Kryten

Boeing's Starliner (thread renamed)

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Canopus said:

I went to one of my wife's medical meetings, and an retired doc friend of hers was a B-57 pilot before he was a doc. An RB-57F (spyplane). He kept going to medical meetings in retirement, and had a little more free time at the meeting, so I ended up hanging out with him and his wife quite a bit. Super interesting aircraft.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's official...

Goodship Calypso
(in tribute to Jacques-Yves Cousteau's RV Calypso)

nice choice

Edited by Just Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm getting a bit confused. Is this capsule going to be reused in future manned missions? Cause I thought I'd read that NASA didn't want to reuse them, or was that just Dragon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Treveli said:

I'm getting a bit confused. Is this capsule going to be reused in future manned missions? Cause I thought I'd read that NASA didn't want to reuse them, or was that just Dragon?

I heard them say in the press conference this morning they want to use them 10 times. 

Edited by Just Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Treveli said:

I'm getting a bit confused. Is this capsule going to be reused in future manned missions? Cause I thought I'd read that NASA didn't want to reuse them, or was that just Dragon?

They mentioned on stream that it will be reused, and Wikipedia list the second manned mission as reusing the flown Capsule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Treveli said:

I'm getting a bit confused. Is this capsule going to be reused in future manned missions? Cause I thought I'd read that NASA didn't want to reuse them, or was that just Dragon?

That's just Dragon. NASA reuse of Dragon was abandoned with the loss of propulsive landing. Not splashing down is much better for reuse (salt water being what it is).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Just Jim said:

I heard them say in the press conference this morning they want to use them 10 times. 

They are designed to be used up to 10 times. I guess we'll have to see how often they actually do get reused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mikegarrison said:

They are designed to be used up to 10 times. I guess we'll have to see how often they actually do get reused.

Yes, exactly. That's a good way of putting it!  ;)

Share this post


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

They clearly left timewarp on too long.

Agreed!!!  hehehe  They need to download Kerbal Alarm Clock... :D

Edited by Just Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nnk14ma75c-attachment-j-03-pws.pdf

Quote

The Contractor’s flight test program shall include an uncrewed orbital flight test to the ISS.The OFT shall include a CCTS that validates end-to-end connectivity, LV and CST-100integration, launch and flight operations, automated rendezvous and proximity operations, and docking with the ISS, assuming ISS approval.

How do they get around this? It's Boeing, so it gets ignored, I assume?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/22/2019 at 4:18 PM, Fraktal said:

Ouch. They mess up the AM/PM or what?

looks like they did not replicate the 11 hours before liftoff that the rocket computer is switched on when doing the in-house testing

(best theory so far seen on NSF forum)

Share this post


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

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nnk14ma75c-attachment-j-03-pws.pdf

How do they get around this? It's Boeing, so it gets ignored, I assume?

A very good question...

"But.... but... but... repeating the test will cost billions and delay the program even longer. It's just a software bug, we'll fix it, we got this!"

Never mind that we've seen how Boeing lets bugs slip and then fix them so quickly after a problem.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand the arguments in favor of going ahead with crew, and indeed if the OFT was crewed, the crew could have dealt with it and docked---but the contract says otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://blogs.nasa.gov/bridenstine/2020/01/07/nasa-update-on-boeings-orbital-flight-test/

Nothing new other than a few months of investigation, and in less time than that some statement on if they require a second OFT.

I'll bet they don't, even though I think they should have to do one (at their own cost).

Share this post


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

https://blogs.nasa.gov/bridenstine/2020/01/07/nasa-update-on-boeings-orbital-flight-test/

Nothing new other than a few months of investigation, and in less time than that some statement on if they require a second OFT.

I'll bet they don't, even though I think they should have to do one (at their own cost).

I'm fairly sure Boeing (space)/ULA doesn't do *anything* at their own cost (not sure about their own lobbying.  Probably not even that).  This makes a lot of sense when your entire business revolves around a single customer.  If that customer won't pay for something, it means they don't want it and won't pay for any follow on work.

Boeing might be a bit more willing to do such stuff (and used to going at it alone to win airline sales), but that simply isn't how government contractors work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spoiler

For some reason I keep expecting to see a couple of droids pop out of that pod capsule

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's an article on the wire services today talking about NASA's dilemma regarding the Starliner. NASA really doesn't want any more delays, and it's super expensive to do another flight test. But the plan did call for an uncrewed docking. NASA is pondering whether to just proceed with a crewed flight or require an uncrewed flight. The only thing that wasn't successfully tested was the actual docking, and they seem to think that's a low-risk item.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I wonder what the astronauts assigned to first crewed flight think about it? :/ It will be their lives in danger if another thing goes wrong.

Share this post


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

 I wonder what the astronauts assigned to first crewed flight think about it? :/ It will be their lives in danger if another thing goes wrong.

I don't think safety is a huge issue, though the failure might be indicative of deeper issues.

Mostly I think it's a fairness issue. It's a fixed price contract, and they've already been given more after the fact (on top of them winning vs Sierra Nevada at a much higher price). If the contract requires it, they should do it, and with the same, fixed price they are contracted for.

 

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.