First signs of disaster, says sensors failed, temps climbed in left wing.The left wing was failing in many ways minutes before the explosionbt

What, temps climbed? I just heard the indicators went to zero - but because of a sensor failure... :-hmmm

I suspect that the piece of falling foam insulation from the external tank shortly after the launch did a lot more damage than NASA realised.Chris Low,ENGLAND.

That is what I heard from the second gentlemen, but perhaps only I heard it. Could be my imagination. The next few days will clarify.Cheers,bt

"I suspect that the piece of falling foam insulation from the external tank shortly after the launch did a lot more damage than NASA realised."I also believe that.... You don't need a large area of tiles lost for the heat and air pressure to start peeling the other tiles away. The rest would be a cascade effect--the exposed portions would heat, become brittle, and fail.As for the explosions heard on the ground, I simply believe these were more likely caused by multiple parts of the shuttle moving at supersonic speeds. I was in California once when the shuttle flew over on reentry, and remember just the two sonic booms heard had a rumbling quality that made for almost a minute....

I stand by my original statement. From CNN:(CNN) -- As federal investigators begin to look into why the space shuttle Columbia broke apart, NASA officials said the left wing lost hydraulic sensors, lost tire pressure and then experienced intense heat before the shuttle broke up Saturday morning. Here is the whole article.bthttp://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/01/shuttle.investigation/

Nothing but speculation of course, but I watched the entire news conference on NASA TV. There was one question about an astronomer (in Hawaii?) reporting he could see unusual discharge or debris when the shuttle passed there. It was dismissed, BUT, look a the relative speed reported (12,500mph) and take the fact that the first sensor failure happened approx seven minutes prior to total loss of contact. At that speed the shuttle covered at least 1458 miles from that first anomaly to total loss of contact (probably more distance since it would have been decelerating during re-entry up to that point). Maybe that individual was right?As an edited note NBC reported just a short time ago that the report came from a California astronomer, affiliated with an observatory there. They ARE NOT saying the observatory telescope was trying to view the shuttle, just that an astronomer noticed this.Probably not true, but there are local TV news reports of debris possible in the Albuquerque, New Mexico area now too. All of this could be hype of course, but points to ponder.Joe L.

explosion.... ?There was no explosion. Be extremely careful what you hear on the news. (i.e.) abc,nbc,cbs,cnn. They have a way of mis-representing the facts.Greylady flys forever STS107GOD BLESS THE SEVEN

The term explosion came out by typing my thoughts, instead of the facts. OTOH, YOU say "there was no explosion"...that is equally a case of misrepresentation of the facts. There is no evidence one-way or the other.I'll be careful...you do the same! :)Cheers!bt

It has been reported for the past several days here in Albuquerque that one of the telescopes on Kirtland AFB (is in Albuquerque) took some movie and still photos as the shuttle passed overhead. They are under strict government orders not to release the picture sent to NASA.Kind of makes one wonder what they might already know. Also it has been reported that a possible piece came off as far back as California. If there is a good thing in all of this, at least she came down over land and maybe they can figure out what went wrong.Terry

Regaurding my first and last post. What happend to the rest of my paragraph? This forums moderator blows !

Well James, don't know what you are rambling on about as no one on the moderator team did anything to your message (you appear to have mis-edited it yourself), but after your childish email message to us, your wish is granted. You no longer have access to post here. Happy flying.