Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!gatech!ut-sally!mordor!lll-crg!gymble!dday
From: dday@gymble.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.columbia
Subject: Re: Speculation III
Message-ID: <491@gymble.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 7-Feb-86 10:12:16 EST
Article-I.D.: gymble.491
Posted: Fri Feb  7 10:12:16 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Feb-86 08:22:53 EST
References: <1955@pur-phy.UUCP>
Reply-To: dday@gymble.UUCP (Dennis Doubleday)
Distribution: net
Organization: U of Maryland, Laboratory for Parallel Computation, C.P., MD
Lines: 21

In article <1955@pur-phy.UUCP> piner@pur-phy.UUCP writes:
>   The only way that a flame from the SRB could have caused the
>ET to explode instantly, would be if there were an internal leak
>inside the ET. Such leaks are not uncommon in cryogenic systems.
>But doesn't the ET have leak sensors in it? Or is there a nominal
>leak rate. A small leak could be ignored if there aren't any flames
>about. But of course this time there was.
 
I've seen speculation in both the Washington Post and Newsweek that the
errant flame might have either burned through the feed line from the 
liquid hydrogen tank or ignited the self-destruct mechanism attached to
the ET.  I have no idea, just reporting what I read.



-- 

UUCP:	seismo!umcp-cs!dday                      Dennis Doubleday
CSNet:	dday@umcp-cs				 University of Maryland
ARPA:	dday@gymble.umd.edu			 College Park, MD 20742
Fan of: Chicago Cubs, Chicago Bears, OU Sooners	 (301) 454-6154