Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Today
More NASA E-Mails Coming Out
Aired February 27, 2003 - 10:11 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: Well, now the latest on the investigation into space shuttle Columbia and its disintegration upon reentry. Newly revealed e-mail showing that one day before the tragedy, NASA engineers were predicting the catastrophe with chilling accuracy.
Our Miami bureau chief, John Zarrella, is following the latest developments for us -- John, good morning.
JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN MIAMI BUREAU CHIEF: Good morning, Daryn.
Well, just as we are speaking now, NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe is on Capitol Hill where he is testifying before the House Science Committee, and discussing the '04 budget, NASA's '04 budget and what they need.
And you can bet that the members of this House Science Committee will probably be asking Sean O'Keefe some very grilling questions about these chilling e-mails that came out several days leading up to the attempted landing of the shuttle Columbia.
Now, in these e-mails, the engineers and the flight controllers were doing what if scenarios. What if the original analysis that there wasn't any real serious damage to Columbia's left wing by the foam insulation falling off of the external tank and hitting that wing, what if that analysis was wrong? What would happen? And the one flight controller, the day before, came out with his chilling analysis, saying that the temperature would heat up if there was a breach of the wheel well, and in fact that hot gasses could get inside of that left wing leading to a catastrophic accident, and investigators, the accident board, while they have not said that is exactly what happened yet, that's one of the principal things that they are certainly looking at.
Another one of the engineers in Langley, Virginia -- he came out and issued an e-mail several days before the attempted landing, and what he said in his e-mail was this: "Seems to me that the benefits of an EVA to go look at damage has more pros than cons. Can't imagine that an astronaut, even on a crappy tether arrangement, would cause more damage than he is going out to look for."
Now, he issued that -- asking for an EVA, which is a space walk for astronauts to go see how bad damage was. But now, other engineers, of course, have come out and say that the fact of the matter is, that even if they had looked at the damage, and even if it was as bad as it turned out to be, there probably wasn't anything that they could do to save the astronauts, given that the shuttle broke up at 200,000 feet.
Daryn, it was not likely that they would be able -- certainly could not have bailed out at that altitude. It was just too high, and the vehicle was moving too fast when it broke up.
So Daryn, the reality is that had they known how bad situation was, that's about all that would have changed, they would have known that their shuttle was doomed before it actually came apart as it re- entered the Earth's atmosphere -- Daryn.
KAGAN: Well, it does bring up another ethical question: if they did know that, did the astronauts have a right to know that, perhaps to say a final good-bye to their families?
ZARRELLA: Exactly -- but none of this got run up NASA's flagpole because all of these were what if scenarios. These engineers are all saying now that they believe that the analysis that had been done after the liftoff that said that there was no real critical risk of loss of vehicle from this impact -- so they decided, Well, this is just a what if, what if the analysis is wrong, and the question is, well why did it not go up the flagpole. Daryn, this is very eerily reminiscent of 1986, the Challenger accident when, in fact, engineering analysis before said, Boy, this cold weather could impact the O-ring seals on solid rocket boosters and cause a catastrophic accident, and that did not get up the NASA flag pole either.
KAGAN: Communication problems ending up in fatal -- fatal results. John Zarrella, thank you so much.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired February 27, 2003 - 10:11 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: Well, now the latest on the investigation into space shuttle Columbia and its disintegration upon reentry. Newly revealed e-mail showing that one day before the tragedy, NASA engineers were predicting the catastrophe with chilling accuracy.
Our Miami bureau chief, John Zarrella, is following the latest developments for us -- John, good morning.
JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN MIAMI BUREAU CHIEF: Good morning, Daryn.
Well, just as we are speaking now, NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe is on Capitol Hill where he is testifying before the House Science Committee, and discussing the '04 budget, NASA's '04 budget and what they need.
And you can bet that the members of this House Science Committee will probably be asking Sean O'Keefe some very grilling questions about these chilling e-mails that came out several days leading up to the attempted landing of the shuttle Columbia.
Now, in these e-mails, the engineers and the flight controllers were doing what if scenarios. What if the original analysis that there wasn't any real serious damage to Columbia's left wing by the foam insulation falling off of the external tank and hitting that wing, what if that analysis was wrong? What would happen? And the one flight controller, the day before, came out with his chilling analysis, saying that the temperature would heat up if there was a breach of the wheel well, and in fact that hot gasses could get inside of that left wing leading to a catastrophic accident, and investigators, the accident board, while they have not said that is exactly what happened yet, that's one of the principal things that they are certainly looking at.
Another one of the engineers in Langley, Virginia -- he came out and issued an e-mail several days before the attempted landing, and what he said in his e-mail was this: "Seems to me that the benefits of an EVA to go look at damage has more pros than cons. Can't imagine that an astronaut, even on a crappy tether arrangement, would cause more damage than he is going out to look for."
Now, he issued that -- asking for an EVA, which is a space walk for astronauts to go see how bad damage was. But now, other engineers, of course, have come out and say that the fact of the matter is, that even if they had looked at the damage, and even if it was as bad as it turned out to be, there probably wasn't anything that they could do to save the astronauts, given that the shuttle broke up at 200,000 feet.
Daryn, it was not likely that they would be able -- certainly could not have bailed out at that altitude. It was just too high, and the vehicle was moving too fast when it broke up.
So Daryn, the reality is that had they known how bad situation was, that's about all that would have changed, they would have known that their shuttle was doomed before it actually came apart as it re- entered the Earth's atmosphere -- Daryn.
KAGAN: Well, it does bring up another ethical question: if they did know that, did the astronauts have a right to know that, perhaps to say a final good-bye to their families?
ZARRELLA: Exactly -- but none of this got run up NASA's flagpole because all of these were what if scenarios. These engineers are all saying now that they believe that the analysis that had been done after the liftoff that said that there was no real critical risk of loss of vehicle from this impact -- so they decided, Well, this is just a what if, what if the analysis is wrong, and the question is, well why did it not go up the flagpole. Daryn, this is very eerily reminiscent of 1986, the Challenger accident when, in fact, engineering analysis before said, Boy, this cold weather could impact the O-ring seals on solid rocket boosters and cause a catastrophic accident, and that did not get up the NASA flag pole either.
KAGAN: Communication problems ending up in fatal -- fatal results. John Zarrella, thank you so much.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
