digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at wired.com

Gallery: NASA's Most Embarrassing Goofs

wired.com — From equipment installed backwards to problems with the metric system, NASA's failures can be as fascinating as its successes. Of course, more cynical critics might suggest that NASA's failures overshadow its successes -- but let's see you send a ship to the moon.

Who dugg this? Made popular Jul 28, 2008

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

46 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • RealmDown, on 07/28/2008, -0/+38If you never fail, then you're not trying.

    Go NASA !

  • flare1028us, on 07/28/2008, -2/+25One of those could have been avoided had the US adopted the metric system when everyone else did.
  • henrik.falk, on 07/28/2008, -3/+18Wasn't the metric failure due to a subcontractor that screwed that one up?
  • tcpip4lyfe, on 07/28/2008, -0/+13We fear change.
  • v00doo, on 07/28/2008, -1/+14NASA still kicks ass despite all these mishaps...keep up the fantastic work!
  • jasonbalmforth, on 07/28/2008, -2/+14Cue the Moon Landing conspiracy nuts...
  • sisko2k5, on 07/28/2008, -1/+13METRIC!!!!!!
  • inactive, on 07/28/2008, -0/+10***** happens!
  • photography0567, on 07/28/2008, -0/+9I'm with the metric system...every inch of the way!
  • MacEnvy, on 07/28/2008, -1/+9Pound for pound, it's the best system by a mile.
  • Balanced, on 07/28/2008, -0/+8That's what the article says.
  • borez, on 07/28/2008, -0/+7At least Nasa actually got some stuff going on Mars. Our only attempt, the British Beagle 2 got all the way there then failed to say a basic Hello. Knowing British engineers though... they probably forgot to put the batteries in.
  • JasonCox, on 07/28/2008, -1/+7Cue Buzz Aldrin punching the guy out... Go Buzz!
  • jasonbalmforth, on 07/28/2008, -1/+6Exactly. It's a shame that today our culture is becoming increasingly risk and failure adverse. You only have to look at the schools. Children are told they're special precious artifacts, corralled away from all risk and never allowed to experience failure. Not a way to breed the next generation of space-farers.
  • jasonbalmforth, on 07/28/2008, -0/+5Sure they did. So the Soviets who would have certainly known about any faked US space activity via their own space program, just decided to keep quiet about it for fear of embarrassing their cold war enemy did they?
  • drgruney, on 07/28/2008, -0/+5The screw up wasn't in part size... it was in calculations for orbit.
  • Wildthing, on 07/28/2008, -0/+5The proliferation of the 9mm bullet is proof that the US has embraced the metric system.
  • GraceHead, on 07/28/2008, -0/+3I bit spellchecker reely let you down on that one.
  • JQP123, on 07/28/2008, -0/+2"They had to know."

    NASA is as much about propaganda as anything else. The very existence of the organization depends on it.

    After spending billions to develop the space shuttle, NASA was forced to swallow the fact that noone wanted to launch a satellite with it because it wasn't cost effective. At that point, they were kinda desperate for anything to justify it's existence. So while it certainly can't be proven, I'd say it is entirely possible that the Hubble "crisis" was intentionally manufactured in an effort to boost the shuttle's public image with a "heroic" repair mission that cost as much as the Hubble itself.
  • JQP123, on 07/28/2008, -0/+2Nice job with the revisionist history! NASA didn't invent televison, the microwave oven nor even the radio communication satellite.

    http://www.gallawa.com/microtech/history.html
  • bobdole369, on 07/28/2008, -0/+2No mention of killing Gus Grissom, Ed White, and Roger Chaffe in Apollo I? No mention of the 2 lost Space Shuttles? I would consider these the most embarrassing, as the same cause for all 3 disasters existed - NASA arrogance, and a blatant disregard for what should have been plainly obvious flaws.
  • capellathestar, on 07/28/2008, -0/+1Suddenly, me putting my cell phone in the fridge by mistake at least twice a week - doesn't seem so bad.
    After all - IM not a rocket scientist.
    =)
  • Tape99, on 07/28/2008, -3/+4I bit is reely hard to send a satellite in to space and then from planet to planet.
    In till you can send one with out F*****g up stop complaining.

    Good job NASA and don't stop trying.
  • barbapapa78, on 07/28/2008, -0/+1I am with you, I poured pineapple juice on my cereals this morning :)
  • ParanoydAndroid, on 07/28/2008, -0/+1Did anyone else find the most informative part of that article to be the information about Murphy's law they linked to? or was that just me?
  • Poovey, on 07/28/2008, -0/+1And for NASA's largest Goof, James Hansen!
  • wunksta, on 07/28/2008, -0/+1mmm i love seeing my tax dollars hard at work.
  • csrster, on 07/28/2008, -0/+1I can't remember if this was a NASA *****-up or not but it's a great image:
    http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/lofiversion/in ...
  • Black6x, on 07/28/2008, -0/+1How about having one of your guys say that you've been covering up alien encounters, and not IMMEDIATELY labeling him as crazy and finding a way to lock him in a closet. True or not, I thought the government was better at this.
  • inactive, on 07/28/2008, -1/+1Every time it happens they release a report saying it was due to incompetence and bureaucracy.
  • Black6x, on 07/28/2008, -2/+2I just wondered how no one noticed this. I mean, "in" vs "cm" in notes and on diagrams? How about feet vs meters? Anyone. Was there no instance where something called for a 12-cm piece, and then got a 12-inch piece?

    NASA: "That's WAY too big."
    Lockheed: "That's what she said."
  • JQP123, on 07/28/2008, -2/+1NASA's most embarassing goofs (in chronological order):

    1) The space shuttle - The most expensive, least cost effective way ever devised to put a payload into low earth oribit. Directly the opposite of what was initially promised. Did anyone really believe that attaching 7 astronauts to a payload would save money?

    2) Repairing the Hubble - For the cost of the repair missions that have been performed on the Hubble, we could easily have had a much more advanced replacement. Repair missions unnecessarily put astronauts at risk and take too long to plan and execute.

    3) The Space Station - It's fairly obvious to those who haven't swallowed NASA's blue pill that the most expensive single thing ever built was really just a make work project to justify the space shuttle and funnel money to military/industrial contractors. It has no real purpose other than the self serving medical study of people in space. The Russians have discovered that it also works well as a money making tourist trap for the super rich.

  • wontstoptalking, on 07/28/2008, -3/+3NASA is no good.

    Now if you excuse me I need to go microwave my dinner and then watch the news and then use other NASA-discovered products.
  • jasonbalmforth, on 07/28/2008, -1/+1Buzz Aldrin, now there is a guy with the right stuff!
  • bben46, on 07/28/2008, -0/+1I was working at a company that used front surface mirrors - like are used in telescopes at the time. When I read the aberration error on the Hubble, I thought it must be a misprint. Nobody allows that much aberration on a front surface mirror. They had to know.
  • zoziw, on 07/28/2008, -2/+2These weren't goofs, they were early attempts at success!
  • taketheleap, on 07/28/2008, -2/+1I love having an image gallery splayed over 9 pages.

    Thanks Wired for making the dream come true.
  • RobbyInternets, on 07/28/2008, -3/+1Can people please start burying anything that isn't all on one page! I am sick of these articles!
  • wontstoptalking, on 07/28/2008, -4/+1"This delicate dance turned destructive on its October 2004 test run, when DART collided with the satellite. NASA delayed its report for a year, then unleashed a scathing indictment citing a 'lack of training and experience, schedule pressure, bad software coding and breakdowns in responsibility.'"


    So....NASA is Microsoft?
  • wontstoptalking, on 07/28/2008, -4/+2Dare you doubt information you read on the internet??
  • GraceHead, on 07/28/2008, -5/+2Well they successfully faked a trip to the moon ....
  • zadadka, on 07/28/2008, -7/+3Microsoft, of course, desciribe such foul-ups as "features".
  • wontstoptalking, on 07/28/2008, -6/+2"This time, however, NASA knew what went wrong: Subcontracted engineers at Lockheed Martin used English units of measurement rather than the agency's favored metric system."

    -You...used....WHAT??????
    --I'm sorry, sir, I thought---
    -Thought WHAT? You moron! You Lockheed! We use the Metric System here!

    And what's sadder is that at NASA, they don't fire you, they kill you in horrible ways.
  • wontstoptalking, on 07/28/2008, -6/+1If you never fail, you're not NASA.
  • allanmacaulay, on 07/28/2008, -6/+1They didn't goof, they did it as a goof.


    "The Ten" anyone?
  • weemundo, on 07/28/2008, -6/+1People Keep finding mistakes made by NASA , loosers >:-[

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...

© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.