James Webb Space Telescope

[12oh2alarm]

... Not to throw stones but:
1. Miscalculation of distance parameters allows Mars probe to crach into the surface.
2. O-ring problems with the external SRB's didn't pose a significant threat to any mission until Challenger
3. Foam strikes observed on many/all(?) of shuttle launches didn't pose a threat until Columbia.
4. Mirror imperfections in Hubble even during 1-2 years in cold storage waiting for the Shuttle to regain flight status.
That's all I can remember at this time.

Shit happens. So much so, it fills an entire book:
Springer, "Space System Failures", by David M. Harland and Ralph Lorenz with chapters on

1. The Missiles
2. The Shuttle
3. Back to Expendables
4. Heavyweights
5. Lightweights
6. Boom and Bust
7. The Chinese Experience
8. The Current Crop
9. Failures and Redundancy
10. Propulsion System Failures
11. Attitude Control System Failures
12. Electrical Failures
13. Environmental Failures
14. Structural Failures
15. Failures on the Ground
16. Operator and Software Errors
17. Conclusions

One more example: if you don't follow the "Count the bolts before you tilt the platform, mate!" protocol, a mishap might happen.

[Trebor]

...
One more example: if you don't follow the "Count the bolts before you tilt the platform, mate!" protocol, a mishap might happen.

That's a bit embarrassing, you would think that checking your extremely costly bit of kit was actually attached to something before spinning it around would have been obvious.

[bknight]

One step closer!
http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/science-instruments-of-nasa-s-james-webb-space-telescope-successfully-installed

Science Instruments of NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope Successfully Installed

[Dalhousie]

Still like Hank Green's video

[Glom]

I suppose after seeing that, I should get out of bed and get back to work on my science thing.

[godscountry]

Good point and lets not forget the loss of the 125 million dollar Mars Climate Orbiter spacecraft,due to the use of two different measuring systems by the engineering teams,one engineering team used the english system while the other team used the metric system,which resulted in navigational errors to the spacecraft.I would like to think NASA has implicated some new rules,along with a long list of QC checks.With a budget of 1/2 of one percent,you can't afford losses like that.

[bknight]

I suppose after seeing that, I should get out of bed and get back to work on my science thing.

Instead of the insurance, health, infrastructure thing?

[ka9q]

The specific units that were confused during Mars Climate Observer were those of force -- the thrust of the attitude control thrusters. They were used in a model to estimate the unwanted perturbations on the trajectory as a result of various attitude changes. The thruster manufacturer specified them in pounds-force and JPL interpreted them in newtons. A pound is bigger than a newton, so this underestimated the effect.

The spacecraft was on a collision course with the Martian atmosphere. The trajectory seemed off and the staff asked for more tracking time but was turned down by management. Had the extra tracking been done, they would have confirmed the problem with enough time to fix the problem.

[Peter B]

http://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/robotic-exploration/why-the-mars-probe-went-off-course

Superb article by James Oberg which details the problems with the spacecraft - or, more precisely, people and processes within JPL.

[smartcooky]

http://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/robotic-exploration/why-the-mars-probe-went-off-course

Superb article by James Oberg which details the problems with the spacecraft - or, more precisely, people and processes within JPL.

What a complete and utter cock-up!!!

A multi million dollar probe was lost because people didn't fill in the correct forms.... that's bureaucrats for you!!!

[bknight]

This reminds me of a favorite saying in my profession:
Companies NEVER have enough money to perform an operation the right way, but they ALWAYS have enough money to fix the problem that was caused.

[BazBear]

This reminds me of a favorite saying in my profession:
Companies NEVER have enough money to perform an operation the right way, but they ALWAYS have enough money to fix the problem that was caused.

Penny wise, dollar/pound foolish.

[Allan F]

http://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/robotic-exploration/why-the-mars-probe-went-off-course

Superb article by James Oberg which details the problems with the spacecraft - or, more precisely, people and processes within JPL.

Just like Apollo 1, Challenger and Columbia.

[smartcooky]

http://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/robotic-exploration/why-the-mars-probe-went-off-course

Superb article by James Oberg which details the problems with the spacecraft - or, more precisely, people and processes within JPL.

Just like Apollo 1, Challenger and Columbia.

I agree, all avoidable tragedies.

This is especially so of Challenger as administrators in NASA ignored repeated warnings from Engineers that launching in freezing temperatures was dangerous. It was only a piece of blind luck (a small piece of aluminium oxide sealing a leak at the last moment) that prevented STS-51L from exploding right there on the launch pad.

In particular, fluid dynamics engineer Roger Boisjoly correctly predicted that the O-Rings would fail in the freezing temperatures. He was ignored, and that decision cost seven astronauts their lives.

In a further insult to Boisjoly, he was treated abysmally by his bosses and colleagues at Morton-Thiokol for telling the truth about what happened.

For mine, the Challenger disaster remains as one of the most disgraceful examples in spaceflight of bureaucratic negligence, right from the political pork-barrelling that resulted in the SRB's being made in Utah and needing to have O-Rings in the first place (a design compromise so that they could be transported to the Cape) to the ignoring of repeated warnings about the SRB's safety in cold conditions.

[ka9q]

I think the Columbia disaster was worse. The technical details of the failure were different but the management failures were the same. They didn't learn from Challenger.