Anybody else watch this? Excellent four-part series that concluded Sunday evening. In many ways reminiscent of the type of reporting PBS
Frontline does.
I’d say the content is about one-third science, one-third human interest (featuring families of the victims) and a third about a culture of political intrigue and backbiting at NASA which prevented (or deterred) those who knew from bringing to light a series of known “near misses” on previous launches and seeking to fully understand the threat posed. For lack of a better term,
arrogance at the highest levels worked to squelch growing concerns about the fated mission and stymied efforts to clarify / understand the shuttle’s true condition before reentry. .
Note - In recent weeks CNN has trying to turn over a “new leaf” / clean up its act. (Had no place to go but up.)
Here’s a link to a
promotional article and short video for the show (which has already aired). If you subscribe to a TV provider that carries CNN the series is still available. I just checked and pulled it up on Hulu’s CNN hub. Might watch it again.
Comments
Many at NASA were deeply worried all during the flight and even were in contact with U.S. military command to obtain photos in space from surveillance satellites. When the “upper brass” at NASA learned of the plan, they thwarted it. Apparently felt it would make them look bad. So, the flight was pretty much doomed & the crew uninformed. Former astronaut Mark Kelly, speaking now as a U.S. Senator, reflects on the events and outlines possible steps that might have been taken to save the crew. But these were by no means certain to work. Might have even endangered additional astronauts.
One advantage of the CNN series is it provides some perspective in years - if not fundamental knowledge. The children of the astronauts are shown both at the time of the incident and 20+ years later fully grown reflecting on events. The NASA engineers are now much older and forever haunted. There’s a lot of anger and finger pointing. Miles O’Brian, who narrates the CNN program (and has done work at PBS), was on-air reporting during the mission for ABC News. He was troubled then by the early photos showing a debris strike on the left wing. O’Brian thought about going public with his worst fears. But he kept quiet after NASA insisted publicly there was no safety issue. Says O’Brian at the end: “I share in the blame …”
"Umm … Those O-Rings were involved in the Shuttle Challenger disaster shortly after launch in 1986. The CNN 4-hour series is about the Shuttle Columbia which disintegrated over Texas on reentry in early 2003"...
How long might they have orbited, waiting to dock with a rescue ship, I wonder? Maybe not even a USA ship? By the same token, I believe more than one Soviet sub was lost and the crew perished because the Soviet Brass refused to allow foreign assistance. A movie was made in that vein, starring Colin Firth: "The Command."
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4951982/?ref_=nm_flmg_t_10_act
- Shuttle Atlantis was in preparation for another mission. Speeding up the launch date might have been doable. Even than, an unplanned, unrehearsed rescue mission would have been dangerous.
- Another option was to alter the reentry tragectory by a series of roll maneuvers to put more stress on the healthy wing and perhaps keep the damaged wing from overheating or breaking loose.
- Personally, I wonder about some type of shield or patch that might been concocted in orbit using whatever they had aboard, You will recall the Apollo 13 astronauts stayed alive by constructing a CO2 scrubber from duct tape and other items aboard.
Thanks, guys. Interesting.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1972/11/11/apollo-13-an-accident-in-space?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_SundayArchive_041724&utm_campaign=auddev&utm_medium=email&bxid=5bd6703a2ddf9c619438b2db&cndid=23016471&hasha=50a3ccf46021c658dabdfd134f8b24e6&hashb=18f9db4a7b70f31f233af5c44c69b44968215ac1&hashc.=0a89078494f67fe8e719854852eeb69fe865156936b141b5a1af49c999a10459&esrc=frm_act_Daily_subs&mbid=mbid=CRMNYR012019&utm_term=TNY_SundayArchive
I can’t recall reading about that space mission, even though we subscribed at the time. In the event, this was an amazing effort by the Apollo crew, the vast ground crew, and the experts from the various manufacturers to get the main module back to earth safely. The lunar landing had to be cancelled, an event that complicated the return because the lunar module was still attached to the mother ship. The detailed written analysis of space travel, telemetry, the workload of the crew and many other wonky details captured my imagination. Cooper’s work is the equal of the best aviation disaster writing of William Langewiesche, who cannot be topped in my view. Wikipedia has links to his articles and the New Yorker piece can be found with a search for « An Accident in Space. »
+1 @BenWP
I’m a New Yorker subscriber and have the lengthy article you linked “in tow”. Quick scan very impressive. I believe I’ve convinced my IPad Air to begin reading it to me when I hit the pillow tonight. Actually, it’s more of a book than an article. Tried to find it in book format on Audible, but not available.
Remember vividly the Apollo 13 saga in ‘69. Many of us had only small-screen B&W TVs in those days. Topic of the town everywhere. Lots of prayers. The movie with Hanks is magnificent. Very accurate portrayal as movies go. Directed by the highly talented Ron Howard.
PS - If you happen upon a good Part II link, please provide …
Struck-out both attempts to consume this audibly. Siri began to read it, but dropped off automatically after reading just 1 page. Than I installed a free text-to-speech app on my ipad. Worked better, but ceased to keep reading after about 5-10 minutes. There are also some apps that charge an annual fee (around $75) and I’m not sure if they would work better or not.
I used an audible credit last night to buy the highly rated Apollo 13 book (audio version) by Jim Lovell. But it’s much inferior in technical detail compared to what your New Yorker piece has. Umm - I don’t really care that Lovell hugged his wife after learning he had the mission - or his thoughts on space exploration for that matter. It’s the gritty technical detail that makes the New Yorker article so damn interesting … “Bus A” “Bus B” etc. Gotta love that stuff.