Kryten

Boeing's Starliner (thread renamed)

Recommended Posts

 

 

Plan to land here in NM in ~48 hours.

Uncrewed rendezvous and docking not required for a crew flight, but nice to have.

Their backup was to send a command, but it was between TDRS, and command didn't get there in time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Crew of course could have just done the burn themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bridenstine saying two things now. That astronauts might well have simply flown it to station, and that given the situation, the call to "protect White Sands" was correct (protect the ability to do EDL and nominally land at WSMR).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bridenstine just confirmed that going to the spac station is off the table given the fuel levels.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

Too bad. Shocking that the mission clock is a single failure point.

It says something about their ground testing as well that they did not catch it. I presume they have "flown" countless simulations before... it'll be interesting to see what the deal was with this.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

Shocking that the mission clock is a single failure point.

They don't use Kerbal Alarm Clock. What else could be expected?

2 minutes ago, tater said:

It says something about their ground testing as well that they did not catch it. I presume they have "flown" countless simulations before...

Wait...

Spoiler

Did it work in Kerbal Space Program?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tater said:

 

 

Plan to land here in NM in ~48 hours.

Uncrewed rendezvous and docking not required for a crew flight, but nice to have.

Their backup was to send a command, but it was between TDRS, and command didn't get there in time.

Don't get this, the delta 5 is automated and in control until capsule is released, on release Pe is say 100 km and Ap is at specified orbit, I assume they had already programmed in an circulation burn for the capsule in case of issues with communication or ground control. 
However as its an chance the launch itself might have issues even stuff like short holds or small inacuracies in the delta burn so want to update capsule burn with better values, I also assume this burn is made so intercepting ISS is cheap.
You would start calculating that burn as soon as you are in cruise toward Ap.
Not sure if centaur does an second burn here, I almost assume not since capsule does circulation, if so you also want to update it. Granted with GPS on rocket or capsule could do this itself, you still want an human in loop as the rocket would not know that one fail state is to get the capsule into an stable orbit so you can show it can work in orbit and land even if you can not reach ISS.

And orbital burns are always automated, or at least you tell the system for too long to burn, on an modern capsule I assume you also tell it to point in one direction manual backup.  
You can dock manually as an backup, this can also be done remotely. 

In short I don't understand that went wrong here, was the clock in the capsule control ahead so it burned early?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

Well this is certainly embarrassing.

At least it didn't explode ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edited by Wjolcz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Wjolcz said:

At least it didn't explode ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yet.  It's still gotta come back down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spoiler

Was outside of KerbNet visibility, so didn't perform the burn in time.

Also maybe they should extend the antennas earlier.

 

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, kerbiloid said:
  Hide contents

Was outside of KerbNet visibility, so didn't perform the burn in time.

Also maybe they should extend the antennas earlier.

 

Spoiler

They set Remote Tech to “hard” and set the delay wrong. The high gain antenna wasn’t deployed in time to send new commands. Unfortunately, save file editing isn’t viable.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder what the verdict will be...

"Yeahhhhh...sure. You don't have to do rendez-vous and docking. We know each other for so long - one out of control spaceship is nothing between old pals *wink wink nudge nudge*"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So was rendezvous and docking a part of the submitted certification profile/outline/whetever (I'm really not sure what it should be called)? Because if it was and they didn't do it why should SpaceX commit to their IFA plan then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Wjolcz said:

So was rendezvous and docking a part of the submitted certification profile/outline/whetever (I'm really not sure what it should be called)? Because if it was and they didn't do it why should SpaceX commit to their IFA plan then?

This flight might prove the vehicle suitable for human flight and then the first manned mission will be used to qualify the rendezvous and docking systems. Assuming the reentry and landing goes to plan and they sort the clock issue out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.