Saturday, February 11, 2012 12:45 pm
Montgomery Blair High School's Online Student Newspaper
Tags: print
Feb. 1, 2003

Picking up the pieces of Columbia

by Nora Toiv, Page Editor and Kevin Chang, Page Editor
The space shuttle Columbia exploded over north Texas on Feb 1 during the re-entry phase of its return to Earth after a 16 day-long mission, killing all seven astronauts aboard.

The cause of the the disintegration of the Columbia is undetermined. According to The Washington Post, the launch debris that hit the left wing on take off is probably not the only reason that the shuttle exploded and may not have even played a part. "Right now, it just does not make sense to us that a piece of debris is the root cause to explain the loss of the Columbia crew," shuttle program mamager Ron Dittemore said at a news conference. "There has got to be another reason."

According to the Associated Press, NASA lost contact with Columbia at about 9 a.m. EST on Feb 1, 2003, approximately 16 minutes before it was scheduled to land at Cape Canaveral, Florida.

Eyewitnesses in the Dallas-Fort Worth area reported hearing loud noises and looking up to see several vapor trails made by pieces of Columbia. Debris from the shuttle was scattered over five states, and a substantial amount was found in the city of Nacogdoches, Texas. The nose, one of the major parts of the shuttle found so far, fell in Hemphill Texas. Remains have been found in 15 locations.

There has been amateur video of what looks like the capsule blowing up in mid-air. Anyone who finds debris has been asked to notify local law enforcement authorities and to stay away, since the debris will be critical to efforts to determine what went wrong and could be coated in toxic propellant. There have been reports of people seeking souveniers among the remains. Two people havv been charged with stealing government property. Some people have been reported to have checked into hospitals after touching debris, but there have been no reports of serious injury.

The final radio transmission between Mission Control and the shuttle gave no indication of any trouble. Aboard the shuttle was the first Israeli astronaut, payload specialist Ilan Ramon, and six American astronauts, mission commander Rick Husband, pilot William "Willy" McCool, payload commander Michael Anderson, and missions specialists Kalpana Chawla, David Brown, and Laurel Clark.

NBC4 news (nbc4.com) reported that Brown, who grew up in northern Virginia, brought a banner from Yorktown High School that had been to the top of Mt. Everest with him on the flight.

The last space shuttle to explode was the Challenger in 1986. Columbia was on a research mission and had been under tight security.

Other sources of information: cnn.com, washingtonpost.com, nasa.gov (official statement).

Discuss this Article

  • Another Magnet Student on February 1, 2003
    I express condolences to the families of the astronauts.

    Rick D. Husband, Commander
    William C. McCool, Pilot
    Michael P. Anderson, Payload Commander
    Kalpana Chawla, Mission Specialist
    David M. Brown, Mission Specialist
    Laurel B. Clark, Mission Specialist
    Ilan Ramon, Payload Specialist

    The Columbia(OV-102) was the oldest orbiter vehicle in NASA's fleet, and flew 28 missions, tragically destroyed in reentry on its last.
  • In Memory on February 1, 2003
    It is a sad day for America. I think that it will take some time for America and Israel to recover from such a tragedy. This unfortunate incident will be in my memory. Long Live The Space Program.
  • stargazer on February 1, 2003
    to quote someone famous,
    "They Slipped the Surly Bonds of Earth to Touch the Face of God"
  • stargazer on February 1, 2003
    I believe it was Reagan.
  • stargazer on February 1, 2003
    Their work was self-less and their sacrifice, total.

  • dan on February 1, 2003
    This is certainly a tragic event. Those men deserved better than to die in their mission. They are true heroes of this country. I believe that NASA is very irresponsible for this kind of incident to occur.
  • Kevin Chang on February 1, 2003
    dan: irresponsible? Doesn't seem like quite the right word to me.... What do you mean?
  • cz on February 2, 2003
    This is certainly a catastrophic incident, and I'm sure everyone is willing to offer their condolences to the families of the victims. However, I hope this will not overshadow the thousands of other unjustifiable deaths that happen everyday, particularly in places outside of America.
  • Kevin L. (View Email) on February 2, 2003
    Irresponsible? NASA checks everything forty times, but when you run a space shuttle 28 times it gets old, I don't think that NASA could have prevented this the way everything went. They check everything on the ground, but going through Earth's atmosphere twice will change things.
  • anonymous on February 2, 2003
    I certainly wouldn't say NASA is "irresponsible for this kind of incident to occur". NASA does everything they can to prevent this sort of thing from happening -- it is quite amazing that in over 40 years of space exploration only two previous fatal accidents have actually occured. After these accidents NASA did everything they could to figure out what went wrong and to prevent similar accidents from happening again. NASA also trains its astronauts to handle as many possibly fatal situations as possible. However, when you are traveling at mach 18.3 and are over 200,000 miles above the Earth, there is very little (if anything) you can be trained to do. It is certainly very sad that these kinds of things happen and I only hope that a lesson can be learned from this tragedy and that the space program will continue.
  • anon. on February 2, 2003
    nasa is not at fault, and its safety record is impeccable. i mean, in comparison, do you know how many people died over the course of the soviet space program? hundreds, probably. the only fault i can find with nasa is using columbia. it had been flying missions for 21 years, had its first mission delayed for a number of years, and was probably 24 or 25 years old. it belonged in a museum. aside from this, it was a horrible tragedy, and i hope the conservatives don't use it as an excuse for cutting funding for the space program. to stop our exploration of space would be an affront to the memory of those 7 astronauts.
  • anon. (View Email) on February 2, 2003
    nasa is not at fault, and its safety record is impeccable. i mean, in comparison, do you know how many people died over the course of the soviet space program? hundreds, probably. the only fault i can find with nasa is using columbia. it had been flying missions for 21 years, had its first mission delayed for a number of years, and was probably 24 or 25 years old. it belonged in a museum. aside from this, it was a horrible tragedy, and i hope the conservatives don't use it as an excuse for cutting funding for the space program. to stop our exploration of space would be an affront to the memory of those 7 astronauts.
  • Enigma on February 2, 2003
    This tragedy cannot be put into words. Those poor people, those poor families. I also heard that the woman, Laurel Clark, her cousin died in one of the towers on September 11th. So that family has had an extra dose of sorrow. This is just another horrible reminder that we can't take people for granted. It's a morbid way to think, but you gotta appreciate who you come into contact with, because you never know if they'll always be there.
  • Anonymous on February 2, 2003
    Well, the easiest way to prevent anything else like this from ever happening is to give the $200 billion about to be spent in iraq to NASA......

    Money does wonders for everything
  • Ben (the voice of reason) on February 3, 2003
    Spaceflight is inherently dangerous. The astronauts were fully aware of the risks they were taking when they signed up for the mission. NASA is not "irresponsible" - that 111 out of 113 space shuttle launches were successful is testament to the success of their ambitions, not their irresponsibility! Spaceflight involves hurtling through the atmosphere from 200 miles up at over eighteen times the speed of sound. This is NOT sailing or aviation, which are easy by comparison! NASA knows this, the astronauts knew it, so why won't the American people just accept it?

    About 10% of all spaceflights fail catastrophically (most of these are unmanned). NASA has managed to bring this number to less than 2% for its spaceflights where people are at risk. NASA should be commended for taking extra precautions to secure the safety of its crew.

    I still fully respect NASA and its mission. It will take something much worse than the loss of a space shuttle to convince me otherwise.
  • Ben on February 3, 2003
    In response to "anonymous" - NASA has actually suffered three fatal accidents in the last forty years. The Apollo 1 launchpad fire in 1967 killed 3 astronauts, and then there are the other two shuttle disasters that you mentioned.
  • Rodney (View Email) on February 4, 2003
    They are our heroes and we should built on their willingness to make our world a better place to live. May the good lord be with their families and through these hard times and we all as Americans peace loving citizens remember those brave men.
  • Another Magnet Student on February 4, 2003
    Not 200,000 miles, 200,000 feet...

    Columbia certainly was the oldest shuttle, but Discovery has completed 30.
  • another freshi on February 4, 2003
    yea, the columbia incident when debris from launch hit the left wing, causing some heat tiles to fall off....my assumption is that the other heat tiles also fell as a consequence to the intial ones, and slowly, as the heat tiles fell, the ship started burning, until it reached inside, taking the lives of the 7 astronauts.
  • Phil on February 4, 2003
    Ya know stuff like this is bound to happen. Nobody is perfect.
  • A. Louise on February 5, 2003
    This is a terrible tragedy, but the amount of media coverage has been really surprising. May be it is a reflection of human nature (or may be just sensationalist journalism) that the nation is in mourning for the deaths of seven individuals who had found flight and, like Icarus, flew too close to the sun and fell.
  • anonymous on February 5, 2003
    Yes, I did mean 200,000 feet... sorry! And I said two PREVIOUS missions had failed, not counting the Columbia incident which brings the total to three.

    Ben -- you asked why can't the American people just accept that fact that Columbia was lost. Yes the Astronauts and their loved ones knew the enormous risks of spaceflight, but this knowledge does not make the tradgedy any easier to deal with.

    About the age of Columbia, it was NASA's first and oldest shuttle, but it was designed to travel 100 missions and had just undergone a large refurbishing. There was no reason for NASA to be worried about Columbia's age.

    Amen to "Anonymous"! I am all for giving NASA at least some of the money that will be used for the possible war.
  • Another Anonymous on February 5, 2003
    In the whole grand scheme of things - 7 lives is just a drop in the bucket. Statistically, with all the gun murders, car accidents, and other deaths that occurr every day, 7 astronauts isn't that much.

    Now, that being said,

    Those 7 people were however doing the most important thing that of anyone on the planet. They transcend all of the crap that's going on right now and represent what is truly great about humanity.

    The consequences of this impede that journey, and therefore extend far beyond the loss of 7 lives.
  • Kevin L. (View Email) on February 5, 2003
    Nobody is perfect? Since when did the American Space Program, the shuttle Columbia, and 7 people become "somebody?"
  • WP_ShipDesigner on February 10, 2003
    Regarding Safety records and the Soviet program....
    From reading http://www.sandcastlevi.com/space/index.html, it looks as if the Russians have been more successful than NASA--they have not lost anyone in spaceflight since the early 70's and have only had two fatal missions ever, with a total loss of only 4 lives. NASA has lost 17 persons, pretty much once every 15 years.
    the Russians have flown scores of missions continuosly since the mid 70's with no loss of life.
    But if anyone has reliable facts showing otherwise, we would love to hear about them!
  • Phil on February 12, 2003
    remember, this was during the soviet union. They could have lied
  • Constance (View Email) on February 13, 2003
    I hope that all of the family members will keep their family's going because of this terrible tragedy. and i have my hopes and prayers are with them.
  • a dissenter on February 13, 2003
    The space shuttle has been a failure. It was supposed to be more economical then conventional rockets, and it was expected to fly up to once a week. Now, the average mission costs 600 million dollars, and the shuttle flys an average of about five missions a year. Even the soviets realized the shuttle wasn't worth it. You know where there only shuttle is? It's rotting in Gorky Park in Moscow.
    The Space Shuttle is too big, too complex, too costly and too dangerous, and its detracting from the space program's main goal: construction of the International Space Station. Because the Shuttle transports so much to the station, the project is now in jepordy due the loss of means to transport necessary supplies, such as the rocket fuel which helps to fire boosters that prevent the station from falling into the earth's atmosphere. Is it worth it to scrap humanity's most important and ambitious goal just because of an unreliable, antiquaited Shuttle? I say its not worth it.
    Instead, we should use space planes, which have been in existence since the 1960's, as well as unmanned scientific payloads and high powered telescopes. That will expand our understanding of the universe far more then the deaths several more astronauts.
Jump to first comment