Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Gulf War Syndrome Vs Shuttle Debris  
User currently offlineWardialer From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1182 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 years 6 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1055 times:

With the shuttle debris being toxic it was the same deal in the gulf war when scud missiles exploded in mid-air causing debris to fall and leak out the highly toxic nitrogen dioxide gas which is used as a propellant. Apparently some of our troops were exposed to that material and they dont want the same thing happening to the public with the shuttle debris.

4 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBoeing4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (11 years 6 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 985 times:

I was wondering about something like this myself. NASA says the debris is toxic, and I hope that it won't cause illnessess in Texas and Louisiana in the future. There were some folks hospitalized after touching the debris, but they turned out ok.

B4e-Forever New Frontiers

God Bless the Columbia 7.


User currently offlineGreg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (11 years 6 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 961 times:

The gas should have burned up or discharged into the atomsophere at a tolerable rate. Although heavier than air, it's unlikely to 'blanket' any sprecific area unless a tank had fallen intact into a sealed area....again, very unlikely.

Personally, I think it the Feds way of assuring folks do not 'pocket' too much of the debris. I think there will be very little evidence on any of the parts showing chemical--or other--contamination.


User currently offlineJetService From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4798 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (11 years 6 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 960 times:

From my undertstanding, it wasn't the fuel so much as the treatment of the materials for shielding the heat.


"Shaddap you!"
User currently offlineBoeing4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 6 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 936 times:

JetService, I read that after the shuttle uses its thrusters to position itself for reentry, all remaining fuel is burned off as a safety precaution.

Greg, true, although we don't really want people pocketing this debris as it may be important in finding out what went wrong. I'm more worried about important pieces landing in isolated rivers, and lakes. How much effort would be needed to search every body of water along the debris field?

B4e-Forever New Fronteirs


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
It's War! Canada Vs. Denmark posted Wed Jul 27 2005 15:44:23 by Lutenist
The Next War: Powell Vs. Rummy posted Tue Apr 22 2003 22:30:16 by Heavymetal
Iraq Invasion Totally Unjustified - Gulf War Gen posted Sun Sep 22 2002 13:31:00 by SAS23
Nuclear War, Ind Vs. Pak posted Sun Dec 30 2001 12:15:52 by NUAir
A PR War Or Has US Vs Iran Started Quietly? posted Thu Sep 21 2006 15:52:09 by Oly720man
Scotland Vs England: Almost At War! posted Thu Jun 29 2006 23:02:19 by Gkirk
Not Your Usual A Vs B War... posted Thu Feb 16 2006 07:26:47 by Carmenlu15
Winning The War On Terror: Fantasy Vs Facts posted Tue Apr 26 2005 16:22:24 by Schoenorama
Wwii Soldiers Vs Iraq War Soldiers - Moscow Times posted Tue Aug 3 2004 06:15:56 by MD-90
Voices From The Gulf: Yes To War posted Mon Mar 17 2003 21:56:49 by Heavymetal