Jump to content

Boeing's Starliner


Kryten
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

Spaceflight has only basically focused on 1, 2, and 3. They have talked about 4, 5, and 6 but not really done much of it.

Yeah, this really is the problem with human spaceflight. I love human spaceflight, it's cool, and it's the future I want to see. I just can't wrap my head around a decent use case that results in any economic benefit except tourism—and tourism as a mass market is a long, long pole, IMHO. Needs to be airline level safety, maybe not 2021 airline safety, but certainly airline safety from within the last few decades, so many orders of magnitude safer than space travel is right now.

Edited by tater
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, tater said:

Yeah, this really is the problem with human spaceflight. I love human spaceflight, it's cool, and it's the future I want to see. I just can't wrap my head around a decent use case that results in any economic benefit except tourism—and tourism as a mass market is a long, long pole, IMHO. Needs to be airline level safety, maybe not 2021 airline safety, but certainly airline safety from within the last few decades, so many orders of magnitude safer than space travel is right now.

3d printing organics ( aka organs) for wealthy individuals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, tater said:

Yeah, this really is the problem with human spaceflight. I love human spaceflight, it's cool, and it's the future I want to see. I just can't wrap my head around a decent use case that results in any economic benefit except tourism—and tourism as a mass market is a long, long pole, IMHO. Needs to be airline level safety, maybe not 2021 airline safety, but certainly airline safety from within the last few decades, so many orders of magnitude safer than space travel is right now.

In order for there to be transportation, there has to be a destination worth transporting to. Without the ISS, Commercial crew would never have happened.

A SpaceX mars base/colony "beachhead" is  a precondition for interplanetary science expeditions. There's no reason for Stanford to do LEO science and Lunar science is the domain of "the Goverment". But in the not so distant future, a non-govermental base on mars that offers base-camp amenities for expeditions into the martian wilderness is something that might attract institution-funded geological lewis-and-clark missions, funding the expansion of the base.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Rakaydos said:

In order for there to be transportation, there has to be a destination worth transporting to. Without the ISS, Commercial crew would never have happened.

A SpaceX mars base/colony "beachhead" is  a precondition for interplanetary science expeditions. There's no reason for Stanford to do LEO science and Lunar science is the domain of "the Goverment". But in the not so distant future, a non-govermental base on mars that offers base-camp amenities for expeditions into the martian wilderness is something that might attract institution-funded geological lewis-and-clark missions, funding the expansion of the base.

For this to be true prices would have to be vastly lower than they are now obviously. I agree that all human destinations in space have to be built… First. In the grand scheme, scientific expeditions are not enough money to matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh hells yes, exogeologists would want to go to Mars and actually study it right there. But that's not on the table right now. Spending three days looking out a porthole from orbit is cool and all, but it's not something I want MIT to be paying their grad students to do. Not if it costs $20M/trip, anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I realize this is not Starliner related,  but it's still Boeing and this is the only active Boeing thread. Also, at this time it's nothing more that an allegation, but here it goes anyway

https://www.expressnews.com/business/local/article/Air-Force-One-work-tied-to-Saudis-16595887.php

tldr, Boeing got a contract to work on Air Force One 747, outsourced it to Saudis, they bailed, now Boeing is asking for additional 500 megabucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That article is paywalled, but I found this from April that suggests this is not a new issue. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-air-force-idUSKBN2BV37Z

It is probably not well known, but typically custom interiors are not designed, manufactured, or installed by airframers. If you buy a bizjet, for instance, you usually buy it as a "green" airplane, and you hire a specialty firm to install the interior you want. This is known as "completing" the airplane.

Edited by mikegarrison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

That article is paywalled, but I found this from April that suggests this is not a new issue. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-air-force-idUSKBN2BV37Z

It is probably not well known, but typically custom interiors are not designed, manufactured, or installed by airframers. If you buy a bizjet, for instance, you usually buy it as a "green" airplane, and you hire a specialty firm to install the interior you want. This is known as "completing" the airplane.

Neat.  

I also understand that we've forgotten everything learned during the Cold War about espionage security? 

 

Totally makes sense to outsource the interior of AF1. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Neat.  

I also understand that we've forgotten everything learned during the Cold War about espionage security? 

 

Totally makes sense to outsource the interior of AF1. 

I was speaking generally. I have no detailed knowledge of the AF1 airplane.

However, corporate espionage is also a thing, and presumably there are ways to make sure your airplane interior is not full of bugs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

https://spacenews.com/nasa-to-award-spacex-three-more-commercial-crew-flights/

Dragon in this thread? Yeah, a good poster on NSF pointed out that given contract lead times, this purchase by NASA signals they likely want certainty about crew flights out until possibly Fall of 2023, suggesting  that they perceive risk that Starliner might not be operationally available before then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
11 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Sometimes a thing gets FUBAR... and that becomes the only way to do it

Makes sense—the question what is different about SM number 2? Did they spec different parts? Since it was already not attached to a CM, was it because they could replace the valves, then do a swap? What was the underlying issue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, tater said:

Makes sense—the question what is different about SM number 2? Did they spec different parts? Since it was already not attached to a CM, was it because they could replace the valves, then do a swap? What was the underlying issue?

I'd be interested to know that, too. 

But it's a cost-plus contract, right?  So no harm in tossing away the old one and never explaining what went wrong 

 

SMH 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

I'd be interested to know that, too. 

But it's a cost-plus contract, right?  So no harm in tossing away the old one and never explaining what went wrong 

 

SMH 

No, I think it's a fixed-price, just that they quoted (and were awarded) a price nearly double what SpaceX quoted

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...