NASA to launch safety review of SpaceX and Boeing after video of Elon Musk...

[Lars-J]

I suspect that this came as a surprise to all of the people at NASA who *actually* work with Commercial Crew. I suspect that Gerst' phone is running rather hot today with lots of expletives.

[ulm_atms]

Where were these concerns when NASA granted SpaceX the ability to fly category 3 payloads last week?

Probably non-existent until the "retire" SLS stories a few days ago.  I think that ruffled some feathers and is my guess for what is now happening.

my .02 cents

[whitelancer64]

...

Show me where they said the vehicles are unsafe. They don't.

They specifically said this is NOT a review of the vehicles.

...

I don't share your optimism. If you have concerns about the people building the vehicles, you probably suspect something they are doing impacts the vehicle's safety. You don't have to come out and say it. The goal of a fishing expedition is to find fish, and if you're looking for safety problems, where are you going to find them?

A "good" safety culture is dependent on management listening to concerns of employees about potential safety issues, and following their internal guidelines for safe operations.

This is not about the ability to produce a good product. It's about the internal function of the culture of the company in regards to safety.

[Lars-J]

...

Show me where they said the vehicles are unsafe. They don't.

They specifically said this is NOT a review of the vehicles.

...

I don't share your optimism. If you have concerns about the people building the vehicles, you probably suspect something they are doing impacts the vehicle's safety. You don't have to come out and say it. The goal of a fishing expedition is to find fish, and if you're looking for safety problems, where are you going to find them?

A "good" safety culture is dependent on management listening to concerns of employees about potential safety issues, and following their internal guidelines for safe operations.

This is not about the ability to produce a good product. It's about the internal function of the culture of the company in regards to safety.

So why is it being done at the end of development instead of the beginning or middle?

[philw1776]

And of course they are going to investigate all the people who drink alcohol too, right?  Including NASA employees?

Careful!  Elon is a public fan of fine single malt beverages.
I would take NASA objecting to this as a racist assault on us fine Scottish people.

[oiorionsbelt]

A "good" safety culture is dependent on management listening to concerns of employees about potential safety issues, and following their internal guidelines for safe operations.

And how is that threatened by Elon taking a hit of cannabis after hours?

[whitelancer64]

...

Show me where they said the vehicles are unsafe. They don't.

They specifically said this is NOT a review of the vehicles.

...

I don't share your optimism. If you have concerns about the people building the vehicles, you probably suspect something they are doing impacts the vehicle's safety. You don't have to come out and say it. The goal of a fishing expedition is to find fish, and if you're looking for safety problems, where are you going to find them?

A "good" safety culture is dependent on management listening to concerns of employees about potential safety issues, and following their internal guidelines for safe operations.

This is not about the ability to produce a good product. It's about the internal function of the culture of the company in regards to safety.

So why is it being done at the end of development instead of the beginning or middle?

Because concerns came up. Musk's behavior, as I said, is likely the straw(s) that broke the camel's back. Both Boeing and SpaceX had findings in their last ISO 9001 audits that could indicate a poor safety culture.

[matthewkantar]

Safety review is a good thing. Sloppy drug addicts with a loosey-goosey culture of safety could drop and damage beyond repair a massive LOX dome, or build a a multi million dollar welding fixture crooked. Gotta be alert. 

[whitelancer64]

A "good" safety culture is dependent on management listening to concerns of employees about potential safety issues, and following their internal guidelines for safe operations.

And how is that threatened by Elon taking a hit of cannabis after hours?

Safety culture is a top-down thing. Bad behavior by administrators / management can be reflective of a poor culture throughout the company. i.e., "If my boss does it, why can't I?"

[ulm_atms]

A "good" safety culture is dependent on management listening to concerns of employees about potential safety issues, and following their internal guidelines for safe operations.

So NASA is not good to you then? They have done bad on the bold a few times.

Please don't take that as NASA bashing as it is not meant as that.  It's just as other's have said though, NASA is not exactly the shining example of safety.  Pot, kettle, black as Lars-J said.

[Rocket Science]

Safety review is a good thing. Sloppy drug addicts with a loosey-goosey culture of safety could drop and damage beyond repair a massive LOX dome, or build a a multi million dollar welding fixture crooked. Gotta be alert.

Like the O2 tanked was dropped and installed anyway "good enough" on Apollo XIII 2 years before...
https://www.space.com/8193-caused-apollo-13-accident.html

[Draggendrop]

Feels like I just had the wind knocked out of me.....just before Xmas.....

[Joffan]

NASA is being frakking (ucking) shameful.

Russia drills holes in it's spacecraft and knocks them over with a crane but you declare them safe and good to launch. Elon Musk takes one and only one half-puff of some marijuana (while discussing how much he dislikes it) while off work and you declare SpaceX unsafe after dozens and dozens of safe launches.

NASA do your job and sign the paperwork and let SpaceX launch. Stop being an impediment and ruining this nation's space program.

Can you show me where it says they are not going to let Boeing and SpaceX launch?

You think a hand interview of hundreds to thousands of employees and the associated review of their comments won't take time? Several employees will remember the odd incident (no work place is perfect) and then NASA will use that as a card to play to delay the missions further.

Interviews of all or even a significant proportion of employees? How would that even work? It would be a gross and totally unjustifiable intrusion into the company. It also shouldn't delay launches in any way; it's not the kind of immediate-critical issue that should do that, but a long-term-relationship level check where issues can be fixed at some reasonable pace.

According to Gerst, the focus is  "the companies’ safety culture — encompassing the number of hours employees work, drug policies, leadership and management styles, whether employees’ safety concerns are taken seriously, and more." That review doesn't need to take a long time, and should be mostly about talking to HR & HSE, but I'd like to see NASA  state some clear objectives before they start taking up additional time at the respective companies.

The whole thing seems like it's far too last-minute to be taken seriously. Did NASA not care about any of things before now? Can they show a clear link to the quality of services they are getting?

[whitelancer64]

A "good" safety culture is dependent on management listening to concerns of employees about potential safety issues, and following their internal guidelines for safe operations.

So NASA is not good to you then? They have done bad on the bold a few times.

Please don't take that as NASA bashing as it is not meant as that.  It's just as other's have said though, NASA is not exactly the shining example of safety.  Pot, kettle, black as Lars-J said.

I think NASA's past experience in that regard is absolutely a good reason for them to make sure that others responsible for launching their astronauts into space have a good safety culture.

[ulm_atms]

A "good" safety culture is dependent on management listening to concerns of employees about potential safety issues, and following their internal guidelines for safe operations.

And how is that threatened by Elon taking a hit of cannabis after hours?

Safety culture is a top-down thing. Bad behavior by administrators / management can be reflective of a poor culture throughout the company. i.e., "If my boss does it, why can't I?"

What bad behavior though?  What did he do?  Smoked some legal pot on his off-time?  It's his time isn't it?  Not the companies?

True...If he was working on the company time high as a kite or drunk off his butt sure, you statement is valid.

But on his own personal time though?  No way.  People are able to separate personal and work life and most do just fine at it.

[Rocket Science]

NASA is being frakking (ucking) shameful.

Russia drills holes in it's spacecraft and knocks them over with a crane but you declare them safe and good to launch. Elon Musk takes one and only one half-puff of some marijuana (while discussing how much he dislikes it) while off work and you declare SpaceX unsafe after dozens and dozens of safe launches.

NASA do your job and sign the paperwork and let SpaceX launch. Stop being an impediment and ruining this nation's space program.

Can you show me where it says they are not going to let Boeing and SpaceX launch?

You think a hand interview of hundreds to thousands of employees and the associated review of their comments won't take time? Several employees will remember the odd incident (no work place is perfect) and then NASA will use that as a card to play to delay the missions further.

Interviews of all or even a significant proportion of employees? How would that even work? It would be a gross and totally unjustifiable intrusion into the company. It also shouldn't delay launches in any way; it's not the kind of immediate-critical issue that should do that, but a long-term-relationship level check where issues can be fixed at some reasonable pace.

According to Gerst, the focus is  "the companies’ safety culture — encompassing the number of hours employees work, drug policies, leadership and management styles, whether employees’ safety concerns are taken seriously, and more." That review doesn't need to take a long time, and should be mostly about talking to HR & HSE, but I'd like to see NASA  state some clear objectives before they start taking up additional time at the respective companies.

The whole thing seems like it's far too last-minute to be taken seriously. Did NASA not care about any of things before now? Can they show a clear link to the quality of services they are getting?

The new "boy-scout" in charge... Google him and you'll understand...

[punder]

The fact is that, for anyone seeking or holding a US government security clearance, off-hours alcohol use is not a no-no (unless it is a real problem that makes the subject a security risk) and smoking weed off-hours is a definite no-no.

The mere opinions of you and me about the relative dangers of alcohol vs. weed are immaterial to the Feds. That's just the way it is. And it's going to be that way for a good while yet.

[ChrisWilson68]

So our standard is that if there's questionable public behavior by the person at the top of an organization, we need to review the safety culture of the entire organization?

NASA is a part of the executive branch of the U.S. government.  Lets follow that chain up to the top and see if the person at the top has any questionable public behavior.

When NASA is done with their review of the U.S. executive branch and its safety culture, then they can get started on Boeing and SpaceX.  Otherwise, it's hypocritical.

[whitelancer64]

A "good" safety culture is dependent on management listening to concerns of employees about potential safety issues, and following their internal guidelines for safe operations.

And how is that threatened by Elon taking a hit of cannabis after hours?

Safety culture is a top-down thing. Bad behavior by administrators / management can be reflective of a poor culture throughout the company. i.e., "If my boss does it, why can't I?"

What bad behavior though?  What did he do?  Smoked some legal pot on his off-time?  It's his time isn't it?  Not the companies?

True...If he was working on the company time high as a kite or drunk off his butt sure, you statement is valid.

But on his own personal time though?  No way.  People are able to separate personal and work life and most do just fine at it.

It's not legal federally - and federal contractors have strict requirements on drug testing / being a drug-free work environment.

[ChrisWilson68]

The fact is that, for anyone seeking or holding a US government security clearance, off-hours alcohol use is not a no-no (unless it is a real problem that makes the subject a security risk) and smoking weed off-hours is a definite no-no.

The mere opinions of you and me about the relative dangers of alcohol vs. weed are immaterial to the Feds. That's just the way it is. And it's going to be that way for a good while yet.

Standards for security clearances are irrelevant.

The top person at NASA just decided on his own authority to start these investigations.  They're not in response to any evidence of any NASA rule being broken, or any plausible safety violation.