Jump to content

Boeing's Starliner


Kryten
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

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

They also were given 300 millions extra years after the contract was awarded for "more schedule flexibility in crewed launches" during 2019, so while formally fixed price Boeing still has some... peculiarities 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

They have completed fuel offload from the service module. Now they are able to proceed with swapping out the current (damaged) service module for a new one.

Because the fuel is so dangerous and toxic, this step had to be done very carefully, before they could start the disassembly process.

Quote

The investigation into the valve issue continues to substantiate that the most probable cause is interaction of moisture with nitrogen tetroxide that permeates through the Teflon seal in the valve, leading to corrosion. Testing continues to fully understand how this occurrence affects the valves in various environments.

Tests include environmental seal evaluation and exposing valves, in a controlled setting, to temperatures and conditions similar to those the spacecraft experienced prior to the planned launch of OFT-2. The results of these tests will help in the ongoing development of remediation efforts to prevent similar issues on future service modules.

For example, the team designed a purging system that will be integrated into the spacecraft to protect the valves from potential exposure to moisture at the factory, launch complex and launch pad.

 

Edited by mikegarrison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

They have completed fuel offload from the service module. Now they are able to proceed with swapping out the current (damaged) service module for a new one.

Because the fuel is so dangerous and toxic, this step had to be done very carefully, before they could start the disassembly process.

How long did that take? It's been half a year since it went back from the pad and a few months since the last time Starliner schedule was moved

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 1/19/2022 at 1:54 AM, Beccab said:

How long did that take? It's been half a year since it went back from the pad and a few months since the last time Starliner schedule was moved

Do they have a rocket?  I understand that it was originally going to use an Atlas V, but that rocket  has since been launched and there are no other Atlas V rockets being made.  There's also the soon-to-be-canceled Delta IV rocket and the still-waiting-for-Vulcan-engines Centaur.  Sending up your "proof of safety" mission on an entirely  new rocket seems like it defeats the purpose, but this appears to be a pork project anyway (that appears to be costing Boeing far more than the pork is worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Delta IV is not crew-rated and all Delta IV launches are already committed anyway.

Atlas V is likewise no longer selling any new launches, but all the already-ordered Starliner launches are already on the books. So that means they will be Atlas V launches. Also, I believe ULA has already taken delivery of all the RD-180 engines for their committed Atlas V launches, so they are not worried about that part of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wumpus said:

Do they have a rocket?  I understand that it was originally going to use an Atlas V, but that rocket  has since been launched and there are no other Atlas V rockets being made.  There's also the soon-to-be-canceled Delta IV rocket and the still-waiting-for-Vulcan-engines Centaur.  Sending up your "proof of safety" mission on an entirely  new rocket seems like it defeats the purpose, but this appears to be a pork project anyway (that appears to be costing Boeing far more than the pork is worth.

The Atlas V vehicles to fulfill the initial Starliner contract have been held aside, so all planned launches can fly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

Delta IV is not crew-rated and all Delta IV launches are already committed anyway.

Atlas V is likewise no longer selling any new launches, but all the already-ordered Starliner launches are already on the books. So that means they will be Atlas V launches. Also, I believe ULA has already taken delivery of all the RD-180 engines for their committed Atlas V launches, so they are not worried about that part of it.

To add to this, ULA has also currently no plans to crew rate Vulcan on their own unless a customer pays for it. If I remember right the estimate was of a few tens of million dollars, but it's been a while so I may be wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do I, but with either Sierra Nevada Corp or NASA itself paying for it, and not soon. If Starliner is set to make a CC launch per year, that means there is zero need to fly on Vulcan until 2029 at minimum with the current contracts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

"wrong blue"?

Interestingly enough, Google says that "Boeing Blue" is hex code 0039A6, but Boeing sources say it is Pantone 286c or hex code 0033A1.

0033A1 is a deeper blue than 0039A6.

https://www.color-hex.com/color/0033a1

https://www.color-hex.com/color/0039a6

According to Wikipedia, NASA's blue is Pantone 286, or hex code 0B3D91. The addition of a little red into it makes it looks a bit "flatter" blue, to my eyes on my screen.

https://www.color-hex.com/color/0b3d91

The blue in that photo appears lighter in color, but that could be just the lighting.

Edited by mikegarrison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, mikegarrison said:

According to Wikipedia, NASA's blue is Pantone 286, or hex code 0B3D91. The addition of a little red into it makes it looks a bit "flatter" blue, to my eyes on my screen.

The US flag. The Union is not the right color. Blue PMS 282.

Upper right:

pantone-blues-swatch.jpg?w=848

 

0033A1 is PMS 286C (second row, middle).

Far, far too light. Boeing doing Boeing color is fine, obviously, and NASA meatball is close enough to not matter (SpaceX is worse in some ways by having the meatball AND the worm, per the worm design doc only the worm!).

The US flag is not negotiable, however.

FR1mwrNWUAgGn6R?format=jpg&name=small

Still, looks washed out even for their stated colors—wonder if it's an illusion caused by the gray?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

Pantone 286 and Pantone 286c are not the same color.

Coated (C) looks darker/more saturated because of the gloss, sure. hard to find 1 chart with both, and it's on a screen, anyway (gloss).

FR1mwrNWUAgGn6R?format=jpg&name=small

The real US flag is literally on the wall. The flag on the capsule is wrong. They are not even close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, tater said:

Still, looks washed out even for their stated colors—wonder if it's an illusion caused by the gray?

Could there be a protective film over the whole thing, causing the washed-out effect?

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...