Nik
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 15 July 2009
- Messages
- 1,229
- Reaction score
- 965
I would think (then it is Boeing....) that the Starliner crews' suit measurements are recorded and suits could be built up using those measurements.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).
Is that a software issue, or Boeing for some reason redesigned the hardware too?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.
Given that what I'm hearing about Starliner boils down to "WTF do we keep getting helium leaks?!?" and not "The machine is absolutely not safe for crew to come home in", I'll fly starliner down if NASA wants to send my fat ass up there.So, MOOSE or Starliner--which do you choose?
Thanks for the background history....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)
Airbus. Obvs.
China perhaps ?...Oh yes. For those outside of France I mean.
It's basically the same. NASA and Boeing can't understood what exactly is wrong with Starliner; so they can't actually determine, how safe it would be to use. If they knew the exacts causes of the problem, they could evaluate risks and develope solution to keep risks withing acceptable. But they aren't sure what exactly caused leaks, and so they could not be sure that it would not cause the whole bucket to fell apart.Given that what I'm hearing about Starliner boils down to "WTF do we keep getting helium leaks?!?" and not "The machine is absolutely not safe for crew to come home in", I'll fly starliner down if NASA wants to send my fat ass up there.
That's the problem; they didn't know. It may be something small and mundane - but it also may be something big enough to blow the whole ship apart.The main question I want to know is what behind the cause of the Helium leeks in the first place? There must be something that is causing the issue. I mean it cannot be that hard to look for it and fix it?
Sure. On the ground. In space? If they start to dismantle Starliner's hull from outside to reach helium tanks, they may be able to pinpoint the cause of the issue - and maybe even fix it - but the ship would be in no shape to do anything anymore.There must be something that is causing the issue. I mean it cannot be that hard to look for it and fix it?
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).
Hm. Tesla bots maybe no, but something as manipulator arm, capable of working the controls to at least undock the Starliner may be a viable idea. Send a manipulator with the cargo ship, install it on Starliner control panel, and let it do the "manual" undocking. Then use Canadarm to push Starliner safely away from station (so even if it blow up while attempting to ignite the engines, it would not damage the ISS)Some one on Youtube proposed
SpaceX send old dragon capsule up with two TESLA bots onboard
Who are remote control and bring Starliner down
the Idea is Worth of study
Hm. Tesla bots maybe no, but something as manipulator arm, capable of working the controls to at least undock the Starliner may be a viable idea. Send a manipulator with the cargo ship, install it on Starliner control panel, and let it do the "manual" undocking. Then use Canadarm to push Starliner safely away from station (so even if it blow up while attempting to ignite the engines, it would not damage the ISS)
Design? No, I was thinking about adapting something from commercially-available robotics. Yes, it may not be perfectly suited to zero-g, but would likely do the job.There's no way that would be faster to design and adequately test than adjusting and testing the old unmanned software and pushing that back up to the capsule.
Assuming, of course, that HARDWARE wasn't changed by Boeing. That's what bother me. Considering that Boeing did not tell anyone about software being changed till the problem arise, they may pretty well put other changes, including hardware ones, without reporting them.than adjusting and testing the old unmanned software and pushing that back up to the capsule.
The Cygnus-21 cargo-ship had clothes & underwear and other stuff for the Two on board.I just feel for the crew, 8 day mission turns into 8 months.
How many sets of underwear are you taking for a 8 day mission vs 8 months!
Not going to be easy to cancel holidays, dentist trips etc from orbit!!!
Because you do not mention Lockheed-Martin or Northrop-Grumman, I assume you refer to civilian aircraft. Again, Airbus.should Boeing disappear, who are you going to buy them from? The Russians?
You will find Airbus aircraft are in use by airlines all over the world. I am not saying it would be a good thing if Airbus would become a near monopolist. I am saying Boeing's crisis is mostly of its own making, and Airbus airliners are perfectly viable alternatives to Boeing airliners. Provided Airbus production slots in France, Germany, Spain, the USA, Canada or China are available in time.Oh yes. For those outside of France I mean.
Considering that Boeing did not tell anyone about software being changed till the problem arise, they may pretty well put other changes, including hardware ones, without reporting them.
Which may be something of an open question,Provided Airbus production slots in France, Germany, Spain, the USA, Canada or China are available in time.
Airbus shares drop after profits cut amid growing supply chain issues
The French manufacturer admitted that issues with the supply of engines for its new aircraft would mean it could no longer hit its targets for the year.
Noah Bovenizer June 25, 2024
Provided Airbus production slots in France, Germany, Spain, the USA, Canada or China are available in time.
Perhaps that´s the source of the problem: too much conversation...
Now that's can-do thinking.Some one on Youtube proposed
SpaceX send old dragon capsule up with two TESLA bots onboard
Who are remote control and bring Starliner down
the Idea is Worth of study
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQd2J8RzgAM&t=834s&pp=ygUJc3RhcmxpbmVy
Which may be something of an open question,
![]()
Airbus shares drop after profits cut amid growing supply chain issues
Airbus has cut its profit and delivery forecasts as it continues to struggle with supply chain issues, causing shares to drop dramatically.www.airport-technology.com
No, can not be pushed away from ISS with Canadarm nor could tether be deployed while attached to ISS. Some propulsion is required.With respect, @Byeman, the de-orbit tether could be deployed while 'Starliner' is still attached to ISS port.
Think 'sea anchor': Scant effect on mass of ISS, but significant for modest mass of 'Starliner' after pushed away by Canadarm...
but the seats were.The Soviet spacesuits had a fair degree of standardisation in the sense that they weren't tailored to individuals.