Slashdot Mirror
Could a Dirty Rag Take Out a $2 Billion Satellite?
An anonymous reader writes "The alleged rescue of a U.S. military communications satellite underscores some of the weaknesses in U.S. space efforts. Quoting: 'The seven-ton “AEHF-1,” part of a planned six-satellite constellation meant to support radio communication between far-flung U.S. military units, had been in orbit just one day when the problems began. The satellite started out in a highly-elliptical, temporary orbit. The plan was to use the spacecraft’s on-board engine to boost it to a permanent, geo-stationary orbit. But when the Air Force space operators at Los Angeles Air Force Base activated the engine, nothing happened. The Government Accountability Office would later blame the failure on a rag left inside a fuel line by a Lockheed worker.'"
TFA states that they are seeking compensation from Lockheed. Hopefully, that'll happen without an actual suit.
Already been established that they were able to overcome the rag and get the satellite into a functional orbit where it can fulfill its mission objective. http://www.spaceflightnow.com/atlas/av019/120103rescue.html
You can use tiny squares of cloth, impregnated with cleaning solution, to clean the inside of valves and metal lines - gets rid of metal filings which are left over from the boring process.
Quite easy to leave one behind. Which is why there are processes in place designed to prevent such issues.
You left out Slashdot summary failure.
FTFA
"On Oct. 24, AEHF-1 reached its originally planned orbit. Testing began soon afterward. The Air Force expects to bring the satellite into service in March. Meanwhile, two more AEHFs are slated to launch in 2012."
They got it into the correct orbit over two months ago using the small thrusters.
In other words...
More sensationalistic headlines to get clicks and comments from the new Slashdot.
Really? Oh and the answer is "no a dirty rag did not take out a 2 billion dollar commsat."
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
More seriously, why wouldn't groundside testing notice that there was a rag in the line?
Yup, why wouldn't it?
Obviously it didn't. Multiple times. In multiple different situations - this isn't the first space mission to be ruined because of something left where it shouldn't have been.
The obvious answer to your question might be because it didn't block anything during testing, so there was the appearance of nothing wrong. Turn on the fuel flow, after the experience of the launch, and it might have been jostled free from wherever it had chosen to hide - from there it might be a short ride to a bottle necking point such as a crimp in the line, a sharp bend, or a valve, and thus begins the blockage.