Text 27136, 94 rader
Skriven 2007-02-12 14:34:26 av Gary Braswell (1:123/789.0)
  Kommentar till text 27128 av John Hull (1:123/789.0)
Ärende: Wetbacks, the Border, sol
=================================
John Hull -> TIM RICHARDSON wrote:
 JH> TIM RICHARDSON -> JOHN HULL wrote:
 TR>> On 02-11-07, JOHN HULL said to TIM RICHARDSON:

 JH>>> TIM RICHARDSON -> JOHN HULL wrote:
 TR>>> On 02-11-07, JOHN HULL said to JEFF BINKLEY:

 JH>>>> Now there's a self-fulfilling prophecy if I ever heard one.  As I
 TR>>> said in
 JH>>>> the last post, the technology hasn't solved all the problems yet.
 TR>> Saying
 JH>>>> it is more dangerous prior to that fact is exactly the same argument
 TR>>> they
 JH>>>> used against gasoline in 1890 or thereabouts.


 JH>>>> By the way, NASA has been using fuel cell technology for 40 years
 JH> and
 TR>>> has
 JH>>>> never had an incident far as I can recall.



 TR>>> Are you forgetting the space shuttle that blew up in mid-launch,
 TR>> killing
 TR>>> all
 TR>>> aboard? Wasn't that a hydrogen fuel explosion? Sometime back in the
 JH>>> 1980's?


 JH>>> No, it wasn't.  That was from a faulty O-ring in one of the solid
 JH> fuel
 JH>>> boosters.  Fuel cells have nothing to do with the launch phase.



 TR>> Re-reading my two questions above.......I don't see anything in
 JH> them that
 TR>> speaks of any `cause', nor anything about "fuel cells"...or "launch
 JH> phase".


 TR>> I simply asked;


 TR>> "Are you forgetting the space shuttle that blew up in mid-launch,
 TR>> killing all
 TR>> aboard? Wasn't that a hydrogen fuel explosion? Sometime back in the
 JH> 1980's?


 TR>> At some point during the failed launch.......didn't the hydrogen
 JH> explode?

 JH> No, it didn't.  There was no hydrogen involved during the failed launch.

The hydrogen did explode. The SRB did have a defective O-ring which caused a
burn-through on the SRB into the hydrogen tank which exploded. Both SRB's were
still intact and flying out of the hydrogen fireball. If there had been no
hydrogen tank, the Shuttle would have survived a simple burn-through.

 JH>  The launch "failed" because of a defective O-ring on the SOLID FUEL
 JH> BOOSTER ROCKET.  Don't try to play word games so you can imply it WAS
 JH> hydrogen that had something to do with it.  It didn't.  And just for the
 JH> record, the explosion didn't kill the crew.  Autopsy evidence showed
 JH> that they were still alive after the crew compartment hit the water.

Its doubtful they lived after they hit the water since they hit at over 200
mph.

The bodies spent 6 weeks in the water, the autopsy could conclude little.

We know some of them were conscious after the explosion since some of the crew,
but not all, manually activated emergency air packs. Comments were heard by the
NASA people too as the explosion happened.

The official report by Dr. Kerwin of NASA Life Sciences in July of '86 stated:
"The cause of the death of the Challenger astronauts cannot be positively
determined, the forces to which the crew were exposed during the orbiter
breakup were probably not sufficient to cause death or serious injury, and the
crew possibly, but not certainly, lost consciousness in the seconds following
orbiter breakup due to in flight loss of crew module pressure."

It is possible the ones who activated the air packs lived until impact with the
water.
-- 
"We are safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the
night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."- George Orwell

"For those dreams taken, here are a few nightmares."
Written on a bomb dropped on Tora Bora.

--- Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207)
 * Origin: The Eastern Star - Fidonet Via Your Newsreader (1:123/789.0)