SpaceX Investigates Possible Falcon Rocket Sabotage

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
SpaceX is looking into the possibility of sabotage? I thought Elon Musk already explained what happened (here)? If this turns out to be a business rivalry form of sabotage, my money is on this guy:

There is a healthy dose of rivalry between Elon Musk's SpaceX and United Launch Alliance (ULA), which once held the monopoly for US military rocket technologies. Now, the investigation into the doomed launch of the Falcon 9 rocket has taken an interesting turn, with suspicious eyes turning on ULA. As reported by the Washington Post, a SpaceX employee recently visited the nearby ULA buildings in Cape Canaveral, Fla., and asked for access to one of the rooftops.
 
Is the theory that somebody shot a rifle at it? I mean, that seems like it would be patently obvious. 1 mile shot capable of penetrating the rocket body would probably have to be a .50 cal if Battlfield taught me anything. That thing sounds like a canon in real life, everybody would hear it.
 
nysmo said:
Is the theory that somebody shot a rifle at it? I mean, that seems like it would be patently obvious. 1 mile shot capable of penetrating the rocket body would probably have to be a .50 cal if Battlfield taught me anything. That thing sounds like a canon in real life, everybody would hear it.
Click to expand...

Nah, I watched this one movie where they used a silencer. .50 cal suppressed. Thing was nearly silent. Those silencers work great. Just a 'pfft' when they fire.

Plus, I think they did a nearly 2 mile shot with it. One shot, too.

If it's true, fuck those people. For the good of mankind. Unless there is a profit to be made, then fuck you. It's mine!

Make a profit, but don't fuck up someone else's goals. You can make a shit ton of money making things great for mankind.
 
The ULA guy was smart to not let him up there. By calling the Air Force to let them do the search he eliminated the possibility of any planted evidence. With the amount of pressure spacex is under it wouldnt surprise me if they tried something shady to shift the blame.
 
I would believe a paid off employee sabotaging it before I believe the sniper shot theory.
 
workshop35 said:
The ULA guy was smart to not let him up there. By calling the Air Force to let them do the search he eliminated the possibility of any planted evidence. With the amount of pressure spacex is under it wouldnt surprise me if they tried something shady to shift the blame.
Click to expand...
Oh cmon, spacex has blown up several rockets already, they arent afraid to make mistakes. I really dont think they'd be so irresponsible to even hint at sabotage unless something VERY damning was uncovered, like an inward puncture mark on the hull or something
 
Corporate espionage is nothing new. This is all entirely plausible. However, you have to have proof to make such claims.
 
nysmo said:
Oh cmon, spacex has blown up several rockets already, they arent afraid to make mistakes. I really dont think they'd be so irresponsible to even hint at sabotage unless something VERY damning was uncovered, like an inward puncture mark on the hull or something
Click to expand...

They have been caught (by someone i personally know and worked with) falsifying data to bypass Nasa standards in their manufacturing facilities. They already have a bad rep for cutting corners. ULA has a 100% success rate with their Atlas vehicle. They don't need to sabotage spacex. Spacex has done a great job of doing that to themselves.

I don't even think they hinted at ULA being responsible. It seems like this story got picked up and blown out of proportion. The Air Force investigation crew checked it out and found nothing. Spacex screwed up, end of story.
 
The densified propellants technique is very experimental, and the latest Falcon 9 iteration is first to use. By lowering the temperature of the propellants to really cold temperatures, they can have more propellant stored in the same tank volume. This improves the performance and to land without too much of a performance hit. But this technique may have unknown effects on the vehicle and ground equipment systems.

The hardware or design failure from the CRS-7 mission may still be present in the Falcon 9 upper stage, but without real traceable hardware or documentation, we may never know. The leading speculation is the COPV’s of the upper stage exploded, but there is nothing to prove what happened so far by the armchair community.

If SpaceX can’t tell from the telemetry what happened, then it is a mystery. Therefore, the design and manufacturing processes will have to be looked over again
I hope they find the problem and refly.
 
nysmo said:
Is the theory that somebody shot a rifle at it? I mean, that seems like it would be patently obvious. 1 mile shot capable of penetrating the rocket body would probably have to be a .50 cal if Battlfield taught me anything. That thing sounds like a canon in real life, everybody would hear it.
Click to expand...

So use a laser gun instead. Hey, there's a lot of high tech stuff just lying around all over the place in these rocket launching areas; shouldn't be hard to MacGruber a laser gun out of a potato and a piece of string.
 
Elon Musk just likes things catching fire ... like electric cars, rockets, etc. ;-)
 
Just going to run with the "sniper" theory on this one, just for fun....

nysmo said:
Is the theory that somebody shot a rifle at it? I mean, that seems like it would be patently obvious. 1 mile shot capable of
penetrating the rocket body would probably have to be a .50 cal if Battlfield taught me anything. That thing sounds like a canon in real life, everybody would hear it.
Click to expand...

Ur_Mom said:
Nah, I watched this one movie where they used a silencer. .50 cal suppressed. Thing was nearly silent. Those silencers work great. Just a 'pfft' when they fire.
Click to expand...

I have observed a .50 suppressed in real life - no movie theatrics. If used, and was in a noisy environment (normal town, anywhere near a highway, etc.) or somewhat remote (closest person about 20 yards away) it would not draw any attention.

Plus, I think they did a nearly 2 mile shot with it. One shot, too.
Click to expand...

You're not trying to hit a 10-20" target, like a sniper would on a human target. It's a freakin' rocket, with a huge area to hit. Much less caliber of rifle would be capable of hitting that 1+ miles out.

On that thought, you wouldn't necessarily have to penetrate the rocket to cause catastrophic failure. Just make a weak spot beyond tolerance, and BOOM!
 
jardows said:
You're not trying to hit a 10-20" target, like a sniper would on a human target. It's a freakin' rocket, with a huge area to hit. Much less caliber of rifle would be capable of hitting that 1+ miles out.

On that thought, you wouldn't necessarily have to penetrate the rocket to cause catastrophic failure. Just make a weak spot beyond tolerance, and BOOM!
Click to expand...

They aimed for that specific area, which was 22". It had to be that area to make it look like an accident. The angle at which the bullet would need to hit that area to destroy the rocket would need to be calculated as well. The noise wouldn't matter much, because the sniper was in a swamp in a gillie suit. He just needed a place to hide and then get away. He may have dumped the gun, though... Might start looking in the swamp for the spent shell and the gun itself.

(BTW - it's all BS. I'm just talking movie talk, definitely not reality!).
 
Ur_Mom said:
They aimed for that specific area, which was 22". It had to be that area to make it look like an accident. The angle at which the bullet would need to hit that area to destroy the rocket would need to be calculated as well.
Click to expand...
That would indicate the need for a trained sniper, easy to find those who will be willing to work for enough cash. Sabotage at this level, could afford to pay someone a hefty sum that would tempt even the most upright! I'm not sure about the required distance. A trained sniper, as alluded to later in your post, could be completely hidden at even close ranges, it all depends on how close he could get. Close enough, and the need for a .50 BMG is negated, and opens up many more options.

The noise wouldn't matter much, because the sniper was in a swamp in a gillie suit. He just needed a place to hide and then get away. He may have dumped the gun, though... Might start looking in the swamp for the spent shell and the gun itself.
Click to expand...
A trained sniper would not dump the rifle, which would most likely be a bolt-action, therefore no casings to find. If he was in a swamp, nature would quickly destroy any evidence of his presence.

(BTW - it's all BS. I'm just talking movie talk, definitely not reality!).
Click to expand...

We're just geeks having fun!
 
jardows said:
That would indicate the need for a trained sniper, easy to find those who will be willing to work for enough cash. Sabotage at this level, could afford to pay someone a hefty sum that would tempt even the most upright! I'm not sure about the required distance. A trained sniper, as alluded to later in your post, could be completely hidden at even close ranges, it all depends on how close he could get. Close enough, and the need for a .50 BMG is negated, and opens up many more options.
Click to expand...

The distance would need to be fairly large due to the resulting explosion and ease of disappearing after the shot.

Good call on the casing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top