THE NEW SPACE RACE: After critics decry Orion heat shield decision, NASA reviewer says agency is correct.
In an interview, Camarda said he knew two people on the IRT who dissented from its conclusions that NASA’s plan to fly the Orion heat shield, without modifications to address the charring problem, was acceptable. He also criticized the agency for not publicly releasing the independent report. “NASA did not post the results of the IRT,” he said. “Why wouldn’t they post the results of what the IRT said? If this isn’t raising red flags out there, I don’t know what will.”
Ars took these concerns to NASA on Friday, and the agency responded by offering an interview with Paul Hill, the review team’s chair. He strongly denied there were any dissenting views.
“Every one of our conclusions, every one of our recommendations, was unanimously agreed to by our team,” Hill said. “We went through a lot of effort, arguing sentence by sentence, to make sure the entire team agreed. To get there we definitely had some robust and energetic discussions.”
Hill did acknowledge that, at the outset of the review team’s discussions, two people were opposed to NASA’s plan to fly the heat shield as is. “There was, early on, definitely a difference of opinion with a couple of people who felt strongly that Orion’s heat shield was not good enough to fly as built,” he said.
However, Hill said the IRT was won over by the depth of NASA’s testing and the openness of agency engineers who worked with them. He singled out Luis Saucedo, a NASA engineer at NASA’s Johnson Space Center who led the agency’s internal char loss investigation.
“The work that was done by NASA, it was nothing short of eye-watering, it was incredible,” Hill said.
More: “When he worked at the agency, Hill played a leading role during the investigation into the cause of the loss of space shuttle Columbia, in 2003. He said he could understand if NASA officials ‘circled the wagons’ in response to the IRT’s work, but he said the agency could not have been more forthcoming. Every time the review team wanted more data or information, it was made available. Eventually, this made the entire IRT comfortable with NASA’s findings.”
Good to know but Artemis still needs a top-to-bottom review, starting with SLS.