NASA And DOJ Investigation Reveals Why Two Taurus Rockets Failed

[WLJ]

Lucy, you've got some 'splaining to do!

They think they found the cause of two launch failures in 2009 & 2011.

In 2009 a Taurus XL rocket failed because the fairing at the top refused to separate, then in 2011 the same things happened again. A multi year investigation traced the problem to materials from a supplier which had been fabricating test results.

NASA And DOJ Investigation Reveals Why Two Taurus Rockets Failed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drSv1biVJZQ&feature=em-uploademail

[230RN]

Really interesting showing how detcord can "unzip" a seam... if everything is in spec.

As opposed to just reg'lar old explosive bolts.

May I offer the suggestion that maybe NASA did not realize that "brittleness" was something that had to be specified as well until these two incidents were analyzed?  Just throwing that out for consideration, apart from any actual data distortion from the contractor.  

Reminded me of the pair of Boeing 737 MAX crashes.  If only one had occurred, nobody would have discovered the real cause.

Terry, 230RN

[MechAg94]

They were made by Taurus so....... 

[MillCreek]

https://www.popsci.com/nasa-aluminum-fraud?dom=rss-default&src=syn

A companion article.  Good thing there was no failure on a manned mission leading to loss of life.

[brimic]

First, at the behest of a plant manager, SPI employees made handwritten alterations to more than 2,000 test results between 1996 and 2006, flipping failing grades into passing ones (which were then typed onto certifications sent to more than 200 customers). Second, from around 2002 to 2015, a lab supervisor had employees alter more than 4,100 test results for more than 250 customers, and instructed employees to violate testing standards as well.

I don't know about materials, but in pharma, they warn you that falsifying records could land you in a very rapey building full of cages.

[MechAg94]

https://www.popsci.com/nasa-aluminum-fraud?dom=rss-default&src=syn

A companion article.  Good thing there was no failure on a manned mission leading to loss of life.

Why did they get off so cheap?

An aluminum manufacturer charged with crimes and civil claims of fraud has agreed to pay $46.9 million to NASA, the Department of Defense, and many commercial customers. This comes after a NASA investigation uncovered a 19-year scheme by Sapa Profiles, Inc. that involved faked test results and the selling of faulty materials—actions which eventually led to two failed NASA missions and more than $700 million in losses.

[Hawkmoon]

19 YEARS?!?!?!

It's comforting to know that NASA is right on top of things. Imagine the problems that might have occurred if this company had been allowed to continue for any length of time.

[WLJ]

Why did they get off so cheap?

Guess maybe charging them the full 700 million would sink the company and NASA needs them.
Besides, it's just taxpayer's money, not like it's anything important.

[RocketMan]

Guess maybe charging them the full 700 million would sink the company and NASA needs them.
Besides, it's just taxpayer's money, not like it's anything important.

One of the stories mentioned they are prohibited from bidding on future government contracts.

[230RN]

Penalties could have been spelled out by statute or regulation.