Floyd 1
Cody Floyd
Professor Alicia Bolton
English 101
November 4, 2013
Annotated Bibliography
In 2004, astronaut Michael Foale and cosmonaut Sasha Kaleri found themselves in the middle of
a major problem. What made it worst was that this problem was over a thousand miles into Earth’s
atmosphere inside the International Space Station. NASA had notified the two man crew of the space
station that air pressure was slowly dropping inside the station. The leak was slow, but eventually could
disable the whole station and waste the thirty billion dollars that went in to build the magnificent
technology. After countless hours of searching for the leak and sealing off multiple modules of the
station, Foale finally found the culprit. The leak was coming from a vacuum hose, that connected the
interior of a window inside the NASA designed Destiny module to the empty outer space. After
contacting NASA, Foale and Kaleri temporarily fixed the leak while waiting on a replacement to be sent
via cargo ship in the future. How did this leak occur? Firstly, the hose was installed by NASA in the
window in order to prevent any bacteria or mold to form between the panes of glass. This would give the
space station the clearest window it had, and it would be in the NASA designed Destiny module instead
of the Russian module. After the event occurred, Russia later released several photos of past astronauts
and cosmonauts taking pictures of the miraculous view from the Destiny window. In every picture, the
crew member had one hand grabbing his camera, and the other grabbed the vacuum hose that was
perfectly situated to be used as a handle. The hose was never meant to be used as a handle, but that is
what the crew men used it for. The crew members of the space station had no clue that the hose was not to
be touched. NASA never sent up any precautionary instructions or safety issues about the vacuum hose
for the crew members of the space station. This would be almost essential to protect not only the lives of
the crew members, but also the huge investment in the station all together. NASA should have taken more
Floyd 2
steps in safety after past events that damaged their image and caused loss of life. Safety should be
NASA’s first goal in human space flight.
Angelo, Joseph A. Human Spaceflight. New York City: Fact on File, Inc, 2007. Print.
This publication describes the journeys of people as they travel into space starting in the early
1960’s. With the most exciting event occurring on July 20, 1969 when American astronaut Neil
Armstrong was the first human being to walk on the moon, to the most horrifying events including the
Challenger accident, and also the possibility of human crewed expeditions on Mars in the future, this
book covers a wide range of human involvement in space. The publication covers the stunning technology
of space flight as it evolved from that miraculous moment of Armstrong first stepping on the moon well
into the twenty-first century with NASA’s wide range of programs that include the International Space
Station, the Space Shuttle Missions, and rovers sent to explore “The Mysterious Red Planet” (Angelo
263) Mars.
The publication is written by Joseph Angelo, who has written more books on space exploration
and space technology. These other publications are cited in the back of the book under “Further Reading”
(Angelo 351). The book contains and index, glossary, and bibliographical references. The bibliographical
references range from publications dates of 1990 to 2004. This further adds to the credibility of the book.
The book was also published in 2007, allowing it to be more up to date with space exploration and
journeys into the last frontier. Since the event in “Picture Window” occurred in 2004, this date of
publication is essential to the argument of the topic.
This source shows the history of space flight through the last several decades. It shows the
accomplishments, but also the downfalls and tragedies. This is what will be used to support NASA’s
countless struggles and failures in the past. Shouldn’t NASA learn from these experiences and be more
cautious and wary in the future as they should develop safer equipment for the men and women who enter
space? That is the question that is asked after the incident that occurred aboard the International Space
Station in “Picture Window.” This book also has several facts about the International Space Station, its
crews, and expeditions that will be helpful to the argument.
Floyd 3
"Disasters in Space." American Decades. Ed. Judith S. Baughman, et al. Vol. 8: 1970-1979. Gale,
2001. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
“Disasters in Space” gives examples of space flight failures that have occurred in recent human
history. The source gives three examples. Firstly the Apollo 13 mission went completely wrong when
something punctured a hole in the oxygen tanks of the ship. The three astronauts watched as their oxygen
supply “suddenly emptied” (“Disasters in Space” n.p.). The crew had to make an emergency route back to
Earth before all of their oxygen was depleted. Next there was the Soyuz Mission by the Russians. The
ship, Soyuz 11, successfully landed back onto Earth, but all three cosmonauts were dead. This occurred
because the hatch on the spacecraft had slightly opened and all the air was sucked out into space. This
suffocated the three man crew. The last example this source gives is the Skylab incident. The Skylab was
the very first space station NASA put into space which ended in disaster. Equipment that was designed to
keep the Skylab in orbit failed, and the 2.6 billion dollar station fell out of the sky and crashed into earth.
This incident was one of the last straws for NASA and led to extreme ridicule of the United States space
program.
This article comes from the online database called Gale, which is approved and used by Horry
Georgetown Technical College. The article also gives its source where it received all its information
from. This is located at the bottom of the article. Dates, facts, and other details also help to give the source
reliability.
This article is important to the argument since it shows NASA’s previous mistakes and failures.
One would think NASA would learn from these mistakes in order to create a safer future for astronauts.
NASA should learn to take every precaution necessary in order to save lives and money.
Living in Space. Films Media Group, 2006. Films On Demand. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
This source gives a brief overview of life in space aboard space stations and the future of space
exploration. It shows how life in weightlessness affects astronauts and the first accounts of humans living
in space from the Russian Mir Station to the now International Space Station that is a joint combination of
several nations’ space programs.
Floyd 4
The source is credible since it comes from a reliable database that is used by Horry Georgetown
Technical College. This database contains only films that can be used for research purposes. The film
includes many speakers that speak on the topics. These speakers are mostly professors at well-known
universities across the United States. The source was also published in 2006 which allows it to be more
up to date with events occurring with the space stations than most of the films in the database.
The segment of the film that talks about the International Space Station gives details that the
station is “a merger of several previously planned space stations” (“Living in Space” n.p.). These nations
include the U.S., Russia, Canada, and several European countries. This would lead to the
counterargument that NASA might not be entirely at fault for the leak aboard the International Space
Station. With over fifteen other countries involved with the construction and development of the station,
none of them recognized the leak. Is it completely up to NASA to regulate all operations aboard the
station, or do other nations help out too? The ISS is a team operation, not a one man show.
Oberg, James. “Crew finds ‘culprit’ in space station leak.” NBCNews.com. NBC News, 1 Jan. 2004.
Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
This article documents the events of the discovery of the window leak right after it happened back
in 2004. The article includes direct quotes from NASA officials along with astronaut Michael Foale and
cosmonaut Sasha Kaleri. The article tells on how the crewmen found the leak and that the “culprit”
(Oberg n.p.) was a leaky window aboard the “U.S. built Destiny laboratory module” (Oberg n.p.). The
vacuum jumper, which was used to equalize air pressure in the window, was the structure leaking aboard
the ISS. The structure was temporarily fixed and was planned to be entirely replaced in a year’s time
when the needed part would be sent up on a Russian cargo ship. The crewmen found the leak by sealing
off parts of the ISS one by one until they came across where air pressure would continue to drop.
This source comes from NBC News’ online site. The article was written by James Oberg who is an NBC
News space analyst. The direct quotes from Foale, Kaleri, and other NASA officials also add to the
credibility of the article and the author. The article was also published only a few days after the leak was
Floyd 5
found, so the article was very current during the time period on when the event happened. Finally the
article contains many different statistics and facts about how the air pressure works inside the ISS.
This article gives first-hand accounts by the crewmen of the ISS right after the window leak occurred
back in 2004. It shows how they reacted and how they felt about the situation with it being anybody’s
fault or just a routine fix aboard the station in Earth’s upper atmosphere. The article shows that NASA,
Russia, or the crewmen did not blame anybody but the faulty vacuum jumper of the window. This could
add to the counterargument that NASA was not entirely to blame for the window leak aboard the ISS.
United States, National Research Council. Review of NASA Plans for the International Space
Station. National Academy of Sciences, 2006. EBESCOhost. Web. 3 Nov. 2013.
This publication goes into in depth reviews on NASA’s plans for the International Space Station
into the future well into the year 2015. These plans include the completion of the ISS with it being on
fifty percent complete, new exploration missions, and other tested activities that are scheduled to occur.
These reviews are by a National Research Council who will either approve or disapprove the future plans
of NASA for the ISS. These reviews include advice on issues NASA might face as it attempts to go
forward with their plans.
This source is incredibly reliable with it being written by the National Research Council of the
United States in Washington D.C. The source also includes actual letters from NASA addressing the
reviews by the council and asking for permission from the council to continue with plans. Along with the
letters, the source includes National Academies’ Reports relevant to the study and biographies of panel
members and staff that where a part of the reviews of the ISS. The source was published in 2006, once
again after the event of the leak occurred aboard the ISS.
This source gives very credible information by the National Research Council on future plans of
the ISS. This would show if NASA plans on improving safety and precautionary procedures aboard the
ISS after the leak occurred in 2004 that almost disabled the station from activity. The Council “did not
receive substantive information about completing construction of the ISS in NASA briefings” (United
States 15), but the plans were inferred by the council and recommendations were given to the completion.
Floyd 6
This helps the argument with NASA’s development in completing the ISS and showing if they considered
more safety precautions after the 2004 window leak incident.