Talk:Space Shuttle Columbia

STS-107 details

Is having the full details of the crew of STS-107 appropriate on this page, when they are given in the articles on STS-107 and on the Columbia disaster? - kiwiinapanic 03:32 Feb 2, 2003 (UTC)

Yes it is how dare you say this,Topgear23

Space Shuttle Buran

If Space Shuttle Buran doesn't relate to Columbia, then how does

• Space Shuttle Challenger
• Space Shuttle Enterprise
• Space Shuttle Discovery
• Space Shuttle Atlantis
• Space Shuttle Endeavour

The only difference is the above are American, and the Buran was Soviet. It is not like there are 30 countries building space shuttles. There have only been a handful of shuttles sent into space by humans, and the Buran is one of them. To discount the Buran because it isn't NASA's, is being America-centric.

I've added Buran to the Space Shuttle template. The problem now is that the header in the template redirects to the NASA Space Shuttle program. A general definition on space shuttles should be in that page.--Andylkl 12:40, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Rakesh Sharma

Kalpana Chawla was not the first astronaut of Indian birth. The first was Rakesh Sharma who went into space in 1984. This fact is mentioned in wiki's Kalpana Chawla page.
Jay 00:36, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Integrating articles

I think it's time to integrate Space Shuttle Columbia disaster and Space Shuttle Columbia into a single article. There is a lack of parallelism between the way the Columbia and Challenger articles are handled and I see no reason the disaster info can't be included in the main article (with a redirect at the disaster article so nobody is dead-ended). I plan to do this soon if no major objections arise. Jgm 15:13, 18 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I very strongly disagree and am surprised I haven't seen your message until now. Having over two thirds of this article about one aspect of Columbia - her death - would unbalance this article. The summary here is a good overview of the event. --mav 23:46, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Response to this at Talk:Space Shuttle Columbia disaster. Jgm 02:12, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

why the shuttle is named "Columbia"

The shuttle was was named after Columbia University b/c scientist at the university were the ones to invented the ceramic tiles that protected the shuttle from the heat of entering/exiting orbit.

The above anonymous statement was written with someone with a particular interest in Columbia University, judging from the edit history. As a son of Right Stuff parents who worked for Rockwell, the company who manufactured the Space Shuttles here in Palmdale, I can tell you the above statement is patent nonsense. The naming of the Columbia was to represent the United States as a whole, and "Columbia" is often used to represent the United States in manufactured things. It's derived from the name of Christopher Columbus, explorer of the New World called the Americas - not Columbia University, which also is named after Columbus. Unlike our anon friend above, I'm willing to sign and datestamp my contribution here. --avnative 02:36, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

Actually, in reading the article, the Robert Gray sloop Columbia story is entirely plausible, but the Columbia University story is patent nonsense. Gray's sloop most likely was named after the explorer Columbus. Still would like a cite one way or the other. --avnative 02:42, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

See the external links - specifically, this one from a NASA site:

Columbia, the oldest orbiter in the Shuttle fleet, is named after the Boston, Massachusetts based sloop captained by American Robert Gray.

-- ALoan (Talk) 09:49, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Changed the picture

I changed the picture of Columbia landing (in the history section) at the end of STS-73 to that of Columbia landing at the end of STS-1. The pictures are about the same quality but the historical significance of STS-1 seems greater than STS-73. It would seem, especially in the history section, that this image is a better fit. Triddle 02:49, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This image?

Can someone post this picture in the article? It's a nice photo that shows the NASA meatball logo and American flag & "Columbia" on the wings. http://www.ccastronomy.org/photo_shuttle_Columbia_STS-107_launch_portrait.jpg

This one shows Columbia's wing markings, too: http://www.vesmirweb.net/galerie/raketoplany/ig05_sts107_launch_02.jpg —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.130.233.72 (talk • contribs) 04:09, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Song played at launch of STS-1?

I remember watching Columbia's first launch, but can't remember the song that was played. It was on the TV news broadcasts. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.136.146.36 (talk • contribs) 07:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Cowboy Bebop

The anachronism could be resolved by figuring the old fellow had a _really_ tough job finding all the parts and rebuilding Columbia. ;) The episode shows a novel method of launching the Shuttle horizontally using JATO rockets on either side of the nose and a jettisonable fuel tank in the cargo bay. Whether or not that would actually work... The show is set in the future, so one could presume more energetic fuels and a superlight composite material for the fuel tank. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.136.146.36 (talk • contribs) 07:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

William Langewiesche from "the Atlantic" article, Nov. 2003

" . . . The caib discovered that on the morning of January 17, the day after the launch, the low-level engineers at the Kennedy Space Center whose job was to review the launch videos and film were immediately concerned by the size and speed of the foam that had struck the shuttle. As expected of them, they compiled the imagery and disseminated it by e-mail to various shuttle engineers and managers—most significantly those in charge of the shuttle program at the Johnson Space Center. Realizing that their blurred or otherwise inadequate pictures showed nothing of the damage that might have been inflicted, and anticipating the need for such information by others, the engineers at Kennedy then went outside normal channels and on their own initiative approached the Department of Defense with a request that secret military satellites or ground-based high-resolution cameras be used to photograph the shuttle in orbit. After a delay of several days for the back-channel request to get through, the Air Force proved glad to oblige, and made the first moves to honor the request. Such images would probably have shown a large hole in the left wing—but they were never taken. . . "--the Atlantic, November 2003. [4th page, roughly a quarter to a third of the way down]
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2003/11/columbia-apos-s-last-flight/4204/4/

" . . . What the Debris Assessment engineers could not imagine is that no photos had been taken, or ever would be—and essentially for lack of curiosity by NASA's imperious, self-convinced managers. What those managers in turn could not imagine was that people in their own house might really be concerned. The communication gap had nothing to do with security clearances, and it was complete. . . " [roughly three-fourths of the way down
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2003/11/columbia-apos-s-last-flight/4204/4/

STS-118 mission patch with Columbia

The original patch has finally been unveiled, approved by NASA just one day before we lost Columbia. needs to be added to the article. The designer of many of the mission patches talked about it in this thread.

http://www.collectspace.com/ubb/Forum18/HTML/000409.html 2600:1700:AB0:4210:84D:35F0:B3F2:C6FE (talk) 02:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Not Enough History

This was the first Space Shuttle. History section isn't anywhere near as detailed as those for Discovery, Endeavour, and Atlantis. Columbia had a lot of history besides STS-107. 2600:1700:AB0:4210:B828:A267:53A9:AA7E (talk) 18:59, 16 August 2024 (UTC)