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
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?
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*.
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.
I could picture Musk stroking a white cat in his underground lair.
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.
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?
Amazing your post has been modded as flamebait. Really amazing that Slashdot is playing to the Alex Jones crowd.
The video, which I have watched dozens of times, doesn't show anything weird at all. One of the "UFOs" was a seagull, another probably a bug. There is a fellow who does Youtube videos who calls himself "thunderfoot" - yes - that thunderfoot, the anti-modern day feminist, but he puts together a pretty good analysis.
While not conclusive, he pretty much debunks this conspiracy theory of launchpad sabotage.
As well, anyone wanting to sabotage the second stage would find the easiest path would be during buildup of the second stage.
The breach almost certainly started at the interface between the second stage fuel and Oxidant tanks, which share a shell. Where in that area remains in question, but that's where it starts. There is an odd screech a second or so before the rapid disassembly that may or may not be connected to the event. The camera was some miles away, so a lot of things in between might make noise.
note: that screech, if related, sounds like what happens when an extremely cold substance comes in contact with warmer metal. You can duplicate this by putting a penny on a piece of dry ice. The penny will make wierd noises.
But don't the conspiracy folks have better things to do, like proving the moon mission was faked, or that Ted Cruz's father put the hit on John Kennedy, or that 9-11 was an inside job, or that electrical companies put the kibosh on perpetual motion?
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.