Author Topic: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.  (Read 101976 times)

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5192
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 342
  • Likes Given: 213
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #240 on: 02/25/2009 06:20 AM »
Is there anything else in human experience like space launch where pretty much anyone can watch in real-time a binomial system (success or failure) where failure is sickeningly catastrophic in lives or money and the demonstrated chance of failure is somewhere between 1% and 10%?

The closest thing I can think of is car or air racing, and those are pretty safe.
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline marsavian

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3216
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #241 on: 02/25/2009 08:35 AM »
Could the satellite and fairing be retrieved from the ocean bed for diagnosis ? 

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7365
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 1519
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #242 on: 02/25/2009 08:43 AM »
Could the satellite and fairing be retrieved from the ocean bed for diagnosis ? 

I'm thinking... NO. You're assuming it could be easily located, fished out and that it's in one piece in the first place. The majority of it probably burned up in the atmosphere.

Online HKS

  • Let's do PDF
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 950
  • Oslo, Norway
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #243 on: 02/25/2009 01:45 PM »
One of the news sites I read (DailyTech) have what they call exclusive comments from an anonymous source at NASA (Goddard Institute of Space Studies) about the failure of OCO.

Quote
I am not surprised OCO failed. If Orbital Sciences Corporation (OSC) runs their launch services like they run their mission operations, then it was doomed from the start.
http://www.dailytech.com/NASA+Source+Paints+Disturbing+Picture+About+Failed+Satellite+Launch/article14411.htm

Edit: Article now pulled by Daily Tech!
« Last Edit: 02/25/2009 03:22 PM by HKS »

Offline Skyrocket

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2072
  • Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • Liked: 271
  • Likes Given: 65
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #244 on: 02/25/2009 01:57 PM »
One of the news sites I read (DailyTech) have what they call exclusive comments from an anonymous source at NASA (Goddard Institute of Space Studies) about the failure of OCO.

Quote
I am not surprised OCO failed. If Orbital Sciences Corporation (OSC) runs their launch services like they run their mission operations, then it was doomed from the start.
http://www.dailytech.com/NASA+Source+Paints+Disturbing+Picture+About+Failed+Satellite+Launch/article14411.htm



What is the worth of this Orbital-bashing by this "anonymous source"? Probably nothing - as the source concludes that due to having (now resolved) Network-Problems in Fairfax the Taurus launch was doomed from the start.

Pardon my French, but what BS.
« Last Edit: 02/25/2009 02:15 PM by Chris Bergin »

Online Chris Bergin

Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #245 on: 02/25/2009 02:15 PM »
Always worry about "anonymous sources" as an entire basis of a story, but especially when this "anonymous source" can't even seem to get his facts straight, appearing to have picked up on something in the count that we heard was resolved as the basis for his "e-mail."

No disrespect to the Daily Tech, but are they even known for their launch coverage (I don't know, I'm asking), so questioning why this person went to them.

However, I also call BS, as we've not heard anything of the sort, and you'd think we would have if it was even slightly true.

Online HKS

  • Let's do PDF
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 950
  • Oslo, Norway
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #246 on: 02/25/2009 02:24 PM »
Daily Tech is at least in my field (computer science) regarded as a reliable source of information. They also have some space news, covering launches, etc.

You should off course take "anonymous source" with a grain of salt (don't know how that translated from Norwegian to English), but I think it is wrong to call it BS, and below the site standards. It is still usefull for the big picture.
« Last Edit: 02/25/2009 02:27 PM by HKS »

Offline Skyrocket

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2072
  • Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • Liked: 271
  • Likes Given: 65
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #247 on: 02/25/2009 02:39 PM »
Daily Tech is at least in my field (computer science) regarded as a reliable source of information. They also have some space news, covering launches, etc.

You should off course take "anonymous source" with a grain of salt (don't know how that translated from Norwegian to English), but I think it is wrong to call it BS, and below the site standards. It is still usefull for the big picture.

No, frankly said, it is not useful at all, as this guy is drawing conclusion from a problem in a completly unrelated area. It only shows, that someone is deeply disgruntled for some reason, but his problems have obviously nothing to do with the failed launch.

Offline zaitcev

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 575
    • mee.nu:zaitcev:space
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #248 on: 02/25/2009 02:45 PM »
http://www.dailytech.com/NASA+Source+Paints+Disturbing+Picture+About+Failed+Satellite+Launch/article14411.htm
One would think everyone in NASA should be using IPv6 by now. "Not having IPs" does not work as an excuse anymore.
-- Pete
{Edit: The logic goes that once NASA mandates v6, contractors like OSC have to follow}
« Last Edit: 02/25/2009 02:46 PM by zaitcev »

Offline pm1823

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 473
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #249 on: 02/25/2009 02:49 PM »
"Anonymous sources" can be used, if they bring "new info", i.e. give us unknown facts . When someone tries make a "qualitative statement" anonymously it means nothing except... you know.
« Last Edit: 02/25/2009 02:55 PM by pm1823 »

Online Chris Bergin

Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #250 on: 02/25/2009 03:22 PM »
I hear they are going to pull the article ;)

Online HKS

  • Let's do PDF
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 950
  • Oslo, Norway
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #251 on: 02/25/2009 03:23 PM »
I hear they are going to pull the article ;)
Yes, pulled now! :)

Offline TR1

  • Member
  • Posts: 16
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #252 on: 02/25/2009 03:44 PM »
Well, I can't read the article 'cause I can't find it on the website, but.....the safe and arm snafu during the terminal count was due to a pretty amateurish error of omission. Such things, while not being directly causative of this failure, do indicate a certain lack of rigor in process development that is troubling.

What was the safe and arm snafu?


Offline ineedalife999

  • Member
  • Posts: 34
  • Baltimore, MD
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #253 on: 02/25/2009 04:25 PM »
From the audio feed, I believe it was an FTS Safe and Arm that wasn't powered up.  Working off memory though, I don't have a copy of the mission audio handy.
“We will never be an advanced civilization as long as rain showers can delay the launching of a space rocket.” -George Carlin

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31276
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9559
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #254 on: 02/25/2009 04:29 PM »
http://www.dailytech.com/NASA+Source+Paints+Disturbing+Picture+About+Failed+Satellite+Launch/article14411.htm
One would think everyone in NASA should be using IPv6 by now. "Not having IPs" does not work as an excuse anymore.
-- Pete
{Edit: The logic goes that once NASA mandates v6, contractors like OSC have to follow}

Not so, this is something that NASA shouldn't have mandate.  It is an implementation. 

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5192
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 342
  • Likes Given: 213
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #255 on: 02/25/2009 04:38 PM »
Quote
I am not surprised OCO failed. If Orbital Sciences Corporation (OSC) runs their launch services like they run their mission operations, then it was doomed from the start.

Generally, Orbital's Launch System Group has a better reputation than its Space Systems Group (based on customer surveys); though the satellites seem to perform OK.  So, while unfair and bombastic, there's a shred of truth in it.  Kind of like Fox News and MSNBC.
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline yinzer

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1509
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #256 on: 02/25/2009 05:54 PM »
http://www.dailytech.com/NASA+Source+Paints+Disturbing+Picture+About+Failed+Satellite+Launch/article14411.htm
One would think everyone in NASA should be using IPv6 by now. "Not having IPs" does not work as an excuse anymore.
-- Pete
{Edit: The logic goes that once NASA mandates v6, contractors like OSC have to follow}

If you have a problem, and try to solve it by switching to IPv6, odds are that you now have two problems.

I can't read the article, but I wonder what the staff turnover has been since the last Taurus launch five years ago, and how many people were working their first flight.
California 2008 - taking rights from people and giving rights to chickens.

Offline randomly

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 516
  • Liked: 97
  • Likes Given: 39
Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #257 on: 02/25/2009 06:23 PM »
No disrespect to the Daily Tech, but are they even known for their launch coverage (I don't know, I'm asking), so questioning why this person went to them.

I have found Daily Tech to be less than reliable and they often tend to sensationalize or slant their stories to the point of outright deception. This varies from author to author, Jason Mick being one of the heavy offenders.

I have found that it is often necessary to check the source materials to find out what the true story is, and if authored by Jason Mick I always check the sources. It's a good source of info, but it has to be taken with a large grain of salt.

Online Chris Bergin

Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #258 on: 02/25/2009 08:38 PM »
No disrespect to the Daily Tech, but are they even known for their launch coverage (I don't know, I'm asking), so questioning why this person went to them.

I have found Daily Tech to be less than reliable and they often tend to sensationalize or slant their stories to the point of outright deception. This varies from author to author, Jason Mick being one of the heavy offenders.

I have found that it is often necessary to check the source materials to find out what the true story is, and if authored by Jason Mick I always check the sources. It's a good source of info, but it has to be taken with a large grain of salt.

Interesting. They have certainly pulled the article, but did not post a note of retraction (which you really should do). Anyway!

Online Chris Bergin

Re: FAILED: Taurus XL - OCO - Feb 23/24, 09.
« Reply #259 on: 02/25/2009 08:38 PM »
Feb. 25, 2009

John Yembrick
Headquarters, Washington
202-358-1100
john.yembrick-1@nasa.gov

Steve Cole
Headquarters, Washington
202-358-0918
stephen.e.cole@nasa.gov

RELEASE: 09-041

NASA NAMES CHAIRMAN FOR ORBITING CARBON OBSERVATORY INVESTIGATION

WASHINGTON -- NASA's Rick Obenschain, deputy director at NASA's
Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., will lead the
investigation board for the unsuccessful launch of the Orbiting
Carbon Observatory on Feb. 24.

The Mishap Investigation Board, or MIB, will have four other members.
NASA will announce the names of additional members as they become
available. The board will gather information, analyze the facts, and
identify the failure's cause or causes and contributing factors. The
MIB will make recommendations for actions to prevent a similar
incident.

Obenschain shares responsibility for executive leadership and overall
direction and management of Goddard and its assigned programs and
projects. He also is responsible for providing executive oversight
and technical evaluation for the development and delivery for Goddard
space systems launch and operations.

Previously, Obenschain was appointed director of the Flight Projects
Directorate in September 2004, and was responsible for the day-to-day
management of more than 40 space and Earth science missions. He has
held a number of project management positions at Goddard.

Obenschain is the recipient of NASA's Distinguished Service Medal,
Exceptional Service Medal, Outstanding Leadership Medal, Equal
Opportunity Medal, and Goddard's Award of Merit. In 1995, he received
the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics von Braun
Award for Excellence in Space Program Management.

For information about the Orbiting Carbon Observatory failed launch
and investigation, visit:



http://www.nasa.gov/oco

Tags: