House members press NASA for information on “epidemic of anomalies” with SpaceX missions, Space Politics
“Three members of Congress from Alabama and Colorado have asked NASA to provide information on what they receive to be an “epidemic of anomalies” on missions performed by SpaceX.”
Coffman Presses NASA for Transparency on SpaceX
“Today, U.S. Representative Mike Coffman (R-CO), along with Representative Cory Gardner (R-CO), sent a letter to the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) expressing strong concerns over anomalies that have occurred on taxpayer-funded space launch vehicles, and the lack of public disclosure or transparency of these anomalies. The letter expresses concern over an epidemic of anomalies that have occurred during SpaceX launches or launch attempts, and communicates frustrations with NASA’s refusal to provide insight into those mishaps. ”

27 replies on “Colorado and Alabama Members of Congress Attack SpaceX”

  1. ULA sure have friends in high places. In the interest of parity will these same politcians also demand thorough scrutiny of the engines used by the Orbital Sciences Antares rocket?

    1. If I am not mistaken the Antares went right up to the pad & Launched, Same with ULA……How many times has Space-X had to pull there LV off the pad in the last 4 launches??

      1. In fact, Orbital had an issue with an engine on the first attempt (I think) to launch this last mission. They had to pull the Antares off the pad.

          1. Not true. Multi-day delays for technical problems have been the norm for the Antares. That’s the rocket business. BTW – best to check your facts before you post.

      2. ULA and Orbital Sciences rockets do experience technical glitches resulting in delays. A half million parts can and do have problems regardless of manufacturer.

  2. News Flash: Members of Congress discover that “rocket science” is actually pretty hard, film of carefully-practiced expressions of shock and outrage at 11.

    1. News Flash. Owners of SpaceX discovers that “rocket science” is actually pretty hard, film of carefully-practiced avoidance to answer questions at 11.

  3. One things these ‘members’ are forgetting is that Elon and SpaceX are taking advantage of commercial launches to test other future additions to the platforms capability. They are testing elements like re-use/re-entry, etc. While the primary mission was met, why waste a golden opportunity to do these tests. Yes, they are more likely to fail – but the risk is low since the mission was over. I have to give kudos for SpaceX in that they continually look to improve their system.

      1. How have they cost the customer and prime contractor money on any of their launches? They’ve had one launch on which they couldn’t get the secondary payload to orbit, but that was because the position of the ISS precluded them from doing the needed burn.

        1. And the failure to deliver the secondary payload was caused by one of the nine Merlins shutting down prematurely, it had nothing to do with testing reusability.

          And as you indicated they actually still could have delivered the secondary payload to orbit. However since this was an ISS flight NASA “owned” the launch and it was their call whether or not SpaceX could continue with delivering the secondary payload. The fuel margins for safe delivery of the secondary payload without endangering ISS were just outside of what NASA would accept and they decided against it. The owner of the secondary payload had previously agreed to this contingency when they signed up for the launch

  6. Yippee! More expert engineering from members of Congress from the Bible Belt! (not to mention the ULA flacks who wrote the text for them)

  7. It’s interesting, if true, that the general that signed off on the Air Force’s latest sole source block purchase of launch cores from ULA left the Air Force shortly thereafter and went to work for ULA. That much was claimed in the Space Politics comment section at the link given by Marc Boucher above. Maybe there’s no impropriety in that sequence of events, but it certainly smells overly ripe.

    1. Yeah I’ve seen that a couple places in comments. I hope someone is at least looking into that.

  8. The “epidemic of anomalies” they refer to must be the series of successful flights by SpaceX demonstrating a capability at 1/20th the cost of the pork-barrel programs in their states that haven’t even gotten to CDR yet (much less fly successfully 10 times in a row).

    1. SpaceX has yet to launch a single vehicle on schedule. Never mind the schedule originally published in ’08 that had the Dragon 6 in orbit with five astronauts in less than a week from now.

  9. There is a term for what these Alabama and Colorado Congressmen are engaged in: Vendetta. It is on behalf of Lockheed and Boeing, of course; separately and together as ULA. Lockheed Martin Space Systems is headquartered in Denver ; the Atlas V is built there ( for now, soon to be made in Decatur Alabama ) , and L-M has satellite facilities all across the Colorado front range. Boeing and ULA are in adjacent manufacturing plants in Decatur, and Alabama has a lot of legacy spaceflight centers and plants dating back to the Werner Von Braun era. Currently , Boeing is developing much of that Great White Elephant of a NASA space program —SLS —in Alabama, or would like to. Boeing just signed a big contract for that dubious beast. So yes, any successful third party startup like SpeceX definitely threatens the continuous billions of largesse in government work pouring into Colorado and Alabama going forward. Pure pork politics and the machinations of that military-industrial complex Eisenhower warned us about. Just add the ” spaceflight” component.

    I have to ask where these Congressmen’s concerns are regarding the billions in cost overruns and long developmental delays in the Lockheed F-35 Lightning fighter jet program, which presently is so untrusted to fly safely its appearance at the big Farnborough Air Show this week was cancelled. The Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor stealth fighter is an overpriced underperforming boondoogle. Boeing’s ledger is chock full of costly boodoggles as well. Ask them about the billions they blew in developing the Future Imaging Architecture space surveillance suite of software. So it goes.

    What these Congressmen are alleging about SpaceX ” anomalies” is chicken scratch…easily resolved helium leaks, and seawater leaking into the Dragon capsule at splashdown . As a matter of fact it is rocket science, which these fatuous Congressmen accuse NASA of being short on , but they themselves have none. Frankly , it is almost embarrassing of them to try to elevate these concerns. On the one hand it is an act of desperation, on the other a political ploy. If THAT is all that Lockheed, Boeing, and their Congressional straw men have found to lay at the feet of SpaceX, I’d say things are progressing rather well for Falcon and Dragon at this stage. Given the timing and the sworl of related events, plus the revelations about Air Force EELV procurement shenanigans, it s not hard to see that the Heavies are indeed trying to banish SpaceX from the pork dripping military and spysat launch arena in its teen years before it matures into a reliable economical integrated team player capable of bringing down their war elephants on a level battlefield. That field is currently not level.

    The complaining Congressmen are just stooges for industry. I’m not excusing NASA here of any complicity or ineptitude here, but these Congressmen trying to hang SpaceX on the meathook of being partly NASA funded with taxpayer dollars is mostly a sham , a deflection of the real issue of squelching competition. Lockheed and Boeing must be really threatened by Elon Musk , who cannot be bought off.

    They will be scared sh_tless when a Falcon 9 flies home from its boost , lands safely on its own power , spends a few man hours in the shop for very minor maintenance, then is mated with a new second stage and new payload to fly again at a fraction of the cost of a throwaway Atlas or Delta.

    As a matter of fact , it IS rocket science. And a new age and new way of doing business in Earth orbit and beyond.

  11. When this FUD campaign fails, expect sabotage. I hope SpaceX has good security which includes never leaving individuals working alone or otherwise unobserved. It takes just one loosened fitting or one stuffed rag.

  14. Dear representatives. U are being misused by the ULA in a desperate attempt to discredit SpaceX. Your questions are misplaced in the sense that the vehicles in questions were not funded by taxpayer dollars but are payed for, developed by, and property of SpaceX. So you should really ask SpaceX if you are interested in the details of the SpaceX Falcon 9 and Dragon spacecraft flights. Where were your questions during the Spaceshuttle program? Where are your questions to the ULA about all details and anomolies of their launches? Uncountable billions of taxdollars went to NASA and ULA, so if you are so seriously concerned, these would be the organisations to target.

Comments are closed.