This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/space by /u/jfoxworth on 2025-07-16 15:51:51+00:00.
Original Title: I tried to blow the whistle that parts of the Orion were not properly designed 15 years ago. One of those systems was this side hatch that is still failing. A story about how this happened and how other problems likely exist on the Orion.
TLDR
- I worked on this side hatch 15 years ago.
- The "design" of that system and others on Orion was totally fraudulent and everyone knew it.
- That system is still causing problems today.
- Lockheed and NASA knew about it and chose to squash dissent rather than address the issues.
In 2008, I was hired as an engineer to work on the Orion vehicle. Specifically, I was hired as a subcontractor to work on the CIAS - Crew Impact Attenuation System. My subcontractor was GHG.
Immediately, I saw problems. The Orion had just gone through PDR - Preliminary Design Review. Yet, no one could produce a single piece of mathematics to explain how they got from nothing to the existing CAD model. There was an FEA analysis presented as part of the PDR, but no one (besides me) had any knowledge of FEA. No one could tell me where that analysis came from.
Within a few weeks, I was approached by another engineer and told that he and I were swapping jobs. It was explained to me by him and my manager - Kurt Miller - that he could not do his job and that he had asked for my position as he and that group lead were friends. This was presented as if I could refuse, but I would not ... because of the implications.
My new system was the ASDS - Abort System to Docking System. It was a one man team and the two previous engineers had both refused to do any work citing a lack of training, knowledge, and mentorship. It had measurements and analysis that were presented in PDR but none had any mathematical support whatsoever. They seemed to be made up completely - again.
I spent the next year doing a full mathematical design. I received no mentorship, no help, no guidance, and not a single question I asked about the process was answered. I was always told that we were all learning as we went on.
I worked 60+ hours a week and when I finished, I was told to move into testing. Again, I asked for guidance and was told none existed. I was also told to relax for a while (years) while the remaining systems caught up. I asked to be transferred back to my original role or to another position.
At this time, my yearly review came up. I filled out my forms and submitted them to GHG. The process should have been that my manager at LM talked with me about the review and then we would agree on the results. Instead, GHG called me over and showed me the "review". I got 5/5 marks for pretty much everything - including behavior. However, there were 3 sentences at the bottom comments section claiming I had a bad attitude.
My subcontractor - GHG - told me that my manager claimed to have spoken with me. I assured them this was not the case and they immediately refused to speak with me any more. Kurt Miller denied making the comments or submitting the review. GHG then claimed that he had reasserted both those things. Eventually, I asked that everyone get in the same room.
When the day of the meeting came, GHG no showed. Kurt Miller was sitting behind his desk and another manager - Kim Kuykendall - was present. She managed the Hatched and Latches - including the side hatch that is still causing problems.
She explained to me that the negative comments were not in the review and that I was being transferred to her group to work on a test fixture for this side hatch. She refused to speak about anything else. Kurt refused to say anything and instead placed his head on his hands and then rolled back from his desk and placed his head under his desk. GHG refused to speak with me and I refused to sign the "review".
This is the United States space program and these are two "non technical" engineers with decades of experience.
Upon getting to my new group, I was brought to a room in the basement where a door from a previous program sat - I believe it was Gemini. I was told that the engineers had copied this design and enlarged it to fit Orion specs.
Here was the problem - Orion was much larger and the seal had to be a lot denser because it would be in space longer and could not leak air like Gemini. These two things meant that the mechanism to open and close the door would not work properly. Again, this was a known issue that I was able to deduce within hours.
When I raised this issue and asked how I could design a test fixture when the design of the actual door was going to change, I was told that if I needed the design of the hatch / latch to be complete to do the test fixture, then this was my job to complete it. Basically, I was told to do their work ... again.
I politely stated that I would not without being given the role and credit for doing it. At this point, everyone stopped working with me.
I was eventually tasked with writing test software with Labview. My thesis work was in Labview and I was very proficient in it. A trial license was put on a computer in a locked training room in the basement and I was told to work on the software when the room was available - after hours.
Again, this is the US Space Program.
Not long after, the Hatches group was brought to a room where our managers - Kin Kuykendall and Paige Carr - told us that the design was now considered a failure and we were going to have to start over. They made it clear that heads would roll. They stated that if you felt that you were responsible and wanted to make a case for remaining, you should come talk to them. So ... walk in and admit that you deserve to be fired and beg to remain. I didn't actually work on the design, so I wasn't concerned.
Again, this is the US space program.
A few days later, I was terminated.
Lockheed and NASA maintain several unwritten policies that apply only to "unprotected" classes of people. One of those is that employees that "do not produce" for six months can be terminated. That means that you can get a review where you are a 5/5 top performing engineer and then 6 months and 1 day later be terminated with no discussion. You won't even know what allegations are made against you, much less be given a chance to defend yourself. You are just escorted from the building. Since this takes place in Texas and the people have no protection status, they have no grounds to sue.
I was terminated 6 months and 1 day after moving to the hatches group - six months and 1 day after getting the 5/5 review.
I filed a NASA OIG complaint denoting that the three systems I saw - including the side hatch - all had zero mathematical basis for their "design" and everything else listed above. To my surprise, I was told that nothing I alleged was denied. Apparently, there was no legal issue with what was done as long as Lockheed and NASA didn't lie to the OIG.
I was never given a reason for my termination. I filed a Lockheed Ethics complaint and was literally laughed at and told that the filing of the complaint established a record of having a bad attitude. I was told through the grapevine that I was blamed for the failure the side hatch design. Basically, Lockheed tells NASA that the design failed and they fired the guy responsible. That destroyed any chance I had at a career anywhere else.
The problem is that the remaining people could not do the design initially and they didn't suddenly become competent when I was terminated. Thus, these failures 15 years ago bleed into today because incompetent engineers remain in place.
NASA was 100% aware of this because they acknowledged it in my OIG complaint.
These issues were known and Lockheed and NASA made the conscious decision to terminate an employee with a history of doing things other engineers could not and retain ones that failed repeatedly. There were reasons for this based on contractor vs subcontractor and protected vs unprotected classes.
I left a lot out for brevity - although I failed at that. I have no solutions and i've spent an unfortunate amount of time trying to get NASA and Lockheed to do something about these designs. They've spent $30 billion and 20 years on this.
