Slashdot Mirror
Implication of Sabotage Adds Intrigue To SpaceX Investigation (washingtonpost.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Washington Post: The long-running feud between Elon Musk's space company and its fierce competitor United Launch Alliance took a bizarre twist this month when a SpaceX employee visited its facilities at Cape Canaveral, Fla., and asked for access to the roof of one of ULA's buildings. About two weeks earlier, one of SpaceX's rockets blew up on a launchpad while it was awaiting an engine test. As part of the investigation, SpaceX officials had come across something suspicious they wanted to check out, according to three industry officials with knowledge of the episode. SpaceX had still images from video that appeared to show an odd shadow, then a white spot on the roof of a nearby building belonging to ULA, a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Boeing. The SpaceX representative explained to the ULA officials on site that it was trying to run down all possible leads in what was a cordial, not accusatory, encounter, according to the industry sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation. The building, which had been used to refurbish rocket motors known as the SMARF, is just more than a mile away from the launchpad and has a clear line of sight to it. A representative from ULA ultimately denied the SpaceX employee access to the roof and instead called Air Force investigators, who inspected the roof and didn't find anything connecting it to the rocket explosion, the officials said. This week, ten members of Congress sent a four-page letter to several government agencies about the SpaceX explosion, raising the question as to whether or not SpaceX should be leading the investigation. Elon Musk said the investigation into what went wrong is the company's "absolute top priority." He added, "We've eliminated all of the obvious possibilities for what occurred there. So what remains are the less probable answers." SpaceX aims to resume flights in November.
Elon Musk said "We've eliminated all of the obvious possibilities for what occurred there. So what remains are the less probable answers."
Solving a rocket failure is a complex task, on the order of magnitude of building a rocket from scratch.
Generating theories that pseudo-government entities utilize sabotage devices from a mile away seems a bit John Nash.
When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
Rather than as an implication, it seems to be more about covering all their bases.
Ezekiel 23:20
Not only does the video link not match the description,
"video that appeared to show an odd shadow, then a white spot on the roof of a nearby building"
it's tantamount to a propaganda video of exactly the sort I'd pay for if I wanted to ridicule anyone conducting an actual investigation into my industrial sabotage. How the fuck did this get past Slashdot editors?
Tesla crashes are always the user's fault, SpaceX explosions are sabotage...
Why ever worry about QC if you can blame all your failures on someone else?
or a SNIPER with MA DEUCE shooting at the OXYGEN TANK.
The link to the SpaceX "evidence" is an alien conspiracy video. Anyway, I'm guessing SpaceX is implying ULA had a shooter on the building? A .50 anti-material rifle like a Barrett or a Tac-50 with a single HEIAP round could do the trick easily, space rockets are fragile little toys. Timed right it would look like a failure or the rocket and the chances of anyone finding any indication of what really happened after the resulting explosion would be pretty damn slim. Only things I could think of would be punctures opposite the force of the explosion and shell fragments (good luck finding those). Any residue from the shell would most likely be burned off (if you could find it to begin with).
But I don't think anyone with enough knowledge of rockets would be that stupid. If you didn't get it to explode immediately there's a good chance the damage would cause the rocket to veer off course. The range safety officer would initiate self-destruct or the rocket would finally explode at that point but either way you're putting other people and equipment at risk.
What is interesting is that SpaceX uses Pad 40 and ULA uses Pad 41 so taking out Pad 40 would not affect Pad 41 (insert ominous sound effect here).
Personally I'm now convinced it was aliens *cough*.
It's not censorship to delete you copy pasta shitposts. It's still present on plenty of older articles. But most importantly, this site is private property.
They can delete anything and it isn't censorship.
Either a) the video shows a projectile about half a metre in size passing through and past the rocket (without impacting).
or b) Its a bee or similar sized insect about 30m from the camera (which is consistent with speed and size).
As to "industrial sabotage"... how? That would be a f**ing big bullet, and yet it continued on without being deflected. I mean it makes no sense because its nonsense.
Look, its always the same, stuff goes wrong with Musk rocket, cars or whatever and its a conspiracy! Remember the New York Times reviewer, who found the Tesla had crap range in the cold? He was told by Tesla support to drive it hard and warm up the batteries for better range, which he did, and stated in his review he'd done that, Musk pulls out that bit of telemetry and announces it is a conspiracy by car companies! Claims the reviewer drove it hard to flatten the battery! His car dies on Top Gear? Conspiracy! Nah it blew a fuse. A SpaceX rocket explodes? Conspiracy!
A man's car drives under a truck.... conspiracy, he's lying. Man drives into side of a truck and dies! He failed to notice the truck, what do you expect, he's a bad driver and in no way is autopilot to blame. A man hits fence posts autopilot didn't see. Liar! Liar! Conspiracy!
Give me a break.
The direction of their investigation was obvious from their previous release where they were talking about the breach in the helium system. They had a "large breach" that could not be explained, so what else fits the description better than a projectile? I was actually modded down for pointing that out (people saying you can't get within 8 miles of the launch etc), but, yeah, that's what they are looking at (among other things I assume). It is not that far-fetched I guess, I mean there are billions at stake here. And if you think about it, if you wanted to sabotage a rocket fueling would be the perfect time - low security compared to a launch (not to mention no bullet-time cameras etc rolling) and yet some activity that could be thought to be related to the cause. ;)
I'm not saying it was certainly sabotage, but, regardless of what Giorgio Tsoukalos might tell you, it is much more probable than aliens
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
Given the amount of money at stake, I wouldn't put it past them to engage in a little bit of industrial sabotage.
Actually, they did pass the safety tests. There are a number of videos showing that.
The problem you are attempting to address is that there are no safety tests for driverless operation.
For there to be a safety test, there has to be multiple examples to identify what is safe and what is not.
Paypal is not a bank. If you want to call it a bank, then you ALSO have to call all credit card companies a "bank".
Credit card companies are frequently fronted by a bank, but the company itself is not.
I could picture Musk stroking a white cat in his underground lair.
SpaceX had still images from video that appeared to show an odd shadow
Which, as the linked video shows, was neither odd nor a shadow - I don't know why this was even included in the summary. It was never anything of interest to anyone but UFO kooks.
then a white spot on the roof of a nearby building belonging to ULA
That would be the more interesting image to see.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
The Congressmen in question here aren't exactly unbiased towards SpaceX, you'll note that they are all from places where ULA has major operations: Florida, Alabama, Colorado, Texas.
Now I wonder why would those folks have any interest in seeing SpaceX fail..hrmm.
If it was actually a meteorite impact. Now that would be funny.
Lecture us now about why we still need AC posting on this site.
Wish I had mod points for that one.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
They should be ashamed for calling something so technical and scientific "SMARF".
Your rocket exploded.
Deal with it.
None of the *AA's are welcome here.
When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
A corporate sabotage version is unbelievable. What if it comes out? Why do it from their own building?.. Won't believe it until an official admits in court they did it, and would doubt even then.
However, what about an employee going postal and acting on their own, out of envy, hatred, or fear of being laid off? It looks like it's possible to buy a suitable rifle in USA (I'm not a resident), so if only they could bring it to the building... And a ULA employee *should* be able to know when to shoot, and what happens if LOX equipment is hit.
That said, the chance is still beyond slim. On the other hand, making unsound sabotage accusations in this circumstances would be a PR suicide. SpaceX better have rock solid evidence if they do.
WYSIWIG, but what you see might not be what you need
SpaceX should start launching their rockets from a underground silo. A least if the rocket goes 'pop' it will be contained enough to flood the silo with nitrogen.
I could picture Musk stroking a white cat in his underground lair.
Something like this? Looks like it's in a private jet but close enough.
Enigma
Any bullet striking the LOX tank would immediately turn into an incendiary bullet - even ignoring the hot/molten aluminum it would spray into the tank (which most definitely burns). Long-range bullets are going to be either copper or steel jacketed, commonly with a steel penetrator, lead core. While the lead is iffy, both copper and steel will ignite in LOX under high shock conditions (and if there's anything that's a high shock condition, it's a bullet impact).
Everybody point at the libertarian and laugh.
This is a comment to make it appear as though comments don't get deleted and anyone suggesting otherwise is like the OP.
(In reply to ALL the replies to me)
Let me clarify for the record: I do NOT believe it was a bullet. I was merely stating that no one would hear a bullet with the loudness of a rocket. As I said, those things are -loud-.
Also, I think the whole conspiracy thing is a bunch of BS. Rocket science is -hard-, very hard. And things go boom all the time. Suck it up, Princess.
Sorry, but the protocols for this were established back in the 1950s for investigating aircraft crashes - the investigation is lead by the civilian agency from the country where the plane was registered ; plane manufacturer, airline, engine manufacturer, agency where the debris landed, agencies for the countries with people killed and some others (e.g. ATC) have listening and often speaking rights. It's a well-established procedure. Why did anyone even waste a minute considering setting up a different system?
Oh, let me guess - spooks didn't want non-spooks to see what spooks do?
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
I agree with you, that AC has it's use and I like that it is available here. Especially since we both know, without a doubt, that big brother (government) is recording you. And also, because, as you mentioned, business is often withholding privacy in order to make money from you without properly informing or compensating you.
But you must also agree that AC is the worst part of Slashdot. Several user consistently post some crap that is clearly designed to offend someone and elicit further responses. Responses like this one I am writing and the post you just made. What a waste of time and space. All of which makes reading Slashdot a pain.
As a minimum, there should be a way for readers to shut off AC posts entirely. So that only posts with names behind them are shown. If her knows that there is such a thing, please let me know.
At the time of the explosion, there wasn't much noise. The engines were not lit, the rocket was being fueled, which uses pumps, that while loud, are nothing compared to an anti materiel rifle.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?