Television images of Columbia breaking up into tiny specks across a blue Texas sky were a defining moment for Americans.

The February 1 tragedy, which cost the lives of all seven astronauts -- including the first Israeli in space, Ilan Ramon -- caused more soul searching.

A seven month long official inquiry found that a breach in the protective skin on the left wing let boiling gases into the shuttle, causing the vessel to break up as it re-entered the Earth's atmosphere.

The Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) was ordered to look into the management of the legendary National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) as well as the accident.

The board under retired admiral Hal Gehman, who earlier led the inquiry into the attack on the USS Cole in Yemen in October 2000, condemned NASA's control of safety management, saying that it had not learned much since the explosion of the Challenger shuttle in 1986.

Experts found that the breach in the skin was caused by a foam isolation tile on an external fuel tank that broke off when Columbia blasted off from Cape Canaveral on January 16.

Tiles had been regularly seen to fall away during launch, but engineers had done nothing because they believed there was little risk.

When they reproduced the Columbia accident they found that the foam could make a hole in the wing big enough to put a man's head through.

During Columbia's 16 day orbit of the Earth, top NASA managers ignored a series of worrying messages by NASA technicians who said the shuttle should be inspected before it returned.

The board found that if the damage had been detected another shuttle, Atlantis, could have been sent to rescue the beleaguered crew, who suspected nothing right up to the moment of their fiery deaths.

The damning report fed NASA's critics in Congress, who have long complained about the agency's lack of vision and oppose its plans for a successor to the shuttles.

It was a shock for NASA administrator, Sean O'Keefe, who repeatedly promised that all of the inquiry's recommendations would be carried out, no matter the cost.

Congress critics also want a new definition of the United States' space policy and a better assessment of the costs before flights were allowed to start again.

Some unofficial figures have estimated that the United States may have to spend 10 billion dollars to renew its space mission through a new Orbiting Space Plane (OSP).

Influential lawmakers such as Representative Sherwood Boehlert, head of the science committee, are opposed.

"No one can tell us how the OSP fits into the future of NASA or how much the project will cost," he said.

"NASA needs to be far more accurate in describing the capabilities, risks and costs of its projects."

The agency hopes shuttle flights will resume in second half of 2004. The government is also trying to set out a new strategic vision for NASA.

Details could come from President George W. Bush when he speaks on the 100th anniversary of the first flight by the Wright brothers on December 17 at Kitty Hawk in North Carolina.

With China now in the elite manned space club, Bush could announce ambitious new plans to send man beyond the orbit of the Earth again.

Bush promised after the Columbia inquiry report was released in August that "our journey into space will go on."

Amidst reports of new flights to the Moon, public surveys have indicated that Americans would support such an initiative as long as it does not carry a multi-billion dollar bill.

US Apollo missions landed on the moon six times between 1969 and 1972.

The White House would only say that such reports are "speculation" and "premature".

SPACE.WIRE