Boeing Starliner

[The K2]

My father had co-workers, but they didn’t have the knowledge or the experience he had and was willing to postpone his retirement to make sure things would be done right. If it was Rockwell, it would have been different, but a lot of things changed when Boeing took over.

 

[Scott Kenny]

(laughing like an idiot typing this. Morning coffee was perhaps a little too strong)

Error, does not compute. How can morning coffee possibly be too strong?

Optimize for shareholder values?

Cut Starliner up into small pieces, mount on walnut plaques, and sell though the Boeing Store and eBay as "Unique Collectors Items".

Not gonna lie, I'd buy one.

As a current Boeing employee, I am legally restrained/restricted to make any comments whatsoever on this particular post at all.

I can hear what you're thinking quite clearly. Need to work on your thoughts "inside voice"

 

[martinbayer]

I can hear what you're thinking quite clearly. Need to work on your thoughts "inside voice"

As a German, I'm afraid I have no inside voice ...

 

[TomcatViP]

found this info on X
Got some more info on this ?

Is that this one you are looking for?

https://oig.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/ig-24-015.pdf

NASA makes me laugh here: they criticize Boeing lack of qualified workers and appropriate management supervision after years of handling US man rated launch systems to Russia. Any weekend botanist would have known better.
And then their only recommendation is to cut back on the program slippery cost with additional penalties for Boeing. This is not how you solve a problem IMOHO.

 

[TinWing]

Is that this one you are looking for?

https://oig.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/ig-24-015.pdf

NASA makes me laugh here: they criticize Boeing lack of qualified workers and appropriate management supervision after years of handling US man rated launch systems to Russia. Any weekend botanist would have known better.
And then their only recommendation is to cut back on the program slippery cost with additional penalties for Boeing. This is not how you solve a problem IMOHO.

There are broader issues here than just Boeing. Both NASA and the associated legacy industry are hopelessly hidebound while Musk’s Space X is actually succeeding, more or less. In hindsight, the policy of relying on former-Soviet technology and infrastructure for manned spaceflight the right one. Why? The safety actually wasn’t bad considering the overall level of investment. The Soviets wasted time and money with Buran, but otherwise, their program wasn’t nearly as conceptually adrift as post-Apollo NASA.

I’m not defending Boeing and it probably . is time to pull the plug on Starliner, in a way that least damages a fragile company that is increasingly likely to need a Federal bailout. Odds are that “Butch and Suni” come home aboard Space-X or even a Soyuz, anyway. Much like NASA itself, Starliner is just beyond fixing. The future of manned space flight belongs to the private sector. As innovators go, Musk is a bit like Marconi - not a highly specialized genius like Von Braun, but willing to fund a venture and buy in the necessary expertise.

 

[Dilandu]

As innovators go, Musk is a bit like Marconi - not a highly specialized genius like Von Braun, but willing to fund a venture and buy in the necessary expertise.

I usually compare him with Ford or Stephenson, but Marconi is a good too)

 

[Byeman]

New Issue for Starliner: Lack of Booster !
Boeing has FAA licence for launch Starline on Atlas V
but last build Atlas V's are now ALL booked by Amazon for Kuiper project,
Boeing has not FAA permission to use Vulcan Booster since it not Manned rated yet !

Amazon need all Atlas V to keep FCC licence, that demand certain numbers of Satellite in orbit at certain date...

...means that Starliner program is dead.

FAA has nothing to do with manrating Vulcan

 

[Byeman]

Back in the days astronauts could calculate angle of reentry with a slide rule if flight computer has failed. How many can do that today?

not true

 

[Byeman]

There are broader issues here than just Boeing. Both NASA and the associated legacy industry are hopelessly hidebound

that is nonsense. NASA and the industry is not monolithic.

 

[Nik]

FWIW, provided can be initially shoved clear--CANADARM ??-- an un-crewed LEO-coracle 'Starliner' could be de-orbited without rocketry.

Attach, deploy conductive tether, let induced currents do the work...

 

[edwest4]

that is nonsense. NASA and the industry is not monolithic.

The industry has been taken over by money managers. This is true across aerospace. The goal is profits first and maybe a quality product/vehicle. And if things go wrong, replace the CEO.

 

[aim9xray]

Starliner's plight set to a familiar tune...

 

[siegecrossbow]

not true

Gemini XII Crew Masters the Challenges of Spacewalks - NASA

In the 20 months following the first piloted Gemini mission, NASA astronauts demonstrated the ability to change orbits, perform rendezvous and docking, along

www.nasa.gov

Aldrin pulled out a sextant and his slide rule and put his MIT doctoral research to work. With the sextant, Aldrin measured the angle between the horizon and the Agena. Aldrin confirmed the information with his rendezvous chart, then calculated corrections with the spacecraft’s computer.

 

[Michel Van]

FAA has nothing to do with manrating Vulcan

It about the licence for Starliner, on what launcher.
The change are realistic that FAA give Boeing a Licence for Starliner to be launch on Falcon 9...
...If Boeing bend over to Musk demands. (metaphorical)

not true

the Apollo capsule had modernised version called Space Sextant, also the LM got one.
the LM one was used by crew of Apollo 13 to find there position
calculated corrections on slide rule "N600-ES," manufactured by the Pickett Company...

Slide Rule, 5-inch, Pickett N600-ES, Apollo 13

During the Apollo missions, an on-board computer and large computers on Earth performed the critical guidance and navigation calculations necessary for a successful journey. In addition, crews carried a slide rule for more routine calculations.

airandspace.si.edu

 

[edwest4]

Gemini XII Crew Masters the Challenges of Spacewalks - NASA

In the 20 months following the first piloted Gemini mission, NASA astronauts demonstrated the ability to change orbits, perform rendezvous and docking, along

www.nasa.gov

So, we are now in "the future," where everything was supposed to be better and more advanced and better. And this is what we've got.

 

[southwestforests]

That song at the video end ...

Aug 12, 2024 #SpaceX #starship #elonmusk

NASA Insider on Boeing Starliner: "No One Considered This"
I spoke to an inside source at NASA for more perspective on the Boeing Starliner situation.

Here is the article from Boeing's website that I drew context from:
https://www.boeing.com/features/2024/04/the-boeing-starliner-wows

Thanks to Jamie Clay for writing the lyrics and giving me permission to sing to the parody song at the end

 

[southwestforests]

Another style of reporting,

Aug 12, 2024 Space expert T.J. Cooney rejoins the channel to talk about whether American astronauts Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore are actually stuck or stranded on the International Space Station and what their predicament says about the health of NASA and the U.S. space industry.

 

[NMaude]

The industry has been taken over by money managers. This is true across aerospace. The goal is profits first and maybe a quality product/vehicle. And if things go wrong, replace the CEO.

Boeing for example needs to go back to what it did before it took over McDonnell-Douglas (And the McD management took over Boeing) and start requiring that its' CEOs and other senior executive positions have anengineering background instead of being bean-counters.

 

[edwest4]

Boeing for example needs to go back to what it did before it took over McDonnell-Douglas (And the McD management took over Boeing) and start requiring that its' CEOs and other senior executive positions have anengineering background instead of being bean-counters.

Well, getting that new house on the Riviera always seems to get in the way. And the shareholders will complain if profits go down.

 

[NMaude]

And the shareholders will complain if profits go down.

Then someone needs to explain to the shareholders using a lot of small words exactly why this needs to happen (Remember that preMcD acquisition Boeing was a highly profitable company) and that having an aerospace company run by a bunch of greedy, shortsighted bean-counters is a bad long-term strategy (They won't get any profit at all if the company goes tits up due to mismanagement).

 

[edwest4]

Then someone needs to explain to the shareholders using a lot of small words exactly why this needs to happen (Remember that preMcD acquisition Boeing was a highly profitable company) and that having an aerospace company run by a bunch of greedy, shortsighted bean-counters is a bad long-term strategy (They won't get any profit at all if the company goes tits up due to mismanagement).

Sadly, there's a formula for that. Let the company fail then buy up what's left. It's like dealing with sharks 10 times normal size.

 

[publiusr]

Falcon is set to launch a billionaire soon. He'd make a good name for himself if he deferred and paid for that Dragon to go to ISS unmanned.

 

[zjz]

I never quite quite understand the term "Instituitional Knowledge", until older colleagues started retiring ......

Anyway, I thought the "destroy all hardware and blue prints" is a Canadian thing (eg. AVRO Arrow") rather the the Americans ......

 

[edwest4]

I never quite quite understand the term "Instituitional Knowledge", until older colleagues started retiring ......

Anyway, I thought the "destroy all hardware and blue prints" is a Canadian thing (eg. AVRO Arrow") rather the the Americans ......

I think the newly minted owners of American aerospace companies don't care. Retired engineers should come back and give the new engineers a proper grounding in what to expect. and work with them for a while. To the money managers, any engineer will do. They are treated not as valued contributors but as interchangeable parts. That needs to stop. Hire the brightest and the best. Give them clear goals. Give them a way to report problems without losing their jobs. Until that happens, it's only about profits.

I recall seeing auctions for various rocket parts from the 1970s.

 

[NMaude]

I think the newly minted owners of American aerospace companies don't care.

The aerospace companies should be run by people with an engineering background like Boeing used to be.

 

[edwest4]

The aerospace companies should be run by people with an engineering background like Boeing used to be.

That is the answer. If you look at the men who founded the aviation industry in the United States, it's clear what needs to be done.

However, if that road is not taken, it will take an outside event or war to get things moving. I'd rather a more peaceful approach be taken.

 

[what_is_that]

I think the newly minted owners of American aerospace companies don't care. Retired engineers should come back and give the new engineers a proper grounding in what to expect. and work with them for a while. To the money managers, any engineer will do. They are treated not as valued contributors but as interchangeable parts. That needs to stop. Hire the brightest and the best. Give them clear goals. Give them a way to report problems without losing their jobs. Until that happens, it's only about profits.

I recall seeing auctions for various rocket parts from the 1970s.

Treating skilled workers as interchangeable parts is rampant in modern management. I think it's a required part of getting an MBA right now. It's not just retirements that kill institutional knowledge, it's voluntary turnover too. Why try to retain skilled workers when you can just hire a new younger cheaper one? I also see way too many managers working to optimize metrics that have nothing to do with an actual good end product.
Apologies for the off-topic rant...

 

[publiusr]

However, if that road is not taken, it will take an outside event or war to get things moving. I'd rather a more peaceful approach be taken.

And that is why I always chafe at this or that national build being called a "jobs program."

Here is where New Spacers sound the most like Boeing.

 

[BlackBat242]

Falcon is set to launch a billionaire soon. He'd make a good name for himself if he deferred and paid for that Dragon to go to ISS unmanned.

1. NASA/Boeing spacesuits and SpaceX spacesuits are NOT compatible with the other's capsule life-support systems. They have different connection fittings, etc. They also have different shaping requiring different shaped seats.

2. SpaceX can't "just take up a couple spare suits", as all spacesuits (no matter whose) have to be modified (almost custom-built) for the person who will wear it.

3. And that would still not solve the issue that Starliner cannot undock by itself (explained by others above), but requires someone inside to operate the controls.

4. As for "just have one inside to undock it then have him exit the capsule and move over to ISS (by whatever means you can improvise" - is the Starliner capsule even designed to allow the person inside to exit when NOT docked?

5. And yes... Starliner HAS to be undocked because there are only 2 docks that American capsules (both NASA/Boeing and SpaceX) can use, and both currently have capsules docked (there is a Dragon there for emergency use as a "lifeboat/emergency return ship" in case of an emergency).

 

[TomcatViP]

Your ever dependable undocking tool

 

[martinbayer]

3. And that would still not solve the issue that Starliner cannot undock by itself (explained by others above), but requires someone inside to operate the controls.

5. And yes... Starliner HAS to be undocked because there are only 2 docks that American capsules (both NASA/Boeing and SpaceX) can use, and both currently have capsules docked (there is a Dragon there for emergency use as a "lifeboat/emergency return ship" in case of an emergency).

WRT #3: If that is true, how was the uncrewed Orbital Flight Test 2 to ISS and back performed?

WRT #5: I believe we are steadily approaching an emergency.

 

[TomcatViP]

@martinbayer : last minute software change.

 

[zjz]

1. NASA/Boeing spacesuits and SpaceX spacesuits are NOT compatible with the other's capsule life-support systems. They have different connection fittings, etc. They also have different shaping requiring different shaped seats.

2. SpaceX can't "just take up a couple spare suits", as all spacesuits (no matter whose) have to be modified (almost custom-built) for the person who will wear it.

3. And that would still not solve the issue that Starliner cannot undock by itself (explained by others above), but requires someone inside to operate the controls.

4. As for "just have one inside to undock it then have him exit the capsule and move over to ISS (by whatever means you can improvise" - is the Starliner capsule even designed to allow the person inside to exit when NOT docked?

5. And yes... Starliner HAS to be undocked because there are only 2 docks that American capsules (both NASA/Boeing and SpaceX) can use, and both currently have capsules docked (there is a Dragon there for emergency use as a "lifeboat/emergency return ship" in case of an emergency).

#1 reminds me of the Apollo 13 scenario, when the CO2 scrubber of the CSM and LM were not compatible with each other (square vs. round shapes) .....

 

[bob225]

#1 reminds me of the Apollo 13 scenario, when the CO2 scrubber of the CSM and LM were not compatible with each other (square vs. round shapes) .....

Perhaps a suit connector adapter could be made to allow the connection? Plug boeing-adapter-spacex.

it just seems to be dragging on and on, more problems everyday it feels.

 

[Byeman]

#1 reminds me of the Apollo 13 scenario, when the CO2 scrubber of the CSM and LM were not compatible with each other (square vs. round shapes) .....

that wasn’t a flaw. The LM LiOH canisters were also used in the PLSS. Compatibility with the CM would mean they would be too big for the PLSS or too small for the CM(meaning more would have to carried and the crew would have to switch them much more frequently)

 

[Byeman]

FWIW, provided can be initially shoved clear--CANADARM ??-- an un-crewed LEO-coracle 'Starliner' could be de-orbited without rocketry.

Attach, deploy conductive tether, let induced currents do the work...

no. Still need thrusters to stabilized the vehicle and deploy any tether

 

[Byeman]

Gemini XII Crew Masters the Challenges of Spacewalks - NASA

In the 20 months following the first piloted Gemini mission, NASA astronauts demonstrated the ability to change orbits, perform rendezvous and docking, along

www.nasa.gov

The sextant was the key factor and necessity. hand calculations could have replaced the slide rule.

 

[Byeman]

It about the licence for Starliner, on what launcher.
The change are realistic that FAA give Boeing a Licence for Starliner to be launch on Falcon 9...



the Apollo capsule had modernised version called Space Sextant, also the LM got one.
the LM one was used by crew of Apollo 13 to find there position
calculated corrections on slide rule "N600-ES," manufactured by the Pickett Company...

Slide Rule, 5-inch, Pickett N600-ES, Apollo 13

During the Apollo missions, an on-board computer and large computers on Earth performed the critical guidance and navigation calculations necessary for a successful journey. In addition, crews carried a slide rule for more routine calculations.

airandspace.si.edu

No. the rocket gets licensed and not the payload. Boeing doesn't get the license.
The sextant is the key

 

[Byeman]

And that is why I always chafe at this or that national build being called a "jobs program."

It is a fact. SLS is a jobs program and nothing more. It was conceived without a purpose (payload) and only to employ people in certain districts.

 

[aim9xray]

that wasn’t a flaw. The LM LiOH canisters were also used in the PLSS. Compatibility with the CM would mean they would be too big for the PLSS or too small for the CM(meaning more would have to carried and the crew would have to switch them much more frequently)

Thank you for this. Never before heard the backstory or rationale. Kinda thought that "bonehead mistake/thoughtlessness" might have been too simplistic.