SpaceX Falcon 9 - AMOS-6 - (Pad Failure) - DISCUSSION THREAD (2)

[Eric Hedman]

This article on CNBC is bizarre:

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/03/sabotage-speculation-gathers-around-spacex-explosion.html

[baldusi]

It seems that sabotage is seriously considered
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/implication-of-sabotage-adds-intrigue-to-spacex-investigation/2016/09/30/5bb60514-874c-11e6-a3ef-f35afb41797f_story.html

I'm answering here because the record needs to be set straight. The article states that even the SpaceX employee said that they didn't thought this was real but they had to discard every single possibility, no matter how ridiculous. USAF investigators went and found nothing. So please remove the "seriously" part of your post.

[SWGlassPit]

Now we get to play the game of "mass media telephone," in which media outlets cite other media outlets as sources, resulting in journalists' interpretations getting cited as fact and things generally blowing up out of proportion.  Been down that road before.  Way too common in "science journalism."

[baldusi]

This article on CNBC is bizarre:

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/03/sabotage-speculation-gathers-around-spacex-explosion.html

Even the Washington Post article states that even the SpaceX employee said that they didn't thought this was real but they had to discard every single possibility, no matter how ridiculous. USAF investigators went and found nothing. This is like somebody saying it was an UFO and they asking USAF to tell them if anything appeared on their radars. They have to do it because they have been told to close every single possibility with a proof. But I'm pretty sure the SpaceX guy was blush when he asked for access.

[Norm38]

Putting "sabotage" on the fault tree reminds me of the advice new parents are given to baby-proof their houses.  You're supposed to get down on your hands and knees, crawl around, and look for each and every way that you could possibly harm/kill yourself. You are encouraged to be creative, paranoid, simultaneously creatively paranoid. You take Murphy and square him, everything that can go wrong will all go wrong at the same time, with more wrong piled on top.
Once armed with your mile long list of death, you set about methodically eliminating the possibility of each item.

Considering sabotage has tremendous value. Think of each way that the design could be subtly compromised.  Then do something about it, even if you thought before you didn't have to. Something sabotaged that rocket, doesn't mean it was consciously done.

[Akhenaten]

If it turns out to be sabotage after all, then the saboteurs must be denied any reward from their actions. If  it is shown that  there was a sabotage with a discernible motive, it should be possible to destroy the guilty organisation, if any.
if it was done by enemies of Israel, then military and diplomatic support for Israel must be ramped up. If it was ULA, then Musk can easily be suitably recompensed.
The one certainty is that IF it was sabotage, sabotage is a felony, and must not be rewarded in any fashion whatsoever. A lone kook could simply be placed in solitary for a few decades. No problem
Nothing could be clearer or simpler.
Not that I am "sold" on sabotage, but, if it was,  the one thing to be avoided is any reduction in SpaceX's role in the advancement of Space.

[Jim]

the one thing to be avoided is any reduction in SpaceX's role in the advancement of Space.

That is nonsense.  They don't deserve any special treatment.  This would be treated no different than any other crime or

[spacekid]

Considering sabotage has tremendous value. Think of each way that the design could be subtly compromised.  Then do something about it, even if you thought before you didn't have to. Something sabotaged that rocket, doesn't mean it was consciously done.

You don't want to do something about sabotage unless it is likely enough or cheap enough to counter. For instance it would be near impossible to guard against a missile or sniper.

[John.bender]

If it turns out to be sabotage after all, then the saboteurs must be denied any reward from their actions. If  it is shown that  there was a sabotage with a discernible motive, it should be possible to destroy the guilty organisation, if any.
if it was done by enemies of Israel, then military and diplomatic support for Israel must be ramped up. If it was ULA, then Musk can easily be suitably recompensed.
The one certainty is that IF it was sabotage, sabotage is a felony, and must not be rewarded in any fashion whatsoever. A lone kook could simply be placed in solitary for a few decades. No problem
Nothing could be clearer or simpler.
Not that I am "sold" on sabotage, but, if it was,  the one thing to be avoided is any reduction in SpaceX's role in the advancement of Space.

Who is talking reward?  I'm not sure where that would come from unless someone likes to be locked up for years.

[edkyle99]

OK.  So, what does ULA do at the SMARF?

 - Ed Kyle

[DragonRider]

The problem with sabotage is that, if it was that you are probably dealing with parties who are very sophisticated and good luck figuring out how they ever did it. No one would do this unless they were convinced they could not be caught.

[LastStarFighter]

OK.  So, what does ULA do at the SMARF?

 - Ed Kyle

Building the Vulcan MLP. I think Jim mentioned new rails being worked or old ones being exposed between there and LC41.

[Mader Levap]

No need for a vast conspiracy theory. All you need is a disgruntled individual with access to a sniper rifle. Not unthinkable among the population affected by ULA lay-offs.

Problem is getting away with it without any trace. Can't happen in Real World(tm).

[vandersons]

If anyone here understands legal/congress speak could they be so kind to translate what on earth that letter from the 25 congressmen/congresswomen is all about?

 To me it all seemed like empty-speak.

[meekGee]

If anyone here understands legal/congress speak could they be so kind to translate what on earth that letter from the 25 congressmen/congresswomen is all about?

 To me it all seemed like empty-speak.

Which at least proves it is genuine.

[Seamus]

If anyone here understands legal/congress speak could they be so kind to translate what on earth that letter from the 25 congressmen/congresswomen is all about?

 To me it all seemed like empty-speak.

Essentially it is in response to the previous letter from certain members of Congress asking why SpaceX was heading the investigation into the mishap.  This letter is affirming they are following the law and doing the investigation the way it is supposed to be done per federal law, and not randomly having other agencies in charge of the investigation as the other letter thought they should be doing.

[mvpel]

If anyone here understands legal/congress speak could they be so kind to translate what on earth that letter from the 25 congressmen/congresswomen is all about?

 To me it all seemed like empty-speak.

It struck me as "keep up the good work, we've got your back." This letter is undoubtedly in response to the one a few days ago from Rep. Mike Crossman (R-ULA):

http://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-accident-coffman-congressional-letter-2016-9

It asks for increased scrutiny of SpaceX's investigation practices, given its plans with NASA to launch astronauts to the International Space Station. It also lobs pointed questions at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), NASA, and the US Air Force (USAF) about the certification process of SpaceX hardware, pricing schemes, risk assessment, and more.

[NaN]

If anyone here understands legal/congress speak could they be so kind to translate what on earth that letter from the 25 congressmen/congresswomen is all about?

 To me it all seemed like empty-speak.

Essentially it is in response to the previous letter from certain members of Congress asking why SpaceX was heading the investigation into the mishap.  This letter is affirming they are following the law and doing the investigation the way it is supposed to be done per federal law, and not randomly having other agencies in charge of the investigation as the other letter thought they should be doing.

Here is a Space Policy thread on the topic, including some other articles: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41328.msg1308972

[AncientU]

If anyone here understands legal/congress speak could they be so kind to translate what on earth that letter from the 25 congressmen/congresswomen is all about?

 To me it all seemed like empty-speak.

It struck me as "keep up the good work, we've got your back." This letter is undoubtedly in response to the one a few days ago from Rep. Mike Crossman (R-ULA):

http://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-accident-coffman-congressional-letter-2016-9

It asks for increased scrutiny of SpaceX's investigation practices, given its plans with NASA to launch astronauts to the International Space Station. It also lobs pointed questions at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), NASA, and the US Air Force (USAF) about the certification process of SpaceX hardware, pricing schemes, risk assessment, and more.

Intentional, or Freudian slip?

[Jimmy_C]

Back to the helium system. An exploding COPV can ignite itself in the LOx tank, or rupture the common bulkhead and ignite the RP-1, or both. What else in the helium system may cause an explosion in the second stage near the common bulkhead without obvious signs in the telemetry? How is helium piped into the tank? Do the hoses go through ports on the tank wall? What would happen if the hose tore into the seal on a port? Would there be a slow or fast leak?