NASA launches safety investigation of SpaceX and Boeing

[mikegarrison]

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/nasa-to-launch-safety-review-of-spacex-and-boeing/

NASA has ordered a safety review of the two companies it has hired to fly astronauts to the International Space Station, a monthslong assessment that would involve hundreds of interviews designed to assess the culture of the workplaces, the agency said.

The review, to begin next year, would look at both Boeing and SpaceX, the companies under contract to fly NASA’s astronauts, and examine “everything and anything that could impact safety” as the companies prepare to fly humans for the first time, William Gerstenmaier, NASA’s associate administrator for human exploration, said in an interview with The Washington Post.

The review was prompted by the recent behavior of SpaceX’s founder, Elon Musk, according to three officials with knowledge of the probe, after he took a hit of marijuana and sipped whiskey on a podcast streamed on the internet. That rankled some at NASA’s highest levels and prompted the agency to take a close look at the culture of the companies, the people said.

NASA spokesman Bob Jacobs declined to comment on what prompted the review. But in a statement, he said it would “ensure the companies are meeting NASA’s requirements for workplace safety, including the adherence to a drug-free environment.”

[tater]

Meanwhile, they'll fly an astronaut on Soyuz a few weeks after a LOV accident, which was a few weeks after they discovered a hole drilled in another Soyuz. Makes sense.

[sh1pman]

11 minutes ago, tater said:

Meanwhile, they'll fly an astronaut on Soyuz a few weeks after a LOV accident, which was a few weeks after they discovered a hole drilled in another Soyuz. Makes sense.

Well, Soyuz-FG launched  successfully after the accident, so it's considered to have requalified itself for human spaceflight. Assembly process was changed to prevent this kind of failures in the future. As for the Soyus-MS09, that's a proper mystery. Nobody seems to have a good idea about when it was done and by whom. Nevertheless, new Soyuz spacecraft are subjected to pressurization testing before launch now.

[Canopus]

Well the man said that later version of his chemically powered meme Rocket will fly to other Stars...He seems to be loosing his grip on reality.

[tater]

4 minutes ago, sh1pman said:

Well, Soyuz-FG launched  successfully after the accident, so it's considered to have requalified itself for human spaceflight. Assembly process was changed to prevent this kind of failures in the future. As for the Soyus-MS09, that's a proper mystery. Nobody seems to have a good idea about when it was done and by whom. Nevertheless, new Soyuz spacecraft are subjected to pressurization testing before launch now.

I didn't mean to change the subject, but it's funny that they will spend time on something predicated by literally nothing, and none of their own time on matters that are perhaps more directly related to safety.

[sh1pman]

1 minute ago, tater said:

I didn't mean to change the subject, but it's funny that they will spend time on something predicated by literally nothing, and none of their own time on matters that are perhaps more directly related to safety.

Maybe they think it's ok to smoke weed at workplace in SpaceX or something stupid like that. "OMG he had a joint at a show, rocket safety is compromised!!"

Or there are people who just hate Musk and use this case to generate some headache for him and his company.

13 minutes ago, Canopus said:

Well the man said that later version of his chemically powered meme Rocket will fly to other Stars...He seems to be loosing his grip on reality.

He never said that later version would be chemically powered.

Also he didn't say there would be humans in it.

[Canopus]

5 minutes ago, sh1pman said:

He never said that later version would be chemically powered.

Also he didn't say there would be humans in it.

Version 1: Methane Oxygen combustion rocket

Version 2: Beam core antimatter engine

Come on now you know he was just joking.

[sh1pman]

17 minutes ago, Canopus said:

Come on now you know he was just joking.

So was I.

That tweet shouldn't be taken seriously. Let's wait for off-the-shelf fusion drives, then we'll talk about human interstellar travel.

Edited November 21, 2018 by sh1pman

[DerekL1963]

2 hours ago, tater said:

Meanwhile, they'll fly an astronaut on Soyuz a few weeks after a LOV accident, which was a few weeks after they discovered a hole drilled in another Soyuz. Makes sense.

NASA has been dodging/covering up Soyuz safety issues ever since the Shuttle-MIR program.  As they say, nothing new under the sun.

[Kevin Kyle]

Not that I think a safety review is a bad thing and under the circumstances I think it is a good idea but ................................. NASA should worry about their own issues as far as human safety. Sounds like its personal to me anyway. I dont think everyone is a fan of commercial space flight. Understandable I think.

[Xd the great]

2 hours ago, Kevin Kyle said:

Not that I think a safety review is a bad thing and under the circumstances I think it is a good idea but ................................. NASA should worry about their own issues as far as human safety. Sounds like its personal to me anyway. I dont think everyone is a fan of commercial space flight. Understandable I think.

Well, without human spacecraft building, NASA loses its value of existence. What can they do? Send a rover to Mars every 2 years?

[Kerbart]

5 hours ago, sh1pman said:

Well, Soyuz-FG launched  successfully after the accident, so it's considered to have requalified itself for human spaceflight. Assembly process was changed to prevent this kind of failures in the future. As for the Soyus-MS09, that's a proper mystery. Nobody seems to have a good idea about when it was done and by whom. Nevertheless, new Soyuz spacecraft are subjected to pressurization testing before launch now.

I think that the issue is that the “safety culture” in Russia is not a point of discussion for NASA, despite a non-stop stream of rather bothersome news (the head of quality control arrested for corruption, holes being drilles, boosters going Kerbal, etc).

One can question if the review of SpaceX/Boeing is warranted based on the incident. But... if you are going to do such a deep dive into them based on a single video stream and not on the actual track record of launches, then I would certainly consider reviewing the Russian space program as well, given the history of what's been happening over there.

On second thought... maybe not because that means most likely you're cancelling American astronauts on Soyuz.

[DDE]

Guys, I hate to play this game on this forum... but is the publication setting the tone for coverage WaPo, by any chance?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/11/20/nasa-launch-safety-review-spacex-boeing-after-video-elon-musk-smoking-pot-rankled-agency-leaders/?utm_term=.352e55a0f904

The Bezos/CIA WaPo?

[Xd the great]

Just now, DDE said:

Guys, I hate to play this game on this forum... but is the publication setting the tone for coverage WaPo, by any chance?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/11/20/nasa-launch-safety-review-spacex-boeing-after-video-elon-musk-smoking-pot-rankled-agency-leaders/?utm_term=.352e55a0f904

The Bezos/CIA WaPo?

Yeah, i will be worried if my rocket was built by a drunk/high engineerer.

I would prefer to ride kerbal rockets.

[DDE]

Just now, Xd the great said:

Yeah, i will be worried if my rocket was built by a drunk/high engineerer.

I would prefer to ride kerbal rockets.

It’s ridiculous to base an investigation on an “off-duty” joint.

Which is why it’s probably not.

Except for WaPo presenting it as such.

[kerbiloid]

Spoiler

6 hours ago, tater said:

a few weeks after a LOV accident

 

6 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

after he took a hit of marijuana and sipped whiskey on a podcast streamed on the internet.

Dragon doesn't need a LOV to fly.

6 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

it would “ensure the companies are meeting NASA’s requirements for workplace safety, including the adherence to a drug-free environment.”

They will distribute a questionnaire with items like:
"Do the drugs obstruct you while you are working?"

5 hours ago, Canopus said:

Well the man said that later version of his chemically powered meme Rocket will fly to other Stars...He seems to be loosing his grip on reality.

Technically, five probes are doing that (2 P, 2 V, 1 NH).
Just 2 mln years later one of them can reach Aldebaran.

P.S.
I have a strange feeling about the future Martian greenhouses when BFS flies.

P.P.S.
A nice way to choose Boeing without excusing for the money invested in SpaceX.

Edited November 21, 2018 by kerbiloid

[CatastrophicFailure]

Ah yes, the ever safety-conscious NASA, just looking out for everyone’s best interests despite the demonstrated launch records of both Boeing as SpaceX. 

Meanwhile, they’ll go and send people around the moon on the second flight of their pork-ridden pride and joy... two years after its first flight. If they’re lucky. And without the minor details like life support systems on board. 

Whats that phrase about taking the log from your own eye before stoning someone else? Oh, wait, Musk is already there...

[YNM]

6 hours ago, tater said:

Meanwhile, they'll fly an astronaut on Soyuz a few weeks after a LOV accident, which was a few weeks after they discovered a hole drilled in another Soyuz. Makes sense.

Well, you still go and drive your car around. (I'm not going to mention how most N. American cars are... very... 'minimal'.)

It's what you do when that's your only choice. If you don't like it well maybe we should just replace ISS as well rather than continuosly keeping it up, who knows can we vacate it and keep it in orbit or not.

20 minutes ago, DDE said:

It’s ridiculous to base an investigation on an “off-duty” joint.

Which is why it’s probably not.

Except for WaPo presenting it as such.

Indeed, they like beer.

You know what ? Maybe rather than building BFR we should just research which smack makes you be on mars.

Edited November 21, 2018 by YNM

[kerbiloid]

Spoiler

Not to mention Freud, but BFR looks like a cigar/ Sometimes cigar is just a cigar.

 

[mikegarrison]

29 minutes ago, DDE said:

It’s ridiculous to base an investigation on an “off-duty” joint.

Which is why it’s probably not.

Except for WaPo presenting it as such.

I would not underestimate the reporting on this one. While personally I think that joint he smoked was no big deal, it clearly gained him a lot of animosity in the upper levels of the current US government. I suspect NASA execs don't give a *&^% if he tokes out every night, but they are not happy about the guy who is the public face of one of their most high-profile partners making a public show of it.

[KSK]

Ahhh - so that's what the delightfully counterintuitive change to BFR was all about. They're rejigging it to use hybrid motors powered by recycled red tape (RT-1?) and nitrous oxide.  

[kerbiloid]

Spoiler

3 minutes ago, KSK said:

nitrous oxide

When BFR is flying over your head everybody smiles. And giggles.

 

[Canopus]

2 hours ago, Xd the great said:

Well, without human spacecraft building, NASA loses its value of existence. What can they do? Send a rover to Mars every 2 years?

NASA is not only about manned Spaceflight. And there are quite a few probes flying right now and upcoming, beyond the Mars rovers.

[DerekL1963]

1 hour ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

Ah yes, the ever safety-conscious NASA, just looking out for everyone’s best interests despite the demonstrated launch records of both Boeing as SpaceX.

Not that I don't think the investigation is dubious - but folks aren't reading the article or paying attention.  They aren't investigating SpaceX and ULA - they're investigating SpaceX and Boeing.  The target here is the Commercial Crew Program, which doesn't have a launch record.

[NSEP]

Elon Musk might be a little not-so-serious but don't forget Shotwell who i think (unlike Musk) is sane person.