© TheBurningPlatform
I realized why a MSM corporate station didn't want to touch this movie after it showed how our government, along with a major corporation, knowingly sent seven astronauts to their deaths in the Space Shuttle Challenger in 1986 by ignoring clear data that indicated extreme risk for that launch. NASA, the government and Morton Thiokol then conspired to cover-up their malfeasance and reckless decision making because profits and funding for their programs were more important than the lives of those astronauts. The Rogers Commission would have come to an inconclusive decision if not for Richard Feynman.
He was dying of cancer but still relentlessly pursued the truth. He never trusted authority. He hated government bureaucracy. He wasn't a political animal. He cared about the truth and sought facts. The NASA officials lied and declared that the O-rings used in the Shuttle could withstand cold up to -40 degrees Fahrenhit. On national TV Feynman proved that the O-Rings would not retain their shape in a glass of 32 degree ice water. He revealed the NASA and Morton Thiokol executives as liars and criminals. NASA chose to launch the Space Shuttle when the temperature was below 32 degrees because they felt pressure to launch two per month in order to get their funding from Congress increased. They were warned by their own engineers that this could be catastrophic. They ignored the warnings and ended up murdering 7 astronauts.
Feynman devoted the latter half of his book What Do You Care What Other People Think? to his experience on the Rogers Commission, straying from his usual convention of brief, light-hearted anecdotes to deliver an extended and sober narrative. Feynman's account reveals a disconnect between NASA's engineers and executives that was far more striking than he expected. His interviews of NASA's high-ranking managers revealed startling misunderstandings of elementary concepts. For instance, NASA managers claimed that there was a 1 in 100,000 chance of a catastrophic failure aboard the shuttle, but Feynman discovered that NASA's own engineers estimated the chance of a catastrophe at closer to 1 in 200. He concluded that the space shuttle reliability estimate by NASA management was fantastically unrealistic, and he was particularly angered that NASA used these figures to recruit Christa McAuliffe into the Teacher-in-Space program. He warned in his appendix to the commission's report (which was included only after he threatened not to sign the report),
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."The unholy alliance between government and mega-corporations will never benefit the American people. Feynman's defeat of the corporate fascists in 1987 was nothing but a rearguard action by one of the few remaining true patriots. We've since lost the war, as the military industrial complex, the Wall Street cabal, and the sickcare complex have completely captured our government and turned it against the American people.
After the movie was over, they followed it with a show about his fascinating life. I can't believe I had never heard of him. He was one of the most brilliant physicists of all-time. At the age of 27 he worked on the Manhattan Project while his 25 year old wife was dying of tuberculosis. Her death and his realization of having unleashed the power of a bomb that could destroy the world put him into a deep depression. But he overcame it and went on to become a leader in the field of quantum mechanics and the creator of nanotechnology. The documentary also mentioned how his father would read to him from the Encyclopedia Brittanica and how his father taught him to not trust government officials just because of their positions. Then I stumbled across this quote from him:
"No government has the right to decide on the truth of scientific principles, nor to prescribe in any way the character of the questions investigated. Neither may a government determine the aesthetic value of artistic creations, nor limit the forms of literacy or artistic expression. Nor should it pronounce on the validity of economic, historic, religious, or philosophical doctrines. Instead it has a duty to its citizens to maintain the freedom, to let those citizens contribute to the further adventure and the development of the human race."He had a deep distrust for the government and those reliant on the government. He was a free thinking, liberty minded, skeptic who questioned everything. Freedom to question the actions of your government is essential for a country to thrive. We sure could use a few more men like Richard Feynman during these critical times.
Reader Comments
As with 911 occupants of the towers, cannon fodder.
I meant to write: As with the 911 occupants of the towers, on the day,....................................
Sure sometimes they "accidentally" kill some people, but at least the government calls them heroes afterwards..... Makes it all good, right..?
In the Cs session of Feb. 2nd, 2002 there was the following:
Q: One of the first questions we want to ask tonight is about the event of the Space Shuttle that was lost. First, was it an
explosion, or was it just disintegration, or breaking up?
A: It was a "direct hit."
Q: A direct hit by what?
A: EM pulse.
Q: (S) What was the source of the EM pulse?
A: 3/4th density Consortium.
[ . . . ]
Q: [ . . . ] (L) Okay, you say that an EM pulse brought down the shuttle. (A) Where did the EM pulse come from?
A: From space based satellite.
Q: (A) Does NASA know about the cause?
A: There are some who suspect.
[ . . . ]
Q: (L) Which explains why they are so anxious to convince everyone that it was NOT sabotage. Like Wellstone's death, there was "no question" about it being a terrorist attack. The likelihood is that the Bush Junta was behind Wellstone's death. In both cases they "know" the cause and want to divert the attention away from it. But, in the case of the shuttle, they aren't "dirty," but they most definitely do NOT want anyone to realize that they also are not "in charge." It makes me think of the remark the Cs made a few years ago about the reason for the Military Industrial Complex build-up and manipulations. Cs said that the REAL enemy is "out there" and that war was just a "cover" to prevent the masses from realizing what they were really doing.
Maybe Bush and the gang are really convinced, in their own minds, that they are acting to "protect" humanity from this threat. Meanwhile, they are simply being driven to fulfill the agenda of the Consortium. And it is so interesting that the shuttle broke up over Palestine, Texas... as though it was saying to Bush: this is what is going to happen to you: Palestine is going to be your destruction. But, of course, Bush would be incapable of perceiving it in that context. Is it so that a message was intended in this event?
A: As always, confusion is the mask.
=================================
At 4:04 of the Feynman vid' above he says he felt he was being " . . . worked . . ." and " . . .operated by somebody else who wanted to something done without involving themselves . . . " and further along he says he was, "Being had to a certain extent . . . "
Now the O-ring problem is likely to have been real enough =however= polymer science has been around for a long time and with it, O-rings from about the end of WW II. So while the low temperature flexibility problem cited is real enough, it is hardly an intractable issue, particularly with NASA's available talent, resources and budgets.
In the 90 minute YouTube movie, "Challenger, The Untold Story" seen at this [Link] we see it's likely there was an issue with O-ring seals in the solid propellant boosters and might reasonably surmise that while Feynman knew the seals were an issue, something else was actually going on and the "seal issue" was a cover.
Researching O-rings, which I buy by the 1,000 and have done for 20 years, I find that only in the last few years have polymers with good low temp flexibility become commercially available.
NASA however has been the bleeding edge for decades so what they might or might not have had available during the shuttle era is not completely certain.
The engineers at Morton Thiokol seen in the YouTube above certainly had concerns at the time so the problem might well have been real enough.
But really, a polymer problem is -not- a "rocket science" problem, it's a chemistry problem . . .
All of which leaves me considering the long term and wide ranging abilities of "The Consortium" to manipulate to its advantage in the face of our ignorance; which I know sounds rather defeatist, which is not how I feel, but there you have it.
Remember the process utilized to qualify material for use in such critical application such as the o-rings in the shuttle. The material used were qualified after much testing and experience. Any consideration of changes to the elastomer would have required an extensive series of tests that may have required full scale testing to certify the new material. Remember also that the fix did not involve changing the material but just adding heater bands around the joints to maintain the temperature of the material at ignition. Any consideration of a change to the material would have represented a significant impact to the program in terms of cost and schedule.
In the years during the development and testing of the Space Shuttle components, I was impressed to see how the concerns of numerous individuals were taken seriously and as a consequence much additional costly testing was performed to investigate their concerns. In my mind this helped explain why the system was so costly. It also indicated the concerns with vehicle that were designed to carry people and the concern for their safety.
Mistakes were made and they were made by humans who thought they were making good decisions. Contrary to current conditions the Space Shuttle was not developed by a company whose success depended on making a profit. I think this is an important consideration when calling for the privatization of our manned space transportation system. The development of successful and reliable commercial aircraft is based on extensive military development and research.
Feynman is quoted as saying mid-movie, that the most critical issue is explaining WHY was the shuttle launched at disastrously sub-freezing temperatures ( when 50 F was there lowest previously done ), and the movie presents a somewhat plausible explanation of NASA covering its butt, obfuscating, and feeling intimidated by launch delays, contract renewals, and the military's extreme dependency and pressure upon it.
The seeds of truth makes the lies easier to swallow.
Prez Reagan had his State of the Union speech all prepared for the next day -- with school teacher in space Christa McAuliffe's active participation -- and the obvious truth to me, is that he forced and over-ruled NASA's culture of steadfastly preserving the lives of its astronauts, for craven political gain and idiotic appearances.
NASA was used as a huge PR stunt, and that ironically failed miserably when demands were made for it to live up to its rhetoric.
There had been OTHER launch delays earlier that week, not due to temperature, so it seems clear to me, that NASA was ordered to launch, regardless of obvious risks ( which they were unwilling and unable to bring forward ). NASA's culture of CYA lies, denials, and the hubris of a jerk Prez, all caught up with them that day. No one at NASA had the balls to dissuade Reagan from "touching the face of God," and those at the lower management levels actively overruled all dissent from those that knew the truth.
The risk was 1 in 200 -- when launched above 50 degrees F -- as the solid rocket boosters had nearly failed several times previously, and engineers knew that lower temperatures were the likely cause.
The movie didn't reveal how much activity occurred leading up to that morning ( it was far more than McDonald just not signing a report about launching ), with many other people risking their jobs to save lives, being told to shut up and do what they were told. The engineers and managers ( and private contractors ) at the lower levels, did do what was moral and mandated by the risks, and they were purposefully ignored and/or extorted.
BTW, the movie presents NASA as having actively driven the militarization of the Shuttle, which is mostly contrary to the original design being much lighter, and having less orbital options ( lower orbits and no polar orbits, via Vandenberg's need for spy sats ). It was the militarization of the Shuttle that made a mockery of initial very optimistic launch rate ideas, so that the underlining cause of its excessive complexities, cost overruns, and risks was the military attempting to get a free lunch ( launch ), as the same MIC contractors could extract more profits while hiding under NASA's skirts.
Post Apollo NASA, was looking for partnership with the MIC, but it was a devil's deal that had NASA pimping ( and left holding the bag ) for the military's ludicrous excesses ( usually, so well and so easily hidden ).
In fact, the exact same dangerous solid propellant boosters were ( and still are ) used in the military's unmanned Titan/Delta expendable launch vehicles
Yes, it was fascist corporate rapacity that killed those astronauts -- but having a duffis actor acting as president and the world as his stage -- made that insipid insanity even worse.
The simple truth is that back then, the inviolate power of the corporacracy was yet to solidify itself, and that Reagan was often outside of his corporatist script, like when he spoke so publicly against the Armenian holocaust ( the last time that ever happened officially, with increasing Israeli pressures ).
NASA ( aka N_eed A_nother S_even A_stronauts ) was used for private and political gain, ignoring the actual risks to its cherished astronauts. So to me, that violation of the people's trust was the beginning of the end of NASA. MIC subcontractors knew that the bread and butter civilian operations would become a huge cash cow, as the spy sat business was relatively infrequent, so NASA was lead to its own slaughter by what were seemingly and only ostensibly its own dedicated agents ( actually same subcontractors used by MIC ).
The earliest version of the Shuttle, actually planned on using the J6 engines so famously able to push the SR-71 to the edge of space, except a civilian agency like NASA was unable to break the national security state's dependency on hiding those marvels ( for decades thereafter ). The military's new unmanned X37 uses this exact approach ( [Link] )
I am likely unaware of the full truth of events of that day, but I needed to present another perspective as the movie only approaches the really painful truths of that day, and Dr Feynman's outstanding courage and integrity is actually even more inspiring and outrageous. He was the Ed Snowden of the 80s
Most of the things and processes we use in our everyday life have their origins in war and the military. Just think about it and you 'll be amazed at the number of the similarities.