Nasa Says Metals Fraud Caused $700M Satellite Failure

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-01/nasa-says-aluminum-fraud-caused-700-million-satellite-failures

by pseudolus • 7 years ago

450 207 7 years ago

j-pb• 7 years ago

It's amazing how companies in the US can cause a billion in damage, wasting years of highly talented people, put climate science years behind, and get a slap on the wrist. Yet, some kid carries a few grams of weed and goes to jail or gets killed by the cops.

taneq• 7 years ago

As with individuals, the measure of a society is how they treat those with no power over them.

mobilefriendly• 7 years ago

Seriously, how is the penalty only $46 million? Should be multiple billions of dollars. And the employees who faked the tests should be in prison.

wil421• 7 years ago

I’m not suggesting prison but some kind of charge, even if it’s a misdemeanor, is needed. Whoever faked the test result needs a record that would hopefully follow them.

Would you rather hire someone who was busted with a small amount of drugs or someone who faked test results for NASA?

vectorEQ• 7 years ago

it's really hard to push onto employees as it's hard to determine if they were acting on their own or being pressured into doing such things. (as even acting on one's own can be motivated by unhealthy stress or such things which can be outside of their control / responsibility.)

that being said, for the incurred loss, 46 million is tiny.

icegreentea2• 7 years ago

The DOJ press release linked elsewhere in the thread says at least one employee was jailed:

"Second, from in or about 2002 through September 2015, Dennis Balius, the SPI testing lab supervisor, led a scheme to alter tests within SPI’s computerized systems and provide false certifications with the altered results to customers. Balius also instructed employees to violate other testing standards, such as increasing the speed of the testing machines or cutting samples in a manner that did not meet the required specifications. Balius pleaded guilty in July 2017 and was sentenced to three years in prison and ordered to pay over $170,000 in restitution."

The penalty is only $46 million because they've yet to be able to determine (like in court) that the claimed loses (like the failed launches) were actually a consequence of SPI's fraud. The damages are likely on the scale of the orders actually made.

TheBeardKing2• 7 years ago

Exactly, I can't believe no one was sent to prison over this.

rayiner4• 7 years ago

Both of your assertions are exaggerations.

1) It is far from certain that the falsified test results "cause[d] a billion in damage." Press releases about settlements are not court judgments. At trial, the government would have to prove "but-for causation." For one of the failures, for example, the government would have to prove that the launch vehicle's faring would have opened fully had the aluminum met specifications. If the government cannot prove that, they recover zero. Even if the government proved that, if anything else went wrong in the launch too, it would have to rebut the defendant's case that some other component, not the out-of-spec aluminum, was the primary cause of the launch failure.

2) It's not typical for "kid[s]" to be put in prison for carrying "a few grams of weed." It might happen sometimes (in a country of 330 million people, everything that can happen will happen sometimes) but it's not typical.

The government settles cases for a reason. Often, it's because the case isn't a slam dunk for trial. Sometimes, it's because the company wouldn't be able to pay the judgment anyway. In government contracting, there is also the consideration that if you put a company out of business for something that was the fault of lower-level employees (as here), that reduces competition going forward. (There's probably not a ton of options for space-worthy aluminium fabrication.)

(Conversely, the government usually settles drug cases on very favorable terms because they're easy to prove at trial. You should see the police reports that accompany these plea agreements. "The accused tried to sell drugs to an undercover officer. After arrest, the officers searched his car and found more drugs. Then they searched his house and found still more drugs. A search of the accused's text messages revealed extensive records of drug sales." In such cases, the government has no need to put an expert on the witness stand to convince the jury what would have happened to a rocket launch in a counter-factual scenario.)

MichaelApproved2• 7 years ago

It's not typical for "kid[s]" to be put in prison for carrying "a few grams of weed." It might happen sometimes (in a country of 330 million people, everything that can happen will happen sometimes) but it's not typical.

First, this shouldn't be a "sometimes" thing, it should be a "never" thing. You get convicted for drugs, regardless of how much, and your life is forever changed.

Second, for all the made, think about how many times police used the bullshit excuse of "I smell weed" to violate and harass citizens.

OP was right, this country's justice system is broken but it's not beyond repair. We are finally seeing changes in the political landscape that will address many long standing injustices.

inetknght• 7 years ago

Far from certain doesn't make it unlikely.

I think it's far more likely that falsified test results could have caused a billion in damage. Over the course of 19 years? Substandard parts being used in the shuttle is just one data point. Who knows how many substandard parts went into other products' increased failure modes whose burdens were borne by third parties (including US and foreign citizens).

It's not typical for "kid[s]" to be put in prison for carrying "a few grams of weed.

Maybe not where you're at.

kps• 7 years ago

something that was the fault of lower-level employees (as here)

Ah, yes, some ‘lower-level employees’ just got together to falsify metals tests because… they have a fetish for falsifying metals tests? They get to brag to their pals at the pub about falsifying metals tests? They have a betting pool to see who can falsify the most metals tests? It must be something like that.

MichaelApproved2• 7 years ago

2) It's not typical for "kid[s]" to be put in prison for carrying "a few grams of weed." It might happen sometimes (in a country of 330 million people, everything that can happen will happen sometimes) but it's not typical.

Alabama Police Ruined a Couple's Lives Over $50 of Weed. Now the Charges Against Them Have Been Dropped

Greg and Teresa Almond filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the Randolph County Sheriff's Department after it raided their house and seized their savings for a misdemeanor pot offense.

https://reason.com/2019/04/16/alabama-police-ruined-a-couple...

writeslowly• 7 years ago

A lab supervisor did go to prison over this last year, and it looks like there were charges against someone else

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2018/08/company_supervis...

Expez• 7 years ago

Wonder if Hydro in turn will file criminal charges. They bought the business unit at fault here in 2000[1]. Surely they could hold someone accountable for fraud that way? They thought they bought a business capable of producing quality parts, but didn't end up getting that.

Like the other posters in this thread I feel like the $46m fine shouldn't be the end of this.

[1] https://www.hydro.com/no-NO/media/news/2019/hydro-reaches-ag...

chrismeller• 7 years ago

I think that's why it was only $46m... Sure they agreed to take on responsibility for any prior debts and obligations as part of the purchase, but at this point you're not really punishing the people who were responsible for it, just those who were left holding the bag.

I'm not sure what legal recourse Hydro has against the prior owners, executives, managers, etc. that were actually responsible, but 19 years after the acquisition I'd be surprised if anything ever came of it.

lotsofpulp3• 7 years ago

Only governments can file criminal charges.

shereadsthenews3• 7 years ago

As a blanket statement this is incorrect. Many common law jurisdictions permit private prosecution of criminal cases.

wlkr• 7 years ago

The linked DOJ report has far more detail [0]. On the penalties themselves:

According to court documents, SPI has agreed to plead guilty to one count of mail fraud, and SEI has entered into a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) in connection with a criminal information filed today charging the company with mail fraud. As part of the plea agreement, SPI has agreed to pay $34.1 million in combined restitution to NASA, the Department of Defense’s Missile Defense Agency (MDA), and commercial customers. SPI has also agreed to forfeit $1.8 million in ill-gotten gains. The plea agreement remains subject to acceptance by the court at a plea hearing currently scheduled for May 13, 2019, before U.S. District Judge Liam O’Grady. The DPA with SEI is conditioned on the court’s acceptance and SPI’s satisfaction of the plea agreement’s terms.

SPI also agreed to pay $34.6 million as part of a related civil settlement to resolve its liability under the False Claims Act for causing a government contractor to invoice MDA and NASA for aluminum extrusions that did not comply with contract specifications. Government contractors purchased aluminum extrusions for use on rockets for NASA and missiles provided to the MDA. Under the terms of the civil settlement agreement, SPI will satisfy the $34.6 million settlement through credits totaling $23.6 million for its restitution payments as part of the criminal plea agreement, plus additional payments of $6 million to NASA and $5 million to the MDA.

[0] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/aluminum-extrusion-manufactur...

pseudolus2• 7 years ago

The deferred prosecution agreement essentially means that as long as the SEI adheres to the financial terms of the plea agreement the government will eventually drop the charges [0]. That's an amazing deal in its generosity and I'm sure that the financial penalties levied are outweighed by the financial gain realized over the years of their fraudulent activity. The rationale for not pursuing the company for the full $700 million dollars lost escapes me. The damages were entirely foreseeable.

[0] http://www.mololamken.com/news-knowledge-18.html

busterarm• 7 years ago

Probably "jobs". :(

brianpgordon2• 7 years ago

This is a worthwhile book that might help clear up some of your bewilderment at why corporate crime cases so often turn out so unsatisfactorily.

https://www.amazon.com/Chickenshit-Club-Department-Prosecute...

My personal TL;DR from a couple of years ago if you don't have the time to read the book:

- It's very hard for prosecutors to secure a criminal conviction even in the most blatant cases of wrongdoing.

- Prosecutors care too much about their win rate to risk trials.

- Prosecutors have fallen into a trap where they're so dependent on the policy of offering generous non-prosecution or deferred-prosecution agreements if the company comes forward and volunteers evidence, they've become incapable of actually executing on a complex criminal investigation anymore.

- There's intense political pressure to not punish shareholders for management's misdeeds.

dghughes• 7 years ago

Deferred prosecution is fairly new in Canada but that's what we're going through now with a company called SNC Lavalin. It's a Canadian-based world-wide engineering company famous for bribes, hookers to win contracts, possible mafia involvement. Yet the executives are escaping prosecution because the company employs so many people.

JumpCrisscross2• 7 years ago

rationale for not pursuing the company for the full $700 million dollars lost escapes me

Satellites are usually insured. (Not sure about NASA protocol, though.) If that’s the case, the insurer will sue. Shareholder lawsuits will also, naturally, follow, as will suits from all the other customers.

Agree, though, that it’s shocking nobody is going to jail in relation to a fraud guilty plea.

m-p-3• 7 years ago

To me, DPAs looks like a legal way to allow corruption to run without real penalties.

WheelsAtLarge• 7 years ago

It makes little sense to go after the company if the penalty costs will bankrupt it. I bet that's the rationale. Had they felt they could have gotten more then they would have gone for more.

The next steps, they might have done it already, for the government is to go after the people that did the fraud and punish them. Depending on how certain the government feels about how strong the case is they will get jail time, fines and be ban from ever dealing with the government- one or all three.

I know what you mean sometimes punishment feels light versus the crime. But I know that it's a system the works better than one based the other way so we take the good with the bad.

naringas• 7 years ago

the best thing is how the "company" (or corporation) is to blame.

so none of the actual individual humans who did this is at fault here. at worst they would be fired and go to work somewhere else. which is compeletely fine.

and with a fine like that, this is just a "cost of doing business" for the corporation.

maybe one day terribly criminal corporations should be forcefully disbanded as punishment.

_red2• 7 years ago

This is completely inaccurate. Corporate liability protection only extends to civil financial issues, any real property crimes (ie. fraud, murder, etc) 'pierces the corporate veil' and ultimately are filed against the people who performed it.

gpm2• 7 years ago

According to other comments here the company plead guilty to (criminal) fraud. So no it is not completely inaccurate.

rectang• 7 years ago

The rot is not excised from the company -- the corrupt processes, institutions, habits and culture which led to the fraud remain in place. The corporation does not go to jail and have its life ruined.

The corporation encapsulates and protects the worst behaviors of the individuals behind its shield, giving them the opportunity to continue profiting from it unless there is enough direct evidence to convict them as individuals.

TallGuyShort3• 7 years ago

In this case, another commenter suggests it's because of the number of people employed. But I don't see why they can't punish everyone proved to be personally responsible (and perhaps the leadership wants to move people who are suspected but can't be proved deserving of criminal charges). And then at worst the assets (including the supply chain, infrastructure and all the employees required to operate it all) can continue under different ownership, but maybe mostly new leadership, or whatever. Surely some impact to the innocent still, but not nearly as much and justice is still done as much as can be proved.

I don't think this problem is unique to private corporations, though. If government projects blow through their budget and achieve almost nothing, they're usually able to get more funding, because if you don't give them more funding, "who would build the roads"? If an agency keeps having corruption issues, there's often a scapegoat or a review board put in place until the PR shitstorm blows over, and then nothing really changes. Very rarely will the general consensus be, "maybe giving people this much power and authority on this issue just does more harm than good".

jve2• 7 years ago

Cost of doing business? See this:

...also agreed to plead guilty to one count of mail fraud and is barred from U.S. federal government contracting

Norsk Hydro just got new CEO. Immediatelly struck by virus, shutting down operations. Now this. From the article wording, looks like thay admit things. Good for them. But I can guess CEO todo list for this and next year.

nwallin• 7 years ago

so none of the actual individual humans who did this is at fault here. at worst they would be fired and go to work somewhere else.

From the actual criminal complaint:

Dennis Balius, the SPI testing lab supervisor, led a scheme to alter tests within SPI’s computerized systems and provide false certifications with the altered results to customers. Balius also instructed employees to violate other testing standards, such as increasing the speed of the testing machines or cutting samples in a manner that did not meet the required specifications. Balius pleaded guilty in July 2017 and was sentenced to three years in prison and ordered to pay over $170,000 in restitution.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/aluminum-extrusion-manufactur...

taurusXL• 7 years ago

Some relevant Wikipedia links that add color to the lost vehicles:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minotaur-C

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbiting_Carbon_Observatory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glory_(satellite)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_Sciences_Corporation

adim86• 7 years ago

Why is NASA asking for less than 14% of the actual damages?

Max-20• 7 years ago

Most likely more would bankrupt the company and they would get $0.

scotty79• 7 years ago

They should get the company.

tyingq• 7 years ago

Interesting. Extruded aluminum profile is one of the items that is under anti-dumping tariffs to discourage Chinese imports. There's a lot of rhetoric from US suppliers like this one about why we need high quality US aluminum.

jahabrewer• 7 years ago

We need to build with high-quality American fakes, not high-quality Chinese fakes!

weberc25• 7 years ago

On the other hand, at least the American supplier was fined and someone went to prison. Fraudulent Chinese suppliers routinely escape justice altogether because they largely operate outside of US jurisdiction.

CharlesColeman4• 7 years ago

We need to build with high-quality American fakes, not high-quality Chinese fakes!

It's entirely possible that American manufacturers are forced to compromise quality like that due to the competitive pressure of low-cost Chinese fakes.

nkrisc• 7 years ago

Corporate and personal greed perpetuated this fraud against the government and other private customers, and this resolution holds these companies accountable for the harm caused by their scheme

Did he misspeak or are only the companies being held accountable? I don't think a company can exhibit "personal greed." Is he implying there are individuals responsible as well who aren't being held accountable?

senectus1• 7 years ago

Chinese suppliers did this to a mining company in Australia.

Put fucking asbestos brakes on the ore cars (train). Cost a fortune to clean up.

fratlas• 7 years ago

Link to learn more?

JudasGoat• 7 years ago

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/asbestos-fo...

whenchamenia• 7 years ago

Many cheap knockoff chinese automotive brake pads still contain it. Buy name brand on brakes, for more reasons than that. Its also good if the compound actually stops the car in time.

Living near mountains I witness brake failures (usually fires!) daily, its no joke. Check your pads, change your brake fluid every 3-5 years. Its cheap and can save lives, including your own. No feeling is more heartsinking than the brake pedal going to the floor with no resistance when you need it most.

Nomentatus• 7 years ago

Chinese everything they make seems to be like this. The landfill now holds nearly everything I've bought from China over the decades, I now realize.

After reading the excellent book "How Asia Works," I went around my place inventorying the source of my possessions recently thinking it'd be full of stuff from China. But no.

True, I do have several things that are only one or two years old from China that aren't dead yet, and a number of older steel items from China that have in fact lasted ('cause you can't fake consumer steel - I always try to bend that stuff in the store. If it bends it gets bent back and goes back on the store shelf.) The exception: one ancient Neo2.

The vast majority of what I own now - other than clothes - isn't Chinese and is 30 or more years old. These are all items that predate the Chinese goods invasion in fact. Quality goods.

For example it turned out that all my (surviving) dishes were American Corelle, glasses French Duralex, Swedish chair, etc. etc. Yet I mostly bought Chinese goods all along. Nothing, except the Neo2 lasted, (except for all-steel items) and I bought that Neo2 used recently. The rest of what I wasted money on is Chinese landfilled junk now.

I grew up admiring China (my Grandmother saw Mao in person, at a banquet she attended in the Great Hall of the People, and liked everything about China she saw except for his wife's speech at that banquet.) No more. Please, let's just drop trade with China. For so many reasons. The race to the bottom is won and done.

I know, the original article was about defective American aluminum testing; and yes there are occasional problems with goods from everywhere, but China takes the cake - and its goods crowd out better, greener, more durable competition.

magicalhippo• 7 years ago

When interviewing for a job at a company making pressure sensors primarily for the oil industry, I got a look at their testing rooms. The sensors were usually placed deep in some well or at the bottom of the ocean, so had to function for ages without maintenance. Switching out a faulty sensor is either very expensive or impossible.

The final testing room had a window with a couch and table in the adjacent room. The interviewer said most customers would have a representative fly over to overlook the final tests in person before accepting the sensors.

dsfyu404ed3• 7 years ago

They missed a great opportunity to stick a porta power on the wall and let the customer choose to apply the test pressure themselves. That says "we're so confident it will work you can test it yourself."

low_key• 7 years ago

They really should be held accountable for the amount of loss that their fraud caused, not just what they gained from the fraud.

pcurve• 7 years ago

What they did was despicable but that's not really fair either. If defective aluminum they sold was direct cause of 2 billion bridge collapse would they be liable for that amount?

travem• 7 years ago

If there was fraud involved why shouldn’t they be held liable?

gibba999• 7 years ago

Generally, yes.

Put yourself on the other side. Someone breaks into your house, steals a painting and pawns it off for $500. Unbeknownst to them, it was worth $10,000. Breaking in, they broke a window. Unbeknownst to them, you're traveling, and that leads to $50,000 in flood damage. Guess who is liable: the crook or you?

It might be unfair that they took on a $60,000 liability for $500 worth of gain, but it's far more fair than if you took on a $60,000 liability.

Base damages are usually the greater of the damages caused to the victim and the gains to the culprit. There are exceptions (treble damages, statutory damages, etc.), but that's a fine baseline.

foobarbecue2• 7 years ago

Which satellites? I presume OCO and some other one?

And how do journalists so frequently fail to include core facts in their articles?

foobarbecue2• 7 years ago

OCO and Glory, according to space.com.

redleggedfrog• 7 years ago

Somebody at Sapa, probably somebodies, need to go to prison. For 19 years, to match the time of the fraud.

fnord77• 7 years ago

A metals manufacturer faked test results and provided faulty materials to NASA, causing more than $700 million in losses

...

the current parent company of Sapa, agreed to pay $46 million to NASA, the Department of Defense and others to resolve criminal charges and civil claims related to the fraud

anentropic• 7 years ago

Lucky it was only a $700million satellite

in another application people could have died

imtringued• 7 years ago

If you value human time by $1 million per year then that is a waste of 700 man years or 8 people's worth. Of course they got paid and received "free" training for their job so it wasn't a complete waste but there certainly are better things to use those man years on, like a functioning satellite.

erikpukinskis• 7 years ago

You can't extrapolate from the price of a human spending 8 hours following limited corporate instructions to the value of their other 16 hours.

First of all, value and price diverge for many reasons all the time. Secondly, most people on Earth produce more value after work than during, but that value is not fully priced or marketed yet (try as captains of industry may).

That used to be more true in the colonial powers as well (most value was not marketed, and stayed on homestead).

Humans do exist now whose labor is fully marketed but they are rare, mostly men, mostly rich. And even them, they still produce a lot of extra-economic value in most cases.

Many humans labor is entirely unpriced, like full-time parents or schoolteachers, social workers, artists, and other "passion professions.

Humans are invaluable.

tomatotomato372• 7 years ago

It may be better to use the statistical value of a human life defined by safety/enivronmental organizations, which for the US is currently about $10 million per citizen.

Going by that the satellite was worth about 70 lives, which is a bit under the amount of people killed by venomous animals each year in the US.

Edit: More random morbid facts - Annual automobile deaths amount to only 6% of Wyoming's population, but do economic damage equal 10x Wyoming's GDP.

JohnGB• 7 years ago

Why wouldn't the QC at NASA include testing at independent labs for anything mission critical? That seems like a failure on NASA's part as much as it is fraud by the supplier.

ethagknight2• 7 years ago

This is what I am wondering. In construction, we have third party testing of every major material in use, like daily concrete testing for new pours, weld inspections on steel, graded lumber, etc. hard to believe that NASA didn’t test their aluminum for a decade.

moftz2• 7 years ago

It was material that went into a frangible rail built by one company for a fairing built by another company, integrated into a rocket built by yet another company. Where would NASA have the time to test each and every bit of material going into the many-tiered parts of the design? NASA is relying on the prime contractor to make sure their vendors are on the up and up. The prime is making sure their vendors do their due diligence as well. The failure in this chain of trust comes about when someone is blatantly lying about results. The lab manager was instructing his technicians to lie about results and also speed up testing equipment between customer visits.

Testing everything yourself works out well since you are receiving most of the raw material and doing the assembly either yourself or on site with a contractor. NASA doesn't built a lot of stuff themselves. Components can be so deep in levels of subcontracting that all NASA can do is just make sure everyone is adhering to proper engineering and manufacturing principles. The company that originally bought the aluminum I'm sure tested all of their finished components the right way but testing might not have been sufficient enough against how much stress the part is actually under during flight. Or testing weakened the part to the point where a failure was imminent but not obvious. Or the vendor doesn't really test their stuff extensively and relies on the customer to handle that. Either way, the part passes tests and gets sent to the customer where the they would integrate the part into their design and test it as well. Or not fully test it based on the idea that the next customer would test it. Who knows? Maybe they didn't test it hard enough or maybe it was most of a length of testing problem. The point is that NASA has neither the time or money to independently test parts and materials, they rely on their experienced contractors and subcontractors to do it.

If there isn't already, there needs to be some additional laws with government contractors to make sure those in a position of trust (like test lab technicians and their managers) receive no compensation based on whether or not material passes inspection or how much they test. Or force these kinds of labs to do independent 3rd party testing.

gnode5• 7 years ago

It may be that actually fully stressing the parts is avoided, as it may risk weakening the part.

I've heard of various non destructive testing methods being used to check the integrity of metals in aerospace, such as ultrasound and radiography. This may well be enough if the part is actually made of what it's supposed to be.

CharlesColeman4• 7 years ago

It may be that actually fully stressing the parts is avoided, as it may risk weakening the part.

Couldn't they just buy an extra and destructively test that?

zackmorris2• 7 years ago

As Nasa is a government agency, I wonder if lack of regulation and oversight played a hand in this.

This sort of scenario is exactly why I'm concerned about the recent trend towards rampant free market economics and libertarianism. Those ideas have merit in certain situations, but also increase risk to the public as witnessed here by losses that are proportionately much higher than any efficiency savings.

I'm also concerned about how many other agencies and companies might be affected by this sort of fraud that we haven't heard about yet. We saw the same thing happen with faulty (mostly imported) capacitors, insecure voting machines, increased healthcare costs, illness/financial hardship from GMOs and pesticides (again, mostly oversees), the list goes on.

It didn't used to be like this when I was growing up in the 80s and 90s. We had different fraud then (for example monopolies and duopolies that held back telecommunications, the savings and loan scandal, industrial waste superfund sites...), but also a stronger manufacturing base in our economy. I'm just going to throw the idea out there that we're seeing a link between deregulation, fraud, increased costs on the public sector, and a slowing economy.

daniel-s• 7 years ago

Fraud is a crime. It has no place in a free (i.e. libertarian) society.

I believe fraud is seen by libertarians as a type of theft and theft is a crime in any society or body of thought that values property rights. Nonaggression towards others and respect for property rights are the top tenents of libertarianism.

Even Ayn Rand, queen of capitalism and profits said the purpose of the courts is:

to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others, and to settle disputes by rational rules, according to objective law.

weberc25• 7 years ago

Honest questions:

1. Is there any compelling evidence that this incident is attributable to "free market economics"? It seems equally possible that it's attributable to notoriously poor incentive structures in government agencies. In my view it seems most likely that it's neither, in this particular case.

2. Is there evidence that there is a "recent trend towards rampant free market economics and libertarianism"? Again, this is an honest question; I've not seen a claim like this made before.

zackmorris2• 7 years ago

I'm not sure about your first question, but for your second question the evidence is everywhere. My news feed is filled with multiple articles per day about cutting regulations on just about everything, but mostly impacting the environment, or social justice issues:

https://www.google.com/search?q=deregulate&tbm=nws

Part of the issue is geographic. Being born and raised in Idaho, I've found myself surrounded by libertarians. Conservative-leaning people tend to move here from more liberal states on the coasts.

Now where it really gets interesting is when libertarian think tanks do the opposite of what might be expected:

https://www.hjnews.com/montpelier/voter-initiatives/article_...

In this case Idaho Freedom Foundation (a local libertarian think tank) is against public voter initiatives (which may someday lead to the legalization of marijuana in Idaho) but is for getting public approval for urban renewal projects like the Boise city library teardown/rebuild and new stadium.

You just can't make this stuff up.

moftz2• 7 years ago

NASA has a ton of regulation and oversight that their contractors abide by. However, if you are in a trusted position of testing materials and not only you but your entire lab is compromised by cheating, how is anyone going to really find out unless someone speaks up? They were speeding up the test equipment between customer visits of the lab. This wasn't just laziness or someone fudging the numbers because its close enough, this was straight up fraud. NASA can't afford to test every little bit of everything that goes into a rocket themselves. They rely on their contractors to do their due diligence and make sure their vendors do everything right. Maybe a lot of stuff slipped past. There's probably bits of deficient aluminum all over the place but it held up enough during testing so no one noticed.

jve2• 7 years ago

SpaceX also had failed a mission due to a 3rd party strut failing the spec.

The strut that we believe failed was designed and material certified to handle 10,000 lbs of force, but failed at 2,000 lbs, a five-fold difference.

https://www.spacex.com/news/2015/07/20/crs-7-investigation-u...

T-A• 7 years ago

A closer analogy was the Proton launch failure and subsequent suspension of launches in 2017, after it turned out that Voronezh Mechanical Plant had switched materials in the engines and falsified the documentation.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/01/russia-recalling-doz...

Rebelgecko• 7 years ago

That is a more charitable explanation than the one from NASA's independent review team. They categorized the problem as a design flaw since SpaceX didn't take into account the part manufacturer's recommended safety margin and other limitations

morsmodr2• 7 years ago

Not to stoke a fire, but I just wondered how the same failure would be viewed if it was done by a Chinese or Indian Manufacturer. Immediately it would have reinforced a stereotype of outsourcing being cheap and that being the issue. When in reality the truth is that there are frauds, lazy and useless people everywhere on the planet.

rhexs• 7 years ago

Hopefully viewed even worse as the question would then be "why is NASA outsourcing spacecraft critical component construction to India/China?".

morsmodr2• 7 years ago

Damn, did not think of that #facePalmToMyself. Yeah, such things shouldn't be outsourced

steve76• 7 years ago

How do you know India and China are exempt? It's the only place in the world that does smelting. Everything in the USA is second gen.

There's a lot of gamesmanship out there. Every part has different numbers for certs. Vendors go out of business because of some scheme with cold unit testing.

Imagine if people were straight with each other. Wow work would be really nice.

user59944612• 7 years ago

It's BAU for Chinese manufacturers. The question is not whether they will try to save costs on materials, it's when and on which parts.

If you're outsourcing production, you have to check the goods regularly.

pseudolus2• 7 years ago

NASA published an investigative summary of the failures of the Taurus XL T8 and T9 rockets that goes into further depth [0].

[0] https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/oco_glo... (PDF)

nafizh• 7 years ago

You are kidding me, right? Years of hard work of scientists are lost. The scientific loss is huge if not quantifiable. You defraud the best and richest space research agency on earth for years. And you are getting away with just paying a fine?

A justice system where the Rich pays their way out, and only the Poor get punished.

PunksATawnyFill• 7 years ago

It's NASA, not Nasa.

nimbius• 7 years ago

this kind of fraud is absolutely rampant in the automotive industry for example.

Speaking from experience as an engine mechanic, Ive had to replace transmission parts for a certain well-known japanese SUV maker. They also make a "luxury" version of this SUV with more horsepower and a turbocharger setup. The transmissions however are virtually identical with a very major exception: the M5PVL transmission gear for the luxury SUV has 15% more nickel than the non-luxury. These parts are not interchangeable, but shadier parts dealers will often interchange them. placing the regular gear in the luxury SUV has life-threatening consequences, and this has been documented in recall data from the manufacturer.

under turbo-load, once the gear is engaged, it basically explodes. These failures often exit the transmission case, breach the cockpit of the vehicle and wound the occupants.

viburnum• 7 years ago

If you’re engineering to protect against fraud then maybe you would make them different sizes? Or only make one kind of part?

zaarn2• 7 years ago

That would be my first instinct as well. Atleast when I interned metallworking, the supervisor did have atleast one lesson where they talked about making sure components don't fit into places they shouldn't. If two gears on a machine have different requirements then they should be made to not fit into eachother's places. It makes maintenance easier since there is only 1 correct way to build the machine from any set of spare parts.

sk5t• 7 years ago

I'm scratching my head as to the possible identity of the mystery SUV. Luxury SUV, Japanese, uses a turbo... maybe the Acura RDX? And the transmission housing is not stout enough to contain gear shrapnel?

izacus• 7 years ago

Toyota / Lexus ?

homero• 7 years ago

But why? They tested not sold metal. The only possible reason is the metal company paid them.

Nasa Says Metals Fraud Caused $700M Satellite Failure

Related Stories