|
|
Author
|
Topic: Shuttle Foam - Fact or Fiction?
|
mikelarson Member Posts: 293 From: Port Washington, NY Registered: Jan 2005
|
posted 07-03-2006 01:21 PM
A year or so ago I was surfing the web and found a site where some guy was claiming the reason we've had all of these foam problems with the shuttle over the past few years is that in the mid-1990's NASA was forced to change the adhesive used to apply the foam because production of the old adhesive was evidently very bad for the environment / global warming. His point was that the new stuff wasn't as good as the old stuff and environmental concerns trumped safetly and engineering.Anyone care to comment? Given the huge story the foam has been since Columbia, and since it hasn't made the mainstream news I figured it wasn't true (and was just one of those Internet legends), but would appreciate all of the expert advice and opinions that are found here. Mike Larson Chesapeake, VA |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42988 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 07-03-2006 01:26 PM
Fiction, from here: quote: According to Volume 1 of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board's report, on page 51, the tank that flew on STS-107 used foam on its domes, ramps and other areas that were hand shaped that was applied using CFC-11. Further, on page 129, the CAIB reports that while NASA did change blowing agents to reduce its use of CFCs, this only affected areas that were mechanically applied with foam. "Foam that is hand sprayed, such as on the bipod ramp, is still applied using CFC-11."So the contention that using CFCs would somehow immediately fix the foam problems is simply not true. Further, foam shedding was observed and considered a concern on STS-1 and on just about every mission since then.
| |
Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts
Copyright 2020 collectSPACE.com All rights reserved.
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a
|
|
|
advertisement
|