Jon Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 picture confirmation No offence, but I think the front page article posted my neobond the other day proved the media is hardly reliable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leedogg Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 You know, I felt bad for that guy pictured on top of the world trade center with the plane coming in too. :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divinatum Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 leedogg: we all did.. :rofl: nasa said that because there was no payload arm or something (im not too sure of what it was) but anyway, they said that because that "thing" wasnt there, there was no way for them to look at it or get a picture, so obvidesly its a fake, if it was real nasa wouldnt be conducting this major investigation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sime27 Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 ok but lets say the pic is fake and 1 seen on lots of tv news channels would'nt they get sued for showing em?? its been on all the news news channels Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john smith 1924 Veteran Posted February 3, 2003 Veteran Share Posted February 3, 2003 1. NASA did not send its astronauts of to die. 2. We do not know anything other than idle speculation from those pictures ( this one is slightly different to the first) and that itv / israeli article. 3. This was broadcasted infront of Ariel Sharon. Now ok - you might think he is a nasty chap - but he is the PM of Israel. Dont just shout it down because it sounds scary or sounds "contraversial"; if some people around here did some proper evaluation before shouting... dont believe everything you read in the paper eh ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john smith 1924 Veteran Posted February 3, 2003 Veteran Share Posted February 3, 2003 No offence, but I think the front page article posted my neobond the other day proved the media is hardly reliable. i think you missed the point there- you trying to say they are unreliable in the sense that they lie (which they do) but neobonds post was highlight poor taste, after such a sad occasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrelrider_and_sting Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 Wow, a picture!!! Don't you think the Astronauts would have raised a little bit of concern about this if they took this photo??? This is some nice work via Photoshop, nothing more. Just like the image done after 9-11 of the guy standing on the tower just before the 757 impact. Every news source would love to scoop this story, they didnt, they fell for a prank. This is so obviously a fake. The tile themselves are not crackable like that. They can be crushed or fall away, bu to suggest they would crack with a seam is not possible. They are composed of a dense silicate structure. Even if they were damaged like that depicted the tiles are WHITE on that surface area. FAKE FAKE FAKE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sime27 Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 maybe the Astronauts would have raised a little bit of concern but may have been told to keep figures crossed cos there was nothing they could do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elocal Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 well, what about this? http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/02/03/s...ttle/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deepu Sudhakar Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 i see it like this... they knew there was damage and they gambled... they lost. but they could have gotten the astronauts off that ship and into the space station and let russia bring them home and either let the columbia float off into space, or let it come home, unmanned and crash into the ocean, or in this case, break apart and fall to earth. there is many things they COULD have done, but they didnt and they must face what happened. i might be stating what has been stated earlier, but im too lazy to read the compelte thread. its easy to say such things (refer to quote), but, in reality, its not your cup of tea. you cant just abort a mission in space like that. first off, columbia did not have any facilities to repair the ship or to dock with the space station. space travel is a lot different than terrestrial travel. its not like you can go outside and replace a blown tire. the damage to the left wing is still speculation at the moment. even if there was any damage, there was nothing that could have possibly done to avert any catastrophic danger. there are not many things that could have been done. it all boils down to common sense. this is nasa we are tlaking about...they are not some reckless organization that decides to go to space on half-assed grounds. there is a reason that people revere rocket scientists as people of the highest intellect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deepu Sudhakar Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 btw...cracks like that are not ignored. if this picture is real (im sure that its not), it would be a terrible folly on nasa's part, and still they would be helpless. i believe the pic is fake because those cracks are seemingly impossible to form (especially of that size). if there was such structure damage, we would have heard news of the columbia breaking up a lot earlier than saturday. microcracks are even enough to cause noticable problems. space is a totally different environment. these type of cracks may not cause problems on earth, but they certainly do in space (microcracks cause so much damage, because the vacuum of space would tear them up immediately). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrelrider_and_sting Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 maybe the Astronauts would have raised a little bit of concernbut may have been told to keep figures crossed cos there was nothing they could do Come on, you must be joking. Not only are the channels used to communicate with the shuttles open airwaves, someone on a ham radio could hear the conversations. Even if they were encrypted somehow, the crew would have made messages to their families or to the world. If the shuttle crew truly knew their fate ahead of them they would have said goodbye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrelrider_and_sting Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 btw...cracks like that are not ignored. if this picture is real (im sure that its not), it would be a terrible folly on nasa's part, and still they would be helpless. i believe the pic is fake because those cracks are seemingly impossible to form (especially of that size). if there was such structure damage, we would have heard news of the columbia breaking up a lot earlier than saturday. microcracks are even enough to cause noticable problems. space is a totally different environment. these type of cracks may not cause problems on earth, but they certainly do in space (microcracks cause so much damage, because the vacuum of space would tear them up immediately). Your knowledge of the shuttle is wrong here. The tiles that cover the aluminum skin of the wing are anywhere from .5 inches to over 1" think in critical areas. If the insulation hit the wing in this location, the damage would have been likely either scraping, gouging, or compression of the tiles. Now there might have been some exposure of the aluminum skin to the vacuum of space, but there are no indications that styrofoam insulation has the ability to render damage like that on aluminum. The only plausible scenario is that somehow damage occured underneath the wing, or at the leading edge of the wing. It would be a cascade like damage that would occur once the shuttle entered the friction of the atmosphere. Possible tiles started peeling away when the speeds and temperature hit sufficient stresses. The is little likelihood of catastrophic failure from the indications of damage from the images we have seen posted here. It's photoshopped. What likely happened was something damaged the tiles UNDERNEATH the wing near the landing gear area...tiles peeled away in this very critically sensitive area...and a burn through started and grew worse, culminating in structural failure. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxBoy Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 It's an awful feeling to find out that you're going to die and there's nothing you can do about it.. Hopefully none of us are faced with this.. :cry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smitjel Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 well, what about this? http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/02/03/s...ttle/index.html http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2003/TECH/space/02/03...ttle.debris.jpg I'm obviously not a NASA engineer, but this CNN article says a "piece of foam insulation that was dislodged during the launch of the space shuttle Columbia may have struck a seam on a landing gear door". Wouldn't the landing gear door be UNDERNEATH the left wing? Isn't this sketchy picture showing the TOPSIDE of the wing? :wacko: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 Your knowledge of the shuttle is wrong here.The tiles that cover the aluminum skin of the wing are anywhere from .5 inches to over 1" think in critical areas. If the insulation hit the wing in this location, the damage would have been likely either scraping, gouging, or compression of the tiles. Now there might have been some exposure of the aluminum skin to the vacuum of space, but there are no indications that styrofoam insulation has the ability to render damage like that on aluminum. The only plausible scenario is that somehow damage occured underneath the wing, or at the leading edge of the wing. It would be a cascade like damage that would occur once the shuttle entered the friction of the atmosphere. Possible tiles started peeling away when the speeds and temperature hit sufficient stresses. The is little likelihood of catastrophic failure from the indications of damage from the images we have seen posted here. It's photoshopped. What likely happened was something damaged the tiles UNDERNEATH the wing near the landing gear area...tiles peeled away in this very critically sensitive area...and a burn through started and grew worse, culminating in structural failure. David Ladies and gentlemen...our local NASA expert. :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrelrider_and_sting Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 Ladies and gentlemen...our local NASA expert. :blink: I never claimed to be an expert. I have read many many articles and am just repeating what I have found. Many of the claims I have seen here haven't made any logical sense, even with photographs. If someone wants to make a wild claim about "just fly the shuttle to the space station" is it wrong to say point out that they can't??? Same with the "wing damage" arguments posted. I have two degrees, one from Iowa (go hawks) what about you??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redmondian Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 a photo of the left wing of Colombia space shuttleas taken from Colombia window camera and sent to NASA it indicates a crack in the left wing. did they know about it and didn't tell? you'll be the judge RD the artical (and photo) was published at Israeli 2nd biggest daily newspaper named: Maariv for the artical, if you know hebrew..... Maariv artical (Hebrew) That picture looks so fake.... Just a ploy for a newspaper to sell more daily's, IMHO. :whistle: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 Ladies and gentlemen...our local NASA expert. :blink: I never claimed to be an expert. I have read many many articles and am just repeating what I have found. Many of the claims I have seen here haven't made any logical sense, even with photographs. If someone wants to make a wild claim about "just fly the shuttle to the space station" is it wrong to say point out that they can't??? Same with the "wing damage" arguments posted. I have two degrees, one from Iowa (go hawks) what about you??? I was being sarcastic, since that's the exact same thing that pretty much everyone else on that post has stated. One degree...from Iowa State. Working on the grad degree. BTW...I am a Hawkeye fan. ISU has a better CS department (my major as a freshman), so I chose isu. If not for that, I'd have a degree from iowa as well :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 Individuals who frequent Neowin surely are aware images can be altered digitally. As to the veracity of media... you viewer usually see the difference between the NYT or CNN and the National Inquirer. Here's a clue: the NYT did not run a photo of Michael Jackson adjacent to the alleged crack in the wing of the Columbia. Name a single reputable outlet publishing that picture. By the way, my cloned cat/dog mix breed gave birth to a spawn of Satan from Saturn. If you want to see color photos and an AVI of the blessed event, I'll prove it with PaintShop Pro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven P. Administrators Posted February 3, 2003 Administrators Share Posted February 3, 2003 So the message we are getting here in general is, you don't trust the media, a Prime Minister (of Israel) or Photo evidence saying for the most part all the images are somehow doctored. While on the other hand conspiracy theorists also hold no ground as pure speculation. A worrying thought. My personal theory is this: The wing was damaged during take-off. This was largely ignored by the media and there was no public out-cry for evidence. NASA gambled (they said this themselves) and lost. What we don't know for sure is if they knew more than they claim to know. Another fact that has been said time and time again is that even if they did get evidence of damage, damage enough to say that re-entry was impossible there were no other options. No dock availability and no life-pods. So they would of had to attempt re-entry and hope for the best anyway. (Space walk was also ruled out because they didn't have the knowledge or equipment to do it) I doubt they sat up there 15 days knowing their ultimate fate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
username Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 how was that "picture" taken though? maybe i missed something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomwarren Veteran Posted February 4, 2003 Veteran Share Posted February 4, 2003 I can confirm the original picture in this thread is real, from video footage. I just saw the exact same pic on BBC News athlough they said NASA claimed the picture means nothing :s hmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
username Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 what took the picture though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted February 4, 2003 Share Posted February 4, 2003 i think you missed the point there- you trying to say they are unreliable in the sense that they lie (which they do) but neobonds post was highlight poor taste, after such a sad occasion. I didnt miss the point, I posted the original link to that article (I'm just humble so'd rather put it down to neobond than myself when mentioning it) :) I did so for those *two* reasons. 1) bad taste for not removing it sooner 2) more importantly it was a harsh illustration of how the media often work, and how things may well be written or said with out any decent proof, and specifically in advance of the event. Potentially in the same way that ITV have been showing this picture, its hard to believe that one person there didnt stop and think "this doesnt actually look very real". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts