An array of cameras and sensors designed to find damage during the mission performed flawlessly. The improved ability to see the orbiter’s condition in space meant that the relatively small number of nicks and gouges were on display and required analysis. Diane Vaughan, a professor of sociology at Columbia University who served as an adviser to the Columbia accident investigation board, said the result was a spate of alarmist news coverage.‘‘One of the ironies of NASA’s situation is that now, finally, they have good cameras for the first time, so every little thing that flies off is visible,’’ she said. ‘‘So to the public it seems like foam out of control, when in fact it is less—less just looks like more.’’The damage required analysis; without a detailed historical record of damage recorded on orbit, it was hard to say whether a ding or spot could develop into something that endangered the shuttle. That, in turn, made NASA appear to be dithering over damage, and old hands from the program’s earlier days groused that the current crop of managers had lost their nerve.The analysis led to a first-ever spacewalk to the underside of the shuttle, by Dr Robinson, who plucked two protruding strips of cloth known as ‘‘gap fillers’’ from the underside of the craft. They had threatened to cause uneven heating during entry. Mission managers decided against another possible spacewalk, to deal with the problem of a damaged insulating blanket on the top of the fuselage.NASA administrators said they intended to go over the shuttle ‘‘with a fine-toothed comb’’ in order to determine the extent of damage. —NYT
