> >        http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993584
>  >Tests have revealed that an object spotted falling from the space
shuttle
>  >Columbia on the second day of its doomed mission was (((apparently))) a
>  >panel of protective heat-resistant tiles.

> I realise this is just a verbatim quote from newscientist.com but I wonder
> at the credibility. Stuff doesn't "fall" in these conditions, if something
> detached from the spacecraft it would simply drift away. Ok, maybe just
> semantics but you'd think a journal with "science" in its name would be
> more precise.

That was just the introduction. The next paragraph says ..

"Radar pictures revealed the object falling from the shuttle as it performed
a pivotal manoeuvre in orbit for a scientific experiment. Investigators have
now taken radar images of various shuttle components to try to find a
match."

ie it was (presumably) ejected by forces generated by the manoeuvre which
were .different than those which had been acting during orbital insertion.

If this was known at the time then it adds to the already existent string of
"if only ..."s.


        RM

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads