Did A Woodpecker Shoot Down The Space Shuttle

[EmoKarateMan]

i read in the book in cape canavaral florida in 1995 woodpeckers tried to impress lady woodpeckers so they peck at the spackeshuttle and it delayed the spaceshuttle

[curiousgeorgeonether]

All I can think of from the title Faith No More's "Woodpecker from Mars" I can remember the last succesful Columbia mission. I was in LosAngels and heard this massive BOOM. About 5 mins later I caught the radio saying that the shuttle had just re-entered the atmosphere over the Mojave Desert. Even at that height and distance it sounded like an overinflated semi tire exploding, only because of the topography of LA it just resounded for about 30 seconds after. Unforgetable.

[whatareyoulookingat8]

I guess it's right.. Why would it be impossible that a bird could do that. Animals FTW :P

[F4bianus]

@ATSFCrash: Maybe, but still the external tank stays in space

[ATFSCrash]

F4bianus: Wrong. And where did that come from anyway, what does it have to do with the price of tea in China? ( in case you dont understand that metaphor, its a way of saying that your off-topic and it seems not to have anything to do with the topic.

So are you just a troll advertising your ignorance? You schizophrenic or under the influence when you posted?

[awilliams1701]

actually the tank comes back and burns up in a decaying orbit.

[wardave3]

there is no chance the bird could have done that and there is no chance of reparin it cause the external tank dose not come back down to earth it stays in spce where it detaches from the orbiter

[ATFSCrash]

wardave3: If a bird cant do any harm, then why did they spend millions of dollars on repairs? If a bird cant do any harm than why do they spend millions of dollars on personnel and equipment dedicated to prevent bird strikes and other related bird damage? Your post proves yourself to be a fool.

[funnyvidzrus]

the footage is fake, there have been no accounts of this, not even in the news

[ATFSCrash]

Funnyvidzrus: You are a stupid liar. The video is authentic, there is even a link to NASA that contains a copy the video clips. Unlike you I don't fake videos or post fake videos.

[poolfreak747]

ATFScrash, im gonna do your mom

[ATFSCrash]

poolfreak747 "ATFScrash, im gonna do your mom"

You're a sick freak since you're sexually attracted to old dead women.

[ATFSCrash]

As I have said before, I think it is an extreme long shot that woodpeckers were a factor in any shuttle mishap, however I think it is still a very remote possibility. I think it's important to remember that small things in nature can have a very large impact. It is remotely possible that something as simple as fungus, bacteria or bugs could compromise the foam. My title is somewhat of a jest, and meant to be taken figuratively.

[spartan4333]

damn al qaida has won if they can get animals to work for them.

[kingdomboost]

Huh how about that.

[NOLANSballs]

huh the more you know

[drsheikhjunior]

Shoot down the woodpeckers then make sell to McDonald

[QuiglysMom]

It is extremely unlikely that woodpeckers or anything else damaged the foam since the foam is given a very thorough visual pre-flight check only a few hours before launch.

Some foam is lost on almost every flight. It is somewhat of a design flaw in that there is no foam that will withstand that sort of buffeting 100% of the time. Still, the insulation it provides is needed, and there really isn't any other practical way of doing it.

[pegleg1992]

A woodpecker can peck a hole like that in less than 'a few hours'

[whitfkl318nu]

I'm confused. Are you saying that they did or didn't? Is it doubtful, or is it likely? It can't be both. What prelaunch checks were performed on challanger's lining to ensure its integrity against this?

[herbys68]

Doubtful but still possible. It is a legitimate question with an open answer.

[londubh2007]

Damn communist, er ah, al qaeda woodpeckers!

[1d0ntc4r39]

whoooo hoooo im wit this guy lol

[aleclitvinov]

You probably mean those woodpeckers sitting in NASA and cutting down safety expenses.

[ATFSCrash]

Aleclitvinov: Pretty good metaphor/analogy. You do have a good point however the woodpeckers in Washington are also partly to blame. Really the media and the public is partly to blame. The financial strain and the pressure to perform has forced NASA into some difficult positions that have resulted in some unwise and very questionable decisions.

[mcdustbunny]

giggity giggity goo!

[Zachmister]

i saw a bird hit a shuttle and fell in one vid.

[ATFSCrash]

I think the one you're talking about is a hoax. It has about three or four birds.

[Zachmister]

ok i didnt know it was a hoax.

[bigjonnyjon]

lol this is funny

[aRazorsEloquence]

thats not funny, asshole

people died cause of those shitty little birds

[ATFSCrash]

I think it is highly unlikely that the space shuttle that burned up was from woodpecker damage. However I think there is an extremely remote possibility that it was or some other similar phenomena. The images in this video was from a shuttle mission that was scrubbed because of the woodpecker damage. Even though the likelihood is no one was killed from the woodpecker's I still find it somewhat hard to find funny because it resulted in the loss of millions of dollars of taxpayer money.

[artjko]

Poor little peckers. Probably ran out of trees to peck when they cleared the forest to build NASA. ;)

Or maybe they'd just rather peck foam than wood (who could blame 'em?)

[b3erni3]

YEH GO BIRDS!! DESTROY NASA!

[WeLikeThis]

wood peckers are a threat to national security, if your assertion is correcto

[ATFSCrash]

WeLikeThis. Almost anything can be. During the Cuban missile crisis a bear climbed over a fence, security forces mistook the ruckus as Russian commandos. A jet was scrambled from the base loaded with bombs. When security forces realized their mistake, they didn't have a radio to recall the plane, so they drove out on the runway to keep the bomb-laden plane from taking off. A bear almost triggered WWIII.

[theantijihadist]

Actually, the Columbia burned up on re-entry in 2003, not 2004. Please correct this error.

[ATFSCrash]

theantijihadist. It's a typo. Thanks for pointing it out, but I'm not going to bother to pull the video over such an irrelevant typo.

[fiftyninefitted]

you gots to be more than incredible stupid to actually consider this theory. oh my fcking god. hahahahha. nice grib those woodpeckers got, must say! and then making holes in metal, while doing 1000mph ? hahahahaha

[ATFSCrash]

Fiftyninefitted: So far, apparently you're the only one that is so incredibly stupid that you think I'm saying that the woodpeckers could have pecked holes in the insulation WHILE the space shuttle was flying. So far, apparently you're the only one that is so incredibly stupid to think that pecking in the foam insulation is pecking holes in metal. You're a foul mouth idiot and a troll.

[Zachmister]

ok i just said i saw a vid of a bird hitting a shuttle as it launched. it had nothing to do with your vid except it was about birds and the shuttle. so please, dont call me an idiot or a foul mouth and a troll

[ATFSCrash]

Zachmister my comment was calling fiftyninefitted stupid for using vulgarities and for thinking I meant woodpeckers pecked holes in the shuttle while flying. As I said I think the other video you saw was a hoax or it was a perspective thing and the birds were miles away. My comment to Zachmister is not directed to you unless that is your sock account/alias.

[Zachmister]

it is not my sock account.

[isadashhqdotcom]

Thanks! Check out the International Space Agency (ISA) site here by clicking on this user account! Also check out the International Space Plane (ISP) Program website! You can google "International Space Plane (ISP) Program", or you can goto this user account which has links to the International Space Agency (ISA) Organization.

[tonymilw]

just a fyi a guy with some puddy and some duct tape holding up a bag shows me exactly why the shuttle crashed. end of story.

[flipper82a]

Does this feature under comedy as well?

Just wondering, Thats all,

lotsa lurv CPxx

[noseycozy]

I'm a little confused. Columbia didn't exist in 2004.

[ATFSCrash]

Sorry it is in the video details but not as clear as it could be. I will try to make it more clear. The film is of the STS-70/Discovery. I am inferring if the foam on STS-70/Discovery was damaged by wildlife, perhaps some wildlife damaged the Columbia. It's an extremely unlikely but a possibility

[ATFSCrash]

Jacoblo I suppose you think all the manned and missions to the moon were faked too.

If you see all wall instead of a space shuttle, I think you need psychiatric help.

You drink too much, or take drugs, or skip your psychiatric medicine?

It sounds like you're hallucinating and having paranoid delusions.

I guess you seen a lot of walls shaped like nose cones. If it's not obvious that is shaped like the nose cone take a closer look at the shadow detail.

[jacoblo]

lol

iuts impossible to tell from these pictures if they woodpeckers are actually pecking the shuttle or just some wall, or if the scientist working is within the shuttle or not, or if the shuttle really is this shuttle

stop making videos loser

[ATFSCrash]

You're hilarious. If you can't tell that's a space shuttle, that just shows you how much you know. You expect your typical wall to crumble so easily like foam? Shows how much you know.

If you look at text documentation in the video description and if you take a look at the photos of the shuttle is fairly easy tell it is the space shuttle.

[HaoSci]

What a farce!

[Mundellproductions]

The last I heard is that the shuttle will retire in 2010 and Nasa's planning to go back to the moon.

[bedachaz]

i belive in this world techonolgy has risen

[ATFSCrash]

The last I heard (possibly outdated) was that NASA was considering (due to budget restraints) using use a smaller one time use, pilotless vehicles to replace the shuttle. I think the vehicle needs to be big enough to take up large things, like the Hubble, spy satellites, space station modules, ect... One of the moon landings might have been a crash, if there wasn't a pilot aboard to override the computer to avoid a crater.

[BigBill783]

Yes, foam is a threat--but that tank needs foam for insulation. The foam falling off and hitting the vehicle happened on every flight NASA did not take seriously the foam coming off and hitting for 113 flights--and shame on NASA. The foam breaks off cause of condensation getting into it. Last week Atlantis's tank was damaged by hail. It'll be locusts next.

[ATFSCrash]

There seems to be a psychotic sway between NASA and the media. The media often has this affect on many people and organizations. The media and the public and NASA gets set into a false sense of security from a long period of no mishaps, then when mishap happens the media and the public get paranoid, so the response is to compensate with an unrealistic persona of safety. The shuttle is a calculated risk, be vigilant and professional, but NASA has been fooled by its own persona.

[ATFSCrash]

We need to take the risks to keep flying the space shuttle, however I think we should invest in the new shuttle like the X-33. I would prefer to see something that is about as capable or more, that is simpler, cheaper, safer, and more reliable.

NASA has done an excellent job. But the space shuttle is horribly complex, with all that complexity there is bound to be another accident if given enough time. The concentration of effort should be on safety and the mission, not the persona.

[RainMan68]

The X-33 was cancelled years ago. NASA is investing in the Orion crew vehicle now, which given the new goals set fourth (return to the moon and manned exploration of mars) makes better sense. There may be another space plane program in the future, but for the time being the X-33 is an abandoned program.

[ATFSCrash]

I don't get what you driveing at. I would think the thickness of the foam would be based on a lot of variables with contradictory interests. I would think too much foam, would encourage cracking, and be a detriment to weight. I would think too little foam could cause excessive icing and condensation, temperature exchange; which have their own dangers. And I'm sure I am leaving out many variables and consequences. This is not the venue for complex deep discussion.

[BigBill783]

This footage is from STS-70 Discovery--a mission in 1995 to launch a TDRS satellite--the woodpeckers attacked the tank-Discovery rolled back and was repaired. You really think small billed woodpeckers killed 7 astronauts and a $3 Billion Space Shuttle?!

[ATFSCrash]

You're stating the obvious, if you bothered to read the video description you would see it clearly states it is STS-70, so we obviously already know.

If it wasn't a threat then why did they delay the launch of STS-70 which cost a fortune, plus a fortune in repairs and why would they have a team dedicated to preventing woodpeckers from pecking holes in the shuttle?

[ATFSCrash]

They even the allegedly have armed aircraft to allegedly prevent bird strikes, which I think is partially true, but I think it may be partly a cover story (or politically correct way) for saying intercepting possible hostile aircraft.

You might want to examine history and study how many crashes have been caused by birds. The term "bug" in the context of talking about computers, is referring to when moths disabled naval fire control computers and radar.

[ATFSCrash]

The origin of "bug" in the context of computer problems is from moths and other insects. Something as trivial as mold and fungus was chronic for causing radar problems in WWII Pacific.

Another thing you should look into is a phenomenon called "crack propagation" is where a small defect like a woodpecker hole can cause a concentration of stress and a weakness that allows for a small problem to become bigger.

[ATFSCrash]

People should spend time reading and thinking a little bit better, some people seem to have a broken moral compass, otherwise there wouldn't be all this nonsense.

[mianbentley]

LIES! This is from STS-70

since than, fake owls and high-frequency screamers keep them away from the pad...

there has been no woodpecker attack on the shuttle since 1995...

[ATFSCrash]

Whom is lying? No one said anything else here, if you bothered to read the video details you would see it clearly states it is STS-70, it even mentions, the owls and the noise makers. If you make wild perversions/lies, that is your responsibility, not mine.

Anyone with an elementary school education could tell that if it happened on one mission that it could possibly happen on another.

[nathanmoeller]

NASA has eyes on just about every part of the vehicle while it is sitting on the launch pad. If woodpeckers played any part in the destruction of the shuttle, it would have been caught on tape long before the mission even began. Foam has fallen from the tank on every mission since STS-1. It just happened to fall from the worst place, at the worst time, and hit the worst part of the shuttle during ascent.

[ATFSCrash]

I would agree you are almost certainly right. As I have stated since this incident NASA has gone to great lengths to prevent this from happening. However there still is a very slight shadow of doubt. As I pointed out it could be some other animal or natural phenomena that they might not be looking for.

[nathanmoeller]

Yes, there is a small shadow of doubt. But it is INFINITELY smaller than any other scientific data they have on how the foam behaves. Air pockets within the foam and thermal effects (expanding and contracting) are usually the causes for foam falling away.

[ATFSCrash]

There is obviously still a problem since several chunks have been seen falling from the shuttle since the mishap. I am pointing out that there might be explanations that have been prematurely dismissed, or not thought of.

Remember part of the reason for both of the space shuttle mishaps, is people were so dismissive of problems. "Launch Fever"

[nathanmoeller]

Yes. Chunks have fallen from the tank during post-Columbia missions. It will never be perfected, but measures have been taken to ensure that no Columbia-sized pieces will fall from the tank again. Small chunks are still dislodged during flight, but as long as they fall away after 2 minutes 15 seconds, they are no threat, as there is no air to accelerate them into the orbiter at a threatening velocity.

[ATFSCrash]

To say that the foam is no threat is ridiculous. I'm obviously not talking about a threat at extreme altitude, the threat occurs at lower altitudes. If there wasn't a threat, then why does NASA have extra cameras for documentation, have inspections of the tiles in space, and why do they bring a tile repair kit? You seem to be confusing the persona versus the facts.

[ATFSCrash]

Remember the persona that NASA gave is that there was nothing wrong with the seals, and the shuttle blew up. The persona was that the foam wasn't a threat, yet that is the probable cause of the second shuttle to burn up. Then they gave the persona the foam cracking and was fixed and there wouldn't be any more foam falling off. Yet you still want to give the persona that the foam is not a threat.

[ATFSCrash]

When they revealed their public test on the foam, they still seem to be underestimating the impact force of the foam. LOX tanks can get very cold, and cause condensation. The foam could have been covered or and saturated with water/ice. I think they tested dry foam. Wet foam would have been more massive and hit with much more force, so an even smaller wet piece could do the same damage.

[ATFSCrash]

Another indication that the foam tests were not entirely realistic is the foam in the tests stayed relatively intact as the videos indicate. Whereas foam from launches have disintegrated on impact, as shown in the videos.

Cracks have a tendency to occur where there are flaws; water/ice can aggravate things in many ways.

[sagaskell]

Iinteresting read and i would not be suprised if a government agency overlooked something as simple as this in the drama that followed !