Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!ucbvax!space
From: MEHARP01@ULKYVX.BITNET
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: SRB O-rings
Message-ID: <8602101550.AA13983@s1-b.arpa>
Date: Mon, 10-Feb-86 10:50:55 EST
Article-I.D.: s1-b.8602101550.AA13983
Posted: Mon Feb 10 10:50:55 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 12-Feb-86 07:22:59 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 25

It looks to me like they may have someone to nail after all.  I saw
on the news where the committee has discovered some internal NASA
flaming about the O-ring seals on the SRB's eroding after use.  The media
is trying to portray this as the result of a cover-up scheme because of
some remarks about it being a "budget item."

I am going to be really disillusioned with the program if this turns out to
be the case.  My first thought when I saw what they were talking about is that
those seals should have been replaced as part of the refurbishment process
after recovery.  Is anyone out there familiar with what exactly IS done
in refurbishment?  I know the fuel is repacked and it's cleaned up but I can't
believe it isn't more stringent than that.  They did show one guy from NASA
(Jesse Moore, i think) saying that it was indeed an "analmolus (sp) item and
thoroughly worked."  This would tend to clear them at first glance, but why
were they not replaced?  Are the gaskets expensive or difficult to replace?

One other thing that seems to have faded into the ambient noise is an item
I heard about Morton-Thiokol saying that the SRB's low end operation and
storage temperature was around 40 degrees Farenheit.  Was this dismissed
as a cause outright, could it have contributed or was the report wrong?

Michael Harpe
University of Louisville

Internet: MEHARP01%ULKYVX@WISCVM.WISC.EDU