Orbiters have been hit by lightning before, but never, to my knowledge, during the approach to landing. Results of the lightning strikes? Nothing important, maybe a dead sensor at most.

One thing makes me wonder about this, though: when the Orbiter crossed over California, it was at 400,000 feet. Lightning happens at 400,000 feet? That's a first. Maybe it was the plasma field starting to form, or perhaps it was causing an "aurora borealis" sort-of thing to occur.

My opinion: camera artifact/problem/something.
My opinion's worth: Zero, plus or minus some.

I'm under the impression that lightning strikes on planes are not an uncommon occurrence. Hmm... confirm that.

And NASA has been doing tests in this area since 1995 and beyond.

FAA seems to focus on damage to radar domes as the biggest area for study, due to some unforseen results during actual lightning strikes.

See these pages for some facts and myths about lightning strikes to aircraft. Note that "mishaps" is not here defined and may not mean a full accident:

Aircraftbuyer.com
Kirtland AFB Magazine

See this link for information about how lightning can be a hazard to aircraft

I've looked at a couple of accident reports now, and despite having much thinner aluminum skins, most large jets report zero damage from these - even minor damage in unusual, as in this case

Smaller planes can also come through OK.

I'd be beyond stunned if they had never tested the Space Shuttle for this very thing as part of basic engineering prudence. Launch you can control, but assuming no lightning on re-entry paths hundreds of miles long would be loony.

The other question is what would attract the strike. If it's the plasma, then NASA would know about it by now and proof against it would be a launch requirement. If it isn't the plasma, those ceramic tiles on the Shuttle's exterior can't be very good conductors - anhd if they're gone, lightning is the LEAST of your problems.

Let's assume that the lightning is not an artifact of the camera, but a real discharge. What it may be is confirmation that tiles were missing, opening up a pathway to the aluminum underneath.

Since the shuttle's re-entry lifespan once tiles went missing would be extremely short, it's not surprising that an observer might connect the lightning and the shuttle breakup in his mind.

Electrically, the tiles wouldn't pose any obstructive, insulating path. They are like scales, and not a comprehensive covering. Moreover, in each mission a given percentage fall off or crack. Normally this is related solely to adhesive failures or microstructure failures which thermally propagate into large scale fissures of the ceramic itself. But if several contiguous tiles failed in this way, then you get a big electrical and thermal path.

If several contiguous tiles failed in this way, isn't the shuttle toast anyway due to the thermal path?

Oh fucking great. Now it will be all over the Mid East as proof that God struck down the satanic Zionist and satanic Americans...

Joy

Joe: That's why this type of failure was inevitable. Apparently to this date not enough contiguous ones close to the leading edges ever had failed. This issue of tile maintenance was the biggest reason why they liked to set down in Florida. It gave the tile testing and repair people more time to turn around the shuttle as all the tile repair folks were in Florida. Land in CA and you knock off days or weeks of time for this inspection and repair process to take place in.

Tom... Thought so, thanks for clearing that up.

Josh... Same thought went through my head. This will indeed make the psychological battle more difficult.

Am surprised that no-one at NASA thought about a return path that passed over a place called "Palastine". But then, if the de-orbit burn started over the Indian Ocean for a Florida touch down then where would a California landing start? It's possible that all options sucked that way.

Guess we'll just have to send up another Israeli and bring him or her home. Preferably after stomping a few leading Arabist/Islamist actors (hint, hint) in order to elicit the requisite Islamic calls for divine revenge.

Dumb question here. If there are pictures, why can't we see them? Does the photographer expect to make money off them? If so, isn't his a vain hope? After all, can't his pictures be subpoenaed by a government inquiry and thus free to all?

Just wondering...

Question for the tile gurus: In the mid-1970s, the aero-instructors at the Air Force Academy were telling us that the ceramic tiles had better not fall off, because the orbiter would turn into a giant heat-sink.

And then on the first missions, lots of tiles fell off but there were no disastrous results. Was it just that the tiles that fell off did not fall off in the most heat-sensitive areas? And/or whenever tiles fell off in sensitive areas (underbody up front, or leading edge of wing) that it was just one, or two?

G. Haubold...
When the tiles came off on the first few shuttle flights, I remember them being well scattered around the fuselage and underside. The image reminded me of someone with chicken-pox, the way the all-white fuselage and the all-black bottom were mottled and pockmarked.

But never were there large areas missing that I remember. One or two here and there, but never whole... lets call them sheets... missing (except for after it hitchhiked across the country on the back of the modified 747). This may very well be the first time something like that has occurred.

Re: lightning. I've got an e-mail out to my Uncle, who got a doctorate for his studies of lightning, about the possibility of there even BEING lightning at 400K feet. I've read his book on the subject a few times, but no reference to high-altitude zaps at all. I'll report back when I've got an answer.

Josh,

Instapundit has the world's best response to the whole "exploding over Palestine" meme...'

http://www.instapundit.com/archives/007226.php#007226

Still won't undo the damage in the minds of "mild believers" in the Islamic world, who believe strongly in portents and the hand of G-d. Maybe when Glenn's portent for Yasser starts to come true they'll understand.

Okay, my Uncle wrote me back about the lighting question. To quote his letter:

"Nothing that I would conventionally call 'lightning' occurs beyond the troposphere, or however far a thunderstorm might poke
into the stratosphere. However, there are various high-altitude electrical phenomena, at least one approaching 'real' lightning in energy and possibly presenting different disruptive mechanisms.
"One question to ask about this particular story (aside from whether what the photographer happened to catch might have another explanation, of course) is what the weather was like. As
far as I know, these phenomena are associated with the tops of vigorous thunderstorms."

So, not "lightning," as we're used to seeing. The question now becomes, was the weather bad over California, and if so, how did the photographer "see" through the clouds? If the weather WASN'T bad, then how did the electrical phenomena OCCUR, as they appear to exist only with thunderstorm activity? And then would it be powerful enough to DAMAGE THE ORBITER???

Eric,

I recall that there was a public television program that showed these electrical phenomina. They were visible during another shuttle flight and filmed.

We really don't have a good handle on these phenomina are. What could happen when a Mach 18-20 plasma covered space craft blasts through such a phenomina is an "unknown unknown."

How the heck do you lightning test a mach 20 space craft?

Just a dumb question - if he's using a Nikon Coolpix 880 digital camera to take pictures of the orbiter upon re-entry, what film did he have to develop? And what zoom lens did he have attached to the camera to be able to take a picture of the shuttle that detailed?

I'm not trying to slam the guy, and it does look like a valid train of investigation, but the story is entirely too short on details (not to mention images!) for me to not instinctively dismiss it...

Andrew: actually, the article doesn't really say that he got a detailed picture of the Orbiter, just that the "lightning" crosses the Columbia's contrail. We've just been assuming that the lightning also struck the Orbiter... seems a fairly GOOD assumtion, if we take the lightning as a fact, not as a lens trick.

Trent: Yeah, I've seen the same PBS show (Nova, I think it was?). The show seemed to show that though there were those strange effects (I remember a red flattened ball shape for one), that they were at the top of the storms and maybe some distance above them. Again, assuming the Orbiter was above Cali (assuming of course that it WAS hit), the lightning was at 400,000 feet. That's an awful "fur piece" above what we normally consider the atmosphere, and a lot farther up than thunderstorms ever seem to reach. My uncle was VERY interested on getting his hands on the photographs (though he wasn't sure he ever would, despite working at Lawrence-Livermore Labs), to see what his eye could spy.

About lightning-testing a Mach 20 spacecraft: since we don't know yet for sure, we may have just done so, inadvertantly. Here's hoping we never do again.

(Just to clear up a mistake I made in an earlier post: my uncle does NOT have a Doctorate; he has a bunch of credits towards a Ph.D., but hasn't been given the title yet. Real Life intruded on the paper chase.)

There were thunderstorms below the shuttle's path to the west of Hawaii at about 180W 30N. The red sprite could've gone up to the plasma trail and followed it to the Shuttle? What does your uncle think of that? Lots of fairly recent information is being learned about upward shooting lightning, but they call the region the Ignorasphere, because not much is really known about it.

Regarding the lack of pictures to view, what makes you think the U.S. Government and/or NASA allowed this guy to make pictures available for sale or even to the public?! Now that Texans are being threatened with 10 yrs in prison for posession of any pieces of Columbia, there is definitely a good reason to beleive they want TOTAL privacy with ANY remaining evidence...

Has any body else here read that the lightning "corkscrewed" behind the plasma and seemed to light up when it suddenly jerked into the plasma stream? I most certainly have never heard of any "lightning" at 400,000 feet, and I have not seen any lightning corkscrew.

Any thoughts on the Star Wars program? Any hackers out there think it is impossible to wrest control of one these sci-fi (fictional?) sattelites?

I for one am dying to see this "Purple Lightning". And I hope for mankinds sake that it was not an act of terrorism. As for God....Yeah, right. Like God has time to make him\herself known to the world, after over 2000 years, by smiting one of his "Chosen People" in front of the thousands of people around the world that were watching.

Give me FACTS! MSNBC, CNN, Reutors, CBC where is all the coverage on this lightning nonsense!

The Hat

Just a couple of thoughts on this subject...
It was nice and clear here on the morning in question. And there's no reason to asume the "lightning" had to originate from a thunderstorm.
Plasma is essentially gas that has been superheated to the point of stripping off the electrons; this alone creates an electrical charge. If there were sufficient charge on the craft and opposing charge in the atmosphere (perhaps follwing magnetic influence, such as the aurora borialis), it could discharge visibly.
The how-to lightning test any aircraft could be done - here's one proposed method: http://www.lod.org/alf.html
About the how-to mate (given brand of camera) to a large zoom / telephoto lense: any amature astronomer already knows that all it takes is a will and a way to adapt whatever camera you have to your telescope, even your quick-cam web camera - check out yahoo groups QCUIAG (I built one of these). Amature Astronomer Photographers are, IMHO, probably a bit more intelligent than the average camera toating tourist.
Could it be an artifact of the imaging system?
Who would be better to determine this than experts at NASA? I'm sure as soon as they have something to share, the pictures and analytical results will be published.

Electricity, especially high-voltages, tends to be crafty (for lack of a better word). Even if just one or two tiles were missing or sufficiently damaged, it is possible that a discharge would find that hole in the armor and take advantage of it, perhaps making it larger. Moderate home-made tesla coils (50,000 V range) can produce energetic enough arcs to ignite wood. Lightning or plasma discharge would be several orders of magnatude more energetic.
A direct hit this strong could easily displace enough tiles to open the trailing edge of the elevons up to plasma heating, and the irreversable process would start.
Best to all, -MikeD

The lightning-strike photo story:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/02/05/MN192153.DTL&type=science

Comments on the photo, and high-altitude electo-physics:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/02/06/MN22145.DTL&type=science

And... yes, electricity can appear to spiral. Search for "spiral discharge tesla" and I'm sure you'll find some footage.

Is this "purple beam" part of a missile defense system?

NASA electron generator creates "purple beam" - Here - "The purple beam emanating from an electron generator in the payload bay spirals around Earth's magnetic field. The TSS mission will study the dynamics and electrodynamics of tethered systems in space and the physics of Earth's ionosphere." - May, 1992

"Purple lightning" tracks aircraft over Oregon - Here - "Looking to the South from my 2nd story kitchen window, what I first observed was what appeared to be a blue/purple beam, which was wavy in shape, but completely linear in direction. This beam had the appearance of a thin streak of lightning, yet was relatively dim. The beam was very clearly connected to the ground...following the beams upward trajectory, I spotted an aircraft flying..." - September, 2002

"Purple beam" tracks aircraft over Oregon -Here - "I saw a fluorescent blue/purple beam like a thin streak of lightning descend from the sky to , ground at 11:30 PM...The angle of the beam changed from and angle of 60, to 90 degrees straight up, and to 45 degrees precisely in unison with the aircraft as though it were a tether attached to the aircraft..." - September, 2002

NASA orbiter struck by "electrical phenomena" - Here - "The pictures, taken with a Nikon-880 digital camera on a tripod, reveal what appear to be bright electrical phenomena flashing around the track of the shuttle's passage, but the photographer, who asked not to be identified, will not make them public immediately." - February, 2003

Orbiter hit by "purple lightning" - Here - "Investigators are combing records from a network of ultra-sensitive instruments that might have detected a faint thunderclap in the upper atmosphere at the same time a photograph taken by a San Francisco astronomer appears to show a purplish bolt of lightning striking the shuttle." - February, 2003

NASA admits photographs of "bolt of something" exist - Here - PDF - DITTEMORE: I have seen the photo. We have sent the photo off to be examined, to verify its validity. We have not completed that activity yet. We have invited some atmospheric scientists to come to the Johnson Space Center to help us understand is there any phenomena that they know of that might exist in the upper atmosphere." - February, 2003

Starfire Optical Range had orbiter "in the crosshairs" - Here/ - "The Directed Energy Directorate (DE) of the Air Force Research Laboratory is the Department of Defense's center of expertise for lasers, high-power microwaves, and other directed energy technologies. The directorate conducts research into a variety of energies that might be transformed into future weapons systems." - February, 2003

NASA timeline - Here - PDF - "Next chart: Main landing gear left hand inboard tire pressure goes off-line. So you can see the sequence of how these things are starting to add up. Next chart's the main landing gear left hand outboard tire pressure number one goes off-line, nonfunctional. Here we are at 7:58--approximately--a.m." - February, 2003
If this is part of a missile defense system that destroyed the orbiter, it's a clear message to foreign observers. But who would believe that the United States military would destroy a NASA orbiter? Wonderful marks for plausible deniability on this one.
And now one last article on this subject, posted in its entirety:

Note this article appeared in the San Franciscro Chronicle on February 2, 2003. This is one (1) day after the orbiter broke up. It clearly and plainly described these photographs of this beam of energy essentially chasing down and striking the orbiter over five frames. The date today is February 9, 2003. That's seven days from the publication of the existence of these photographs, yet the incompetent media whores have been cramming foam down our throats for the last week, and NASA has refuted each and every single day, without mentioning these photographs, the idea that foam damage destroyed this orbiter.

SF Gate article

Photos show odd images near shuttle

David Perlman, Chronicle Science Editor Sunday, February 2, 2003

A San Francisco amateur astronomer who photographs the space shuttles whenever their orbits carry them over the Bay Area has captured five strange and provocative images of the shuttle Columbia just as it was re-entering the Earth's atmosphere before dawn Saturday.

The pictures, taken with a Nikon-880 digital camera on a tripod, reveal what appear to be bright electrical phenomena flashing around the track of the shuttle's passage, but the photographer, who asked not to be identified, will not make them public immediately.

"They clearly record an electrical discharge like a lightning bolt flashing past, and I was snapping the pictures almost exactly . . . when the Columbia may have begun breaking up during re-entry," he said.

The photographer invited The Chronicle to view the photos on his computer screen Saturday night, and they are indeed puzzling.

They show a bright scraggly flash of orange light, tinged with pale purple, and shaped somewhat like a deformed L. The flash appears to cross the Columbia's dim contrail, and at that precise point, the contrail abruptly brightens and appears thicker and somewhat twisted as if it were wobbling.

"I couldn't see the discharge with own eyes, but it showed up clear and bright on the film when I developed it," the photographer said. "But I'm not going to speculate about what it might be."

PS: The house is on fire, children, let's run.

Lightning still probable cause in Shuttle Columbia accident. To date the lightning theory answers more questions such as unexpected communications drop-outs and the San Fran lightning-Columbia photo being taken at the same time as a comm drop-out than does insulating foam damage from take-off. A rare solar shock wave detected by the NOAA struck the earth at the same time which produced measurable increases in the energy within the ionosphere.
see: http://www.superforce.com/shuttle/

Sincerely,
Guy Cramer

The "purple lightning" most likely came from the Starfire beamed energy weapons lab, and was most likely a beamed energy weapon like one of their "plasma projectiles," which they liken to "firing a bolt of lightning." The absurd foam damage theory has been discounted by NASA since day one, and the media, at the promptings of the Columbia "Accident" "Investigation" Board have been sensationalizing, misrepresenting NASA's quotes on the matter, misquoting NASA's statements out of context to make it appear as if the "foam damage" theory had some merit and outright LYING about the entire incident. It's clear that Admiral Gehman is not leading any investigation but it leading a coverup.