Boeing Starliner

[Michel Van]

It Official NASA bring the Crew with Crew Dragon back
Starliner try to leave under Computer control

https://twitter.com/x/status/1827394044701634608

View: https://twitter.com/DJSnM/status/1827394044701634608

 

[_Del_]

I imagine it will probably return fine.

Probably, but with multiple leaks and several recurrences of thruster problems that you don't really understand and can't replicate, there's no reason to risk the crew.

 

[publiusr]

Heck, I can give you guys a ride
"Forget it, Palmer"

I do like the retro layout

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gZ6qnYsZQLA

 

[martinbayer]

Something tells me that If Starliner doesn´t blowup on re-entry, NASA is gonna look stupid.

Better stupid than reckless.

 

[TomcatViP]

Those people already sent two professional astronauts on a mission with a challenged vehicle in term of safe arrival to the ISS without any contingency plans for them to come back or extend their stay. This is reckless by the very definition.

Nasa did not execute their historic test flights that way. If Joe Engle had decided to stir his morning coffee that day counter clockwise, there would have been a flight planner at the HSFC FRC that recalculated the potential impact on the flight trajectory in regard to how the Coriolis acceleration was affected.

(Edited)

 

[Flyaway]

A few more details from the press conference:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1827404506864525378

View: https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1827404506864525378

Stich and Bowersox said NASA has not decided if another Starliner crew test flight will be required. Will work with Boeing afterwards on path forward.

Bowersox: we don't know how much we can use the Starliner thrusters before we encounter a problem; that was key factor in decision to return uncrewed.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1827414393623064940

View: https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1827414393623064940

Nelson sayd "unequivocally" that politics or the upcoming election played no role in the Starliner decision. That concludes the briefing.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1827414342817735066

View: https://twitter.com/spcplcyonline/status/1827414342817735066

Q-did politics play any role in this decision?
Nelson-unequivocally no. NASA is bipartisan, nonpartisan. Decision is about safety.

 

[sferrin]

Boeing said they'd have been willing to bring them back on Starliner but NASA overruled them

 

[Michel Van]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1827423458042454156

View: https://twitter.com/Gwynne_Shotwell/status/1827423458042454156

 

[Grey Havoc]

Q-did politics play any role in this decision?
Nelson-unequivocally no. NASA is bipartisan, nonpartisan. Decision is about safety.

Somehow I rather doubt that.

 

[NMaude]

It is perceived by the public as being unsafe, and therefore NASA management won’t take the ‘political’ risk of using it even if it is actually technically safe to use.

It might end up being used for unscrewed supply-missions to the ISS.

 

[Moose]

Something tells me that If Starliner doesn´t blowup on re-entry, NASA is gonna look stupid.

Very very few people will care if it returns issue-free. Boeing will crow about it a little and NASA will say "better safe than sorry" and most of the world won't even notice. The budget hawks won't even make much of it because they're going to use an existing flight to bring the crew home rather than a dedicated rescue flight. More people would raise a stink if it came back crewed and had no issues, because that would look like a gamble with their lives.

 

[Moose]

It might end up being used for unscrewed supply-missions to the ISS.

I think it will get crew missions if it has a safe return. NASA doesn't want to give up on it, Boeing still wants to get paid. It's always going to have people looking at it sideways, but a safe return keeps the door open for it to have a career.

 

[NMaude]

The Space Bucket has a video about NASA picking SpaceX toreturn Starliner crew to Earth:

After over two months in space, constant ground testing, and general back and forth between the agency and Boeing, a decision was finally made. SpaceX is now responsible for returning Butch and Suni from the ISS, the two astronauts who launched on Boeing’s Starliner apart of the spacecraft’s first crewed flight test.

During a news conference held earlier today, NASA confirmed the decision and provided additional context into exactly what it means. Here I will go more in-depth into the switch, NASA’s reasoning, what this means for Starliner, and more.

Full article here - https://thespacebucket.com/nasa-just-...

Chapters:
0:00 - Intro
0:29 - Starliner To Dragon

 

[_Del_]

Every decision NASA makes is a political one. Not L-R politics, but there are at least four positions that are appointed and need Senate confirmation, and they have to consider Congressional reaction in every decision because the House is in charge of the budget.
Killing two astronauts when you know you have problems you can't understand or replicate is going to kill the program in Congress, regardless of how badly they want Starliner.
This decision covers their tail politically. Boeing maintains Starliner is safe for reentry, and they'll get a chance to prove it. If it fails to deorbit or burns up, the program can still survive. Failure will hardly make a blip right now on the news cycle or Boeing's reputation. Success obviously won't hurt the program, and saying, "Better safe than sorry with our astronauts lives" will always be an answer that diffused questions.

Assuming the program survives, they should do the next flight unmanned, bring up some cargo. Then before they deorbit, deliberately abuse the thrusters and see if they can get a handle on when/why the thrusters are failing since they cannot reproduce the problem on the ground. And see how many you can lose and still maintain a safe deorbit burn and maintain attitude. Even if they cannot get a handle on "why", if they get enough data on "when", it'd make future green lights a lot more likely. And if your goal is to abuse it first, then no-one cares if that one comes back safely or not. You're just gathering data.

Bottom-line is no-one likes "We're not quite sure why, but we're extremely confident it won't be a problem" after 5/28 thrusters experience failure on your first crewed flight to ISS. It'd be nice to know more about the helium leaks if you plan on being up there for several months in the future, too, but the priority now should be nailing down why your thrusters are overheating and unpredictable. If you can't reproduce it on the ground, you need to go abuse it in space and make it happen. Figure out the limits even if you can't figure out the cause precisely.

 

[Byeman]

Not exactly, since NASA and Boeing still aren't sure what exactly went wrong. On-planet tests and models did not correspond with data from orbit. And considering the number of problems ALREADY observed, it's not impossible that there might be other, more serious problems that just weren't found yet.

Wrong. The issue wasn't anything close to blowing up. It was just the thrusters working reliability.

 

[NMaude]

I think it will get crew missions if it has a safe return.

I was referring to this specific command module.

 

[Moose]

I was referring to this specific command module.

The failures have been with the service module.

 

[NMaude]

The failures have been with the service module.

I know, NASA management might be feeling a bit overly cautious with crew safety. Keep in mind there's the 1986 Challenger disaster and the 2003 Columbia accident with both resulting total crew loss.

 

[Byeman]

Those people already sent two professional astronauts on a mission with a challenged vehicle in term of safe arrival to the ISS without any contingency plans for them to come back or extend their stay. This is reckless by the very definition.

That would be wrong.
a. It was not a "challenged"vehicle. And nothing like the Saturn V after Apollo 6.
b. There were contingency plans like extending the stay, returning on another vehicle or even returning on Starliner if necessary. The large margins of the ISS life support capability meant that nothing had to be on the books before they launched.

Nasa did not execute their historic test flights that way. If Joe Engle had decided to stir his morning coffee that day counter clockwise, there would have been a flight planner at the HSFC that recalculated the potential impact on the flight trajectory in regard to how the Coriolis acceleration was affected.

BS and not true. And what the hell is HSFC?

 

[Byeman]

Somehow I rather doubt that.

that would be wrong

 

[Archibald]

NASA’s Starliner decision was the right one, but it’s a crushing blow for Boeing

It's unlikely Boeing can fly all six of its Starliner missions before retirement of the ISS in 2030.

arstechnica.com

Sweet Jesus. NASA has made the right decision. We shall see on September 6 how Boeing flawed death trap handle undocking, reentry and landing.

 

[Dilandu]

Wrong. The issue wasn't anything close to blowing up. It was just the thrusters working reliability.

Yeah, and considering that neither NASA nor Boeing could figure out what exactly wrong with thrusters - how could anyone be sure that the issue is not of "blowing up" type? Again: the core of the problem is NOT the thrusters malfunction themselves; the core of the problem is that nobody could actually understood what's wrong with the boosters. And therefore nobody could be sure how serious the problem is.

 

[Scott Kenny]

BS and not true. And what the hell is HSFC?

Houston Space Flight Center

 

[Archibald]

Except it is usually called JSC : Johnson Space Center

 

[publiusr]

Abbey’s Alcatraz

I can just hear that tyrant’s solution:

“February? I’m not paying you to stay until 2025–get back here, if you have to jump…oh, get Jerry on the next Starliner—I want to hear Linenger scream.”

 

[Flyaway]

The sorry state of Boeing.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1827549178806816957

View: https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1827549178806816957

The decision to firewall the Boeing prop engineers from the AJR prop team was, in retrospect, perhaps a mad management decision.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1827540463437365664

View: https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1827540463437365664

The Boeing culture, I'm sorry, it's broken. As Doug told me for Reentry, after the White Sands test failure in 2018, Boeing hid the failure from the crew for weeks. In contrast, when Dragon exploded in 2019, Lee Rosen texted him minutes after the accident.

More here:

NASA’s Starliner decision was the right one, but it’s a crushing blow for Boeing

It's unlikely Boeing can fly all six of its Starliner missions before retirement of the ISS in 2030.

arstechnica.com

NASA’s Starliner decision was the right one, but it’s a crushing blow for Boeing
It's unlikely Boeing can fly all six of its Starliner missions before retirement of the ISS in 2030.

 

[TomcatViP]

HSFS: High Speed Flight Station
FRC: Fight Research Center (HSFS was transitioned into the FRC in 1959)

FRC were in charge of planning the flight trajectory with the hosted Simulator during the X-15 program.

HSFC: unexpected contraption of the two.

 

[NMaude]

Abbey’s Alcatraz

Abbey's Alcatraz?

The decision to firewall the Boeing prop engineers from the AJR prop team

I assume prop is the Boeing propulsion group and AJR is Aerojet-Rocketdyne?

perhaps a mad management decision.

Time to purge the senior Boeing management of the bean-counters running the show* and replace them with managers who have an engineering background.

* Joe Sutter must be spinning in his grave.

 

[Rhinocrates]

The sorry state of Boeing.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1827549178806816957

View: https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1827549178806816957

https://twitter.com/x/status/1827540463437365664

View: https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1827540463437365664



More here:

NASA’s Starliner decision was the right one, but it’s a crushing blow for Boeing

It's unlikely Boeing can fly all six of its Starliner missions before retirement of the ISS in 2030.

arstechnica.com

Hopefully a series of damn good kicks up the arse will be what Boeing needs to decide to fix itself. One failure will be ignored, two will be ignored, three will be ignored, four... well... maybe the message will get through, but give them another kick to make sure and remember that people have died. Still, it will take a while for the results to be seen, whatever they are.

 

[Rhinocrates]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4uivPpzCGo

 

[TomcatViP]

That would be wrong.
a. It was not a "challenged"vehicle. And nothing like the Saturn V after Apollo 6.
b. There were contingency plans like extending the stay, returning on another vehicle or even returning on Starliner if necessary. The large margins of the ISS life support capability meant that nothing had to be on the books before they launched.



BS and not true. And what the hell is HSFC?

There was not much of contingency plans. No one in his sane mind deliberately plans to fall short of underwear.

Also, please, if you had seriously read that coffee stirring could affect earth gravity gradient, you might want to lower your morning intake...

 

[Byeman]

There was not much of contingency plans. No one in his sane mind deliberately plans to fall short of underwear.

Not much more is needed for contingency long term plans. No different than going on a two week vacation and having it extend for weeks. You don't pack for that. You go buy more underwear, go to the Laundromat or have more sent from home. It doesn't have to be specifically preplanned. What else would you expect to be in a long term contingency plan?

There are dozens of immediate or near term contingency plans.

 

[Michel Van]

This not age well...

...Boeing in 2024

 

[southwestforests]

Houston Space Flight Center

Since the G and H keys are immediately adjacent I read it as a typo of GSFC, Goddard Spaceflight Center.

Goddard Space Flight Center - NASA

Goddard is home to the nation’s largest organization of scientists, engineers and technologists who build spacecraft, instruments and new technology to study Earth, the Sun, our solar system and the universe for NASA.

www.nasa.gov

Goddard is NASA’s premiere space flight complex and home to the nation’s largest organization of scientists, engineers, and technologists who build spacecraft, instruments, and new technology to study Earth, the Sun, our solar system, and the universe.

 

[Flyaway]

Scott Manley’s take:

View: https://youtu.be/VvaSRfpW5iY

 

[samardza]

Hopefully a series of damn good kicks up the arse will be what Boeing needs to decide to fix itself. One failure will be ignored, two will be ignored, three will be ignored, four... well... maybe the message will get through, but give them another kick to make sure and remember that people have died. Still, it will take a while for the results to be seen, whatever they are.

Here is an idea, it's short notice, but as it's already designed it may be doable.
Look into NG or LM to second source the service module.

 

[Byeman]

Also, please, if you had seriously read that coffee stirring could affect earth gravity gradient, you might want to lower your morning intake...

I was referring to the quick reaction that you think HSFS had.

 

[Byeman]

Here is an idea, it's short notice, but as it's already designed it may be doable.
Look into NG or LM to second source the service module.

No, Boeing is not going to subcontract the service module construction. And it is doesn't solve the issue. It is a design problem between Boeing and its sub,

 

[TomS]

So, I just had an odd realization. If Starliner CFT undocks on September 6 and Crew-9 launches NET September 24, doesn't that leave the CFT crew without an life boat option at all for almost 3 weeks? I think their only contingency would be to improvise seats in the Crew-8 capsule, as was considered when Soyuz MS-22 was having difficulties.

 

[_Del_]

So, I just had an odd realization. If Starliner CFT undocks on September 6 and Crew-9 launches NET September 24, doesn't that leave the CFT crew without an life boat option at all for almost 3 weeks? I think their only contingency would be to improvise seats in the Crew-8 capsule, as was considered when Soyuz MS-22 was having difficulties.

That is the plan. They are jury-rigging seats just in case.