airship
I apologize for the tone I used ...
<<It sounds like the builders and operators of the Titanic not only believed their vessel was unsinkable but that even when the vessel was struck, decided not to launch any lifeboats at all, and sending an SOS would have been an entire waste of effort>>
I disagree. Any book you read on something such as the shuttle will tell you there are a number of "critical" failures that are fatal - full stop.
1. The designers never considered the shuttle "unsinkable"
2. They are not able to incorporate or launch "lifeboats"
3. "and sending an SOS would have been an entire waste of effort" - frankly yes.
I think you have to remove traditional safety concepts of civil / public transportation from a vehicle such as the shuttle. If you applied these standards (lifeboats etc.) it would never fly.
You are also jumping to the conclusion that the break up had something to do with the loss of the foam on launch. I agree it is the only other "event" of note with this flight so far, but that does not mean it was the cause. Most accidents tend to have a multitude of causes, and rarely the ones that appeared obvious on day 1. I think we'll have to wait sometime longer...
If it was a tile loss / damage leading to overheating then break up I would have thought some temperature sensors would have given more warning of this? There was talk of temperature sensiors built into the body (wing underside?). Any experts out there know the point of maximum heating in the recovery?
NoD