My apologies for misunderstanding your post Marcus. When I read "blowing it to smithereens" I assumed you had not read the material, as Columbia did not blow apart so much as disintegrate over a period of several minutes. Debris-shedding events happened frequently as witnessed and recorded by many folk over several states. Perhaps your bad for over-colorful language, and my bad for taking you too literally?...
As people lost their lives and there's any chance their loved ones may one day read the site and then perhaps this site, I have made a deliberate attempt to keep the language as factual and as un-offending as I can. And just as well I did, as Charles above notes a close family connection to the event. I'm sure his father would not appreciate the phrase used above, and frankly with a history of rescue work (including assisting with accident investigations) neither do I. Extricating a person from a serious car wreck requires the same attention to dignity whether they are deceased or not. This is especially important if their loved ones are nearby. Perhaps I'm over-sensitive to such matters...
MarcusDrake wrote: ... you never once mention how this could have affected the shuttle in any way. Nor did you discuss at all the obvious thought that the shuttle is wrapped entirely in thermally and electrically insulated ceramic tiles and how a breach in this protection might lead to electrical discharge.
I do not know what effect a lightning strike, mega or otherwise, would have on a shuttle in this condition. I can speculate, but to do so at least within the study would have lessened it's scholarly value somewhat, and left me open to accusations of bias.
MarcusDrake wrote: If it did seem wildly speculative to you, then obviously I touched upon a train of thought that hadn't occurred to you before this. I present an opportunity for expanded discussion of your work.
Perhaps "wildly" was harsh on my part, but again I was assuming you had not read the study as explained above. My bad. Of course I had many trains of thought including the ones you have mentioned, but the study itself had to remain objective and restricted to evidence, not speculation.
I should explain in case you were not involved with the forum back before the collapse of 1.0, that there was a long and arduous thread about the incident which got severely out of hand due to much speculation, including that the shuttle had been shot down by the government's secret laser... It was that discussion which 'set the parameters' for my own study, in that the available published evidence, and only the available published evidence, should be discussed.
MarcusDrake wrote: I take the case just a bit further. What would megalightning do to an intact orbiter if it were struck and is it even possible? Did the breach in the tiles provide a means for discharge? Did the lightning strike create any more problems for the already failing wing? This is called scientific inquiry, not wild speculation.
OK Marcus, I take your point, so long as the discussion remains appropriately constrained, I'm happy to discuss these possibilities, keeping in mind that what we don't have evidence for is purely speculation, so let's keep it as scholarly as we can.
Again, my apologies for misunderstanding you and for any offense this may have caused.
Cheers, Dave.