Aeronautics Industry Aeronautics Industry    FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next          Aeronautics Industry Forum Index -> Aeronautics Industry View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message Dogfighting Guest Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 8:06 pm    Post subject: Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! Hello, Would someone please post a link to the picture that showed the alleged Sprite (lightning) that hit the Challenger shuttle just before it blew up. Thank you in advance for your response. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Rand Simberg Guest Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 8:06 pm    Post subject: Re: Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 12:06:17 -0400, in a place far, far away, Dogfighting <none@none.com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Quote: Hello, Would someone please post a link to the picture that showed the alleged Sprite (lightning) that hit the Challenger shuttle just before it blew up. I've never heard of such a thing, and Challenger didn't "blow up." Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor André, PE1PQX Guest Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 11:10 pm    Post subject: Re: Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! Op 21-4-2007, heeft Dogfighting verondersteld : Quote: Hello, Would someone please post a link to the picture that showed the alleged Sprite (lightning) that hit the Challenger shuttle just before it blew up. Thank you in advance for your response. The Challenger was never struck by lightning on Jan. 27th. Everyone knows the disaster was caused by an booster ripped loose on the bottom on the ET. The wheather was clear, and about 12 Deg C (as far as I can remember). André Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Rand Simberg Guest Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 11:17 pm    Post subject: Re: Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:10:27 +0200, in a place far, far away, André, PE1PQX <pe1pqx_geenviagra@planet.nl> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Quote: Op 21-4-2007, heeft Dogfighting verondersteld : Hello, Would someone please post a link to the picture that showed the alleged Sprite (lightning) that hit the Challenger shuttle just before it blew up. Thank you in advance for your response. The Challenger was never struck by lightning on Jan. 27th. January 28th. Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor André, PE1PQX Guest Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 11:27 pm    Post subject: Re: Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! Rand Simberg schreef : Quote: On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:10:27 +0200, in a place far, far away, André, PE1PQX <pe1pqx_geenviagra@planet.nl> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Op 21-4-2007, heeft Dogfighting verondersteld : Hello, Would someone please post a link to the picture that showed the alleged Sprite (lightning) that hit the Challenger shuttle just before it blew up. Thank you in advance for your response. The Challenger was never struck by lightning on Jan. 27th. January 28th. Your'e right, tnx! Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Greg D. Moore (Strider) Guest Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:05 am    Post subject: Re: Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! "Rand Simberg" <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote in message news:46bc366c.1388030902@news.giganews.com... Quote: On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 12:06:17 -0400, in a place far, far away, Dogfighting <none@none.com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Hello, Would someone please post a link to the picture that showed the alleged Sprite (lightning) that hit the Challenger shuttle just before it blew up. I've never heard of such a thing, and Challenger didn't "blow up." I suspect he means Columbia. That was an early theory that was pretty quckly ruled out. -- Greg Moore SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available! Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Dogfighting Guest Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:27 am    Post subject: Re: Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! Dogfighting wrote: Quote: Hello, Would someone please post a link to the picture that showed the alleged Sprite (lightning) that hit the Challenger shuttle just before it blew up. Thank you in advance for your response. Yes, Columbia was the one. I believe it was more than just a theory. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/02/07/MN200326.DTL&type=news Cannot someone provide a link to the picture the amateur photographer took ? I cannot find it with a google search. thank you -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Dogfighting Guest Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:34 am    Post subject: Re: Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! Dogfighting wrote: Quote: Dogfighting wrote: Hello, Would someone please post a link to the picture that showed the alleged Sprite (lightning) that hit the Challenger shuttle just before it blew up. Thank you in advance for your response. Yes, Columbia was the one. I believe it was more than just a theory. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/02/07/MN200326.DTL&type=news Cannot someone provide a link to the picture the amateur photographer took ? I cannot find it with a google search. thank you Hi, I found the original article here: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/02/05/CAMERA.TMP -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Rand Simberg Guest Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 1:01 am    Post subject: Re: Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 16:27:56 -0400, in a place far, far away, Dogfighting <none@none.com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Quote: Dogfighting wrote: Hello, Would someone please post a link to the picture that showed the alleged Sprite (lightning) that hit the Challenger shuttle just before it blew up. Thank you in advance for your response. Yes, Columbia was the one. I believe it was more than just a theory. No, it's just a theory. And not the most likely one, by a long shot. Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Jorge R. Frank Guest Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 1:03 am    Post subject: Re: Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! simberg.interglobal@org.trash (Rand Simberg) wrote in news:46c07b7a.1405708381@news.giganews.com: Quote: On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 16:27:56 -0400, in a place far, far away, Dogfighting <none@none.com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Dogfighting wrote: Hello, Would someone please post a link to the picture that showed the alleged Sprite (lightning) that hit the Challenger shuttle just before it blew up. Thank you in advance for your response. Yes, Columbia was the one. I believe it was more than just a theory. No, it's just a theory. And not the most likely one, by a long shot. It's not even a theory. It's a camera artifact. -- JRF Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail, check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and think one step ahead of IBM. Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor OM Guest Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 1:46 am    Post subject: Re: Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! <- Read t On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 16:03:47 -0500, "Jorge R. Frank" <jrfrank@ibm-pc.borg> wrote: Quote: Yes, Columbia was the one. I believe it was more than just a theory. No, it's just a theory. And not the most likely one, by a long shot. It's not even a theory. It's a camera artifact. ....You kids have forgotten about the FAQ, haven't you? From Section VI: Smoking Guns, Theories, Guesses, Hoaxes and Facts: ******************** What's this about Columbia getting hit by lightning? This one appears to be based on the report of a digital photo snapped by an amateur astronomer from a San Francisco hillside that reportedly shows a "purplish electrical bolt" striking Columbia as it flew over California during reentry. The "bolt" is described as being a "glowing purple rope of light corkscrews down toward the plasma trail, appears to pass behind it, then cuts sharply toward it from below. As it merges with the plasma trail, the streak itself brightens for a distance, then fades." According to sources including the San Francisco Chronicle, the photographer - who has requested anonymity - took the photo as one of five at roughly 7:53am , roughly seven minutes before Columbia disintegrated over the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex. After first trying to reach NASA via the various methods of contact established following the mishap, the photographer reportedly reached investigators through a connection with a relative who attends the same church as former astronaut Jack Lousma, who flew 24 million miles in the Skylab 3 mission in 1973. Lousma put him in direct touch with Ralph Roe Jr., chief engineer for the Shuttle program at JSC, and after a series of telephone conversations on 2/2/03, arrangements had been made for NASA to send former shuttle astronaut Tammy Jernigan, now a manager at Lawrence Livermore Laboratories, to retrieve both images and camera for transport to JSC for further analysis. The problem with the image is twofold: First off, there's the issue of the photographer's anonymity and the fact that neither the photographer nor NASA have released the image to the public. Although both Jernigan and an unnamed reporter for the _San Francisco Chronicle_ have confirmed the existence of the "purple electrical bolt", and have given matching descriptions to that in the first paragraph above, even the word of one person with serious credibility - Journigan - has not been enough to stem the tide of suspicions and dissatisfaction over the image not having been made available for public scrutiny. In short, even the crackpots are dissatisfied with the lack of availability of both the image for analysis and the photographer for questioning. Secondly, the description of the "purple electrical bolt" has brought out the most vocal of the "HAARP is a weapon!" crackpots, who claim that such "bolts" are a primary visual effect associated with tests of the High Altitude Auroral Research Project. HAARP, in actuality, is merely a scientific endeavor aimed at studying the properties and behavior of the ionosphere, with particular emphasis on being able to understand and use it to enhance communications and surveillance systems for both civilian and defense purposes. However, to some disturbed individuals, HAARP is reportedly some "microwave doomsday weapon" designed to blow missiles and aircraft out of the sky, and is also responsible from everything from the ozone layer breaking down, to the World Trade Center attack, to geese flying backwards and upside down. In this case, the fiction is far stranger than the truth, and infinitely less accurate. Since the description of the photo was announced, some scientists, meteorologists, and aviation experts have suggested that Columbia was hit by an atmospheric phenomenon called a sprite. Sprites are a form of lightning, typically broad in size and shape, reddish in color, and strikes upward rather than toward the ground. Sprites have been reported for years by pilots, but weren't actually confirmed by scientists until the early 90s, with direct observations from orbit by Shuttle Astronauts being considered the "final word" on their existence. Based on observations, sprites are made up of broad charges called "streamers." One of the best examples of a streamer on a small scale is the static discharge shock a person can send to another person after rubbing their socks on a carpet. The smaller and more directed a streamer is, the more damage it can do. However, most observed sprites have been typically associated with broader, weaker streamers. The problem with explaining the "purple bolt" as a streamer is that it requires that the shuttle have been above a cloud. Furthermore, if Columbia had been hit by a streamer, and a cloud had been present underneath, to generate a streamer of the required magnitude would have required a cloud large enough to have obscured the photograph. Some experts also offer another source for the "purple bolt" a more rare phenomenon called a "blue jet." Blue jets have been observed and photographed, and based on observations could cause significant physical damage to an aircraft, or even a shuttle. But as with sprites, blue jets are typically associated with extremely strong storms systems. According to the National Weather Service, and backed up by weather radar date of the area, at the time Columbia flew over the region where the "purple bolt" reportedly was photographed, there were absolutely no storm patterns capable of producing either a blue jet or a sprite. It should be noted, however, that both NASA and CAIB are looking into the possibility that that some kind of electrostatic discharge took place that blew a hole in an RCC panel and damaged the Thermal Protection System. Although not a front runner on anyone's list of possibilities, several officials with NASA and the CAIB have voiced their initial opinions on the issue: CAIB member James Hallock noted on 2/20/03 that the possibility of some sort of electrical discharge was something the board had looked at and will be considering again in the future. Hallock was quoted by SPACE.COM as noting “There’s not much ionization at that altitude. It’s low enough so that in my mind, while I haven’t crossed it off, it’s not high on my list.” While NASA has confirmed the image's existence, Shuttle Program Manager Ron Dittemore has noted that NASA was still trying to confirm the image's validity. At the same time, Dittemore was not willing to confirm or deny that static electricity played a role in Columbia’s loss, and preferred to wait for expert analysis to provide the answers. “I really have no idea whether we had any static electricity," Dittemore emphasized. "Whether or not we had any electrical discharge. I don’t know. We are asking experts in the field of atmospheric science if those types of events are even possible.” Meanwhile, Doug Kohl, a former Shuttle program engineer and materials scientist for the same Lockheed group that developed the Shuttle’s tiles, is already convinced that an electrical event at high altitude during re-entry that was the reason for the suspected RCC panel failure. Kohl worked for more than 10 years at KSC in several roles, including test conductor, pad leader and part of the team that prepared Columbia for its first post-Challenger-era flight in 1989. Commenting on the possibility of some sort of electrical discharge having damaged the Shuttle, Kohl responded “I still think that the RCC saw something such as a large static discharge that damaged it and the surrounding thermal protection system tiles, and that the problem progressed from there.” “If an electrical event caused the damage it will be readily evident to any materials person familiar with electrical damage in composites, as the fibers will look like a blown out steel belted radial tire where the charge exited the structure,” Kohl said. Still, with no tangible image to analyze, much less for the public to actually view and even analyze for themselves, a significant cloud of doubt has grown around this image. Based on the description of the image, most serious analysts following the investigation into the loss of Columbia are theorizing that the "purple bolt" is nothing more than some refractory artifact - a "trick of the light" - that can easily be explained. However, until either the image is released or the photographer steps out from his self-imposed anonymity, very little more than speculation can be made regarding the true nature of the image. On 3/08/03, interest in the Starfire photo was revived as several news services carried a report that both NASA and the CAIB were reconsidering the accuracy of the Starfire photo. Citing an as-yet unnamed NASA official close to the CAIB, as the investigation into the cause of the Columbia mishap has proceeded, more evidence has been uncovered that points to the breach point that allowed plasma to enter the wing occurred along RCC panels 1 thru 5. These panels are located on the leading edge of the left wing, at approximately the same location of the jagged edge as seen in the Starfire photo. Note that as of this writing, no official acknowledgement of this report has been made by either NASA or the CAIB. OM -- ]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[ Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Jim Oberg Guest Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 2:29 am    Post subject: straight skinny The picture is genuine, but because of an unusual feature of entry lighting, it LOOKS bizarre. The purple zig zag is the Columbia fireball bouncing around as the time exposure is triggered. As the camera settles down the zig-zagging object aligns itself with the white sky track that is the path of the fireballing shuttle. That is the 'strike' point -- an optical misinterpretation. Here's the key: because the orbiter leaves a persistent milky-white trail, that lingers for 30 seconds or more, the continuous track across the field of view LOOKS like the path followed by the fireball from one side to the other of the frame. But it's not. The white path that precedes the join-point of the purple zig-zagger (which is the real time-exposed image of the orbiter fireball) is the persistent trail that is being laid by the fireball during its transit, and it builds up to the recordable brightness only after the camera has stabilized. There IS a 'persistent trail' following the purple zig-zagger but because it moves rapidly side-to-side across the FOV, the exposure is never long enough to lay down a noticeable track on the image. Not until the camera is still, and the already existing persistent trail is lingering across the same swath of film, does the image emerge from background darkness and become a visible trail. It wasn't obvious, but anybody who has actually SEEN an orbiter entry fireball cross their sky will never forget the jaw-dropping awe of the golden spark and the milky trail. And remembering those visual effects, the jittering camera time exposure hypothesis becomes obvious. The photograph is copyrighted by the owner, Dr. Peter Goldie, so it is not supposed to be posted on open-access sites. But it has been, from time to time, until the owner tracks the site down and discusses copyright violation with them. I have a private-use copy that I can email you, but NOT for publication anywhere. See a non-illustrated news story at: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/02/11/MN150539.DTL .. Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Craig Fink Guest Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 2:56 am    Post subject: Re: straight skinny Jim Oberg wrote: Quote: I have a private-use copy that I can email you, but NOT for publication anywhere. See a non-illustrated news story at: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/02/11/MN150539.DTL WeBeGood@GMail.Com, I'd like to take a look at the picture. -- Craig Fink Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @ WeBeGood@GMail.Com Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Brian Thorn Guest Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:52 am    Post subject: Re: Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:10:27 +0200, André, PE1PQX <pe1pqx_geenviagra@planet.nl> wrote: Quote: The wheather was clear, and about 12 Deg C (as far as I can remember). It was 36F deg. Brian Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor André, PE1PQX Guest Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 1:23 pm    Post subject: Re: Challenger - Sprite Picture - HELP !!!!!!!!!!! Brian Thorn schreef : Quote: On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:10:27 +0200, André, PE1PQX pe1pqx_geenviagra@planet.nl> wrote: The wheather was clear, and about 12 Deg C (as far as I can remember). It was 36F deg. Brian Here in Holland we use the Celcius scale, I'm not familiar with the Farenheid scale, I don't use it daily. 12 °C would be about 53.6 °F according to the formula °F = (°C × 1. + 32 36 °F would be about 0 °C according to the formula °C = (°F − 32) × (5/9) I think I know why I thought it was 12 °C. The manufactureres (Morton-Thiokol) of the SRB's said this is the minimum temerature the SRB would work properly, without any dangerous problems. André Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         Aeronautics Industry Forum Index -> Aeronautics Industry All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next Page 1 of 3   Jump to: Select a forum Aeronautics Industry----------------Aeronautics Industry  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum 222 Attacks blocked Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group