASA about the explosion.
NASA's data, according to the NASA spokesman, points to a failure of the
right SRB's lower attachment point. Whether the plume of flame was the
cause of it was not discussed while I was listening. According to various
telemetry, specifically the gyros in the SRBs and the ET, the right SRB's
lower attachment point failed, at which point the SRB hinged on the remaining
attachment points at approximately 60 degrees per second. It collided at
a midpoint between both ET tanks, severely damaging both. This happened
approximately one second before the large explosion. According to the NASA
spokesman being interviewed, most of their data supports this theory, and
none of it rejects it.
I'm surprised that since it was broadcast, last Friday, I haven't read one
word about this theory in the papers. Was it later dropped for some reason?
Or was I the only one listening?
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sean Casey UUCP: sean@ukma.uucp CSNET: sean@uky.csnet
University of Kentucky ARPA: ukma!sean@anl-mcs.arpa
Lexington, Kentucky BITNET: sean@ukma.bitnet
"Who's `we', sucker?"fisher@star.DEC (Burns Fisher ZKO1-1/D42 DTN 381-1466) (03/18/86)
ukma!sean writes: ... >NASA's data, according to the NASA spokesman, points to a failure of the >right SRB's lower attachment point. Whether the plume of flame was the >cause of it was not discussed while I was listening. According to various ... >I'm surprised that since it was broadcast, last Friday, I haven't read one >word about this theory in the papers. Was it later dropped for some reason? >Or was I the only one listening? The reason that this was not big news is because it isn't. That theory was first put out in the second Aviation Week after the accident. It has not been given a lot of press play, I'll admit. It is much easier for reporters to understand "the flame caused a chain reaction which led to the explosion" than "the flame severed the aft attach point which allowed the SRB ..." Burns ...decwrl!rhea!star