Talk:Space Shuttle Challenger disaster

An NYT Book Review of Higginbotham's new book Challenger mentioned that astronaut Smith "had survived the entire journey, counting down the seconds to certain death" (6/9/2024). I was curious how exactly that was determined and what it meant. Reading the Talk here about this page's section, I was thankful for @HandThatFeeds's reminder about reliable and valid sources, and to @NekoKatsun considered takes.

Your posts prompted me to dig in, and go to Higginbotham's book itself. While it's not a primary source but secondary, there's a helpful finding there. "The volume of air remaining in Smith’s pack also revealed that someone had been breathing from the supply for around two and a half minutes: almost exactly the length of time it took for the sundered crew cabin to fall the twelve miles from its apogee to the surface of the Atlantic."(p. 439) Higginbotham, Adam. Challenger : A True Story of Heroism and Disaster on the Edge of Space, Simon & Schuster, 2024. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/northeastern-ebooks/detail.action?docID=30789142. Created from northeastern-ebooks on 2024年07月21日 00:20:28.

So while Slade's statement may go too far (inferring whether Smith was literally counting down seconds seems not supported), I do wonder if it would answer public curiosity to add a sentence or two, and even borrow from Slade's review. Something like this maybe:

"Recorded audio captured from a painstakingly reconstructed magnetic tape of the shuttle’s black box revealed that at least one astronaut, Mike Smith, had survived the entire journey," as Rachel Slade described 6/9/2024. The book reviewed by Slade, Challenger by Adam Higginbotham, explained, "The volume of air remaining in Smith’s pack also revealed that someone had been breathing from the supply for around two and a half minutes: almost exactly the length of time it took for the sundered crew cabin to fall the twelve miles from its apogee to the surface of the Atlantic." (p. 439). http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/northeastern-ebooks/detail.action?docID=30789142

Out of respect for more experienced Wikipedia editors I figured I'd ask first in Talk rather than boldly make the edit without first checking. Also I apologize I'm unfamiliar with the conventions for citation and wonder if anyone can help get that right too. Roben Torosyan, Ph.D. (talk) 00:48, 21 July 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

What, exactly, are you wanting to add to the article? — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 16:22, 21 July 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Thank you very much for your comment!

The current article does mention that Smith's PEAP was activated (as were the PEAPs for two other crewmembers, although we don't know who), that Resnik or Onizuka likely activated it for him and that their remaining unused air was "consistent with the expected consumption during the post-breakup trajectory." This is sourced to Mike Mullane's "Riding Rockets: The Outrageous Tales of a Space Shuttle Astronaut". Reading the relevant chunk of the book (pp.245-249), the established information is that:

1. Onizuka and/or Resnik was conscious and functional immediately following breakup (because one of them turned on Smith's PEAP),
2. Smith was conscious and functional immediately following breakup (because some of his switches had been manually toggled), and
3. Smith was alive until impact (because his air volume matched the expected consumption of someone breathing it for the descent).

I don't have a copy of Higginbotham's book, but I'm very curious to know if the audio mentioned is new information. My understanding is that at the altitude the break-up was that, if the cabin lost pressure, the crew would have rapidly lost consciousness, but if the pressure held, the crew would have been able to remain active the whole time. My understanding is also that both of those "if"s are basically unknowable due to the damage the capsule suffered on impact (we know there was no floor buckling, so no explosive decompression, but we don't know about gradual).

Do you have a copy of the book? The one at my library is checked out (though I've placed a request for it). Man, now I'm really curious! NekoKatsun (nyaa) 15:34, 22 July 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Whoever had it before me finally returned it to the library, so I've got a copy of Higginbotham's book in my hot little hands now. I checked p. 439 (and the surrounding pages, and I'm working through the whole thing so I may update later) and:

• "[T]hey could find no conclusive signs of an explosive decompression";
• 3/7 PEAPs had been used, one of which was confirmed to be Smith's via serial number;
• Resnik or Onizuka would have had to activate it for him, and his wife believes it to be Onizuka after testing in the simulator; and
• Some switches were moved from their ascent positions.

To quote directly from the book, "To Jane, this discovery confirmed not only that Mike had been conscious when he began his long descent toward the ocean, but that he had been busy, working through every procedure he could think of as he fell. He was nobody's fool; he knew he was going to die. But he never stopped trying to live." (p. 439) The other bit of interesting information is on p. 440, which states that at the very end of the CVR tape, Mike Smith said "Uh-oh." The "uh-oh" is new information that's not currently present on the page; as of right now the final transmission is "Roger, go at throttle up."

I do want to point out that the bit I quoted specifies "Mike had been conscious when he began his long descent," and although it later implies he was conscious all the way down ("he had been busy, working through every procedure he could think of as he fell") Higginbotham doesn't come right out and assert that he or anyone was definitely conscious. I'll keep reading and if anything new pops up, I'll mention it here. NekoKatsun (nyaa) 19:48, 5 August 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

There are way too many images in this article. I'd like to hear from some people watching this article about which ones we think are necessary to keep, and the rest need trimmed. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 12:52, 15 October 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Yes, a solid column of images on the right side is too much. The images should be curated and should relate to nearby text. Acroterion (talk) 14:20, 15 October 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Agree - especially since the majority are just different images of the explosion itself. My personal thoughts are:

• Keep: infobox, Challenger on the crawler transport, o-ring diagram, crew photo, ice on the launch pad, first puff of smoke, Greene's reaction, the image with the crew cabin indicated by an arrow, and the recordings of the launch/explosion and of Reagan's speech
• Weak keep: an image showing the plume of flame, the larger version of the fuselage image, memorial service, Rogers commission
• Not needed: everything else; open to having them in a gallery at the bottom or just leaving them in Commons for interested persons to view.

I'd love to hear other opinions; this is where I stand right now. NekoKatsun (nyaa) 19:35, 15 October 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

That sounds reasonable to me. No need for the gallery, people can find them on Commons if they want. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 20:12, 15 October 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

@HandThatFeeds and NekoKatsun: I'm going to remove the images that seem unnecessary (largely in line with NekoKatsun's suggesttions and what was on the article when it became an FA). Balon Greyjoy (talk) 10:20, 19 October 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

i think there is enough images in this article Mo1StCrtiKAL12 (talk) 19:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

The article has generally deteriorated a little since it became a FA three years ago. The image selection made back then is also superior to the current version. —Kusma (talk) 20:58, 15 October 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

I would agree, and apologize that I haven't followed up since it became an FA. I'm biased towards what was originally in the article when it became an FA, but I think the images need to be pared down, as there are numerous shots that all show the mission launching, or in-flight with the plume.

I disagree with creating a gallery at the bottom; I think the pictures within the article are sufficient and my personal opinion is that galleries tend to be a repository of photos that don't have a good place in the article but someone wanted to include them on the page. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 10:17, 19 October 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

This all looks great, and absolutely no issues with leaving the gallery out. Thanks for making those edits, Balon! NekoKatsun (nyaa) 17:35, 22 October 2024 (UTC) [reply ]