|
Originally Posted by cavuman1
(Post 11682494)
The continued postponement of Starliner's re-entry date concerns me. If helium leaks represented a threat to safe flight, the craft would have been brought home soonest to limit pressure loss. Malfunctioning and non-functioning thrusters are a matter of grave importance. Correct flight attitudes during re-entry are critical; axis excursions might lead to loss of crew. Perhaps there is another glitch of which we are unaware. Do Boeing and NASA know something we don't? Fingers crossed for Butch and Suni.
- Ed - Ed |
Thinking that the mission for Suni and Butch has evolved from 8 day s to 8 months, I'm imagining a NASA recruiting poster saying something like "Join NASA and see the world" - "again, and again, and again.......".
Though I'm certainly not knowledgeable on spacecraft, software, and helium leaks, I do know something about signing on the line saying that an aircraft is fit and safe for fight. I can't blame a staff member somewhere in a suitable safety structure in NASA or Boeing for, in their best conscience, saying "I can't sign on that line with what I know to date". I think back to the congressional investigations following the Apollo 1 fire, where (I believe it was Deke Slayton) said that it was "failure of imagination" "We just did not ever imagine that type of risk". So now, no one wants to be the person who could next be in front of a congressional investigation, admitting that they did not think of a risk - particularly if they work for Boeing! I remember the old pilot saying "it's better to be down here, wishing you were up there, than being up there, wishing you were down here". I guess that that needs to be changed for spaceflight, to say "better to be up there, then on your way back down, wishing you'd stayed up"! |
Out of interest, now that the ISS has two 'extra mouths to feed' so to speak- how much food reserves are carried for such contingencies? What about such mundane things as spare clothes? Toothbrushes? I guess it could be quite a list that two more crew than is planned for could generate?
|
Originally Posted by jimgriff
(Post 11722927)
Out of interest, now that the ISS has two 'extra mouths to feed' so to speak- how much food reserves are carried for such contingencies? What about such mundane things as spare clothes? Toothbrushes? I guess it could be quite a list that two more crew than is planned for could generate?
|
Originally Posted by what next
(Post 11722935)
There have been two uncrewed supply missions in August alone (one Cygnus and one Progress capsule) so I would guess that they packed enough spare socks on these to cater for the needs of "Suni" and "Butch" as well... BTW: For us Europeans, at least for me, it is still totally unusual, that highly respected people like these astronauts are are generally referred to on first name basis. Would the media talk about the president and his vice president as "Joe and Kamala"? Certainly not. Or were Armstrong and Aldrin ever called "Neil and Buzz" while they were on their moon mission? Not that I can remember.
But I understand your point as referring more directly to the public-relations and media settings. I think you're probably correct, in that nicknames or diminutive forms were not generally substituted for the astronauts' full names, for example, Tom Stafford, Frank Borman, Jim Lovell. Still, especially since both Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore are U.S. Navy, recognition must be given here to the late Charles "Pete" Conrad (U.S. Navy/NASA Astronaut) - referred to with his nickname included, frequently in place of his given name. |
Originally Posted by what next
(Post 11722935)
Would the media talk about the president and his vice president as "Joe and Kamala"? Certainly not.
|
Originally Posted by Pilot DAR
(Post 11722872)
Though I'm certainly not knowledgeable on spacecraft, software, and helium leaks, I do know something about signing on the line saying that an aircraft is fit and safe for fight. I can't blame a staff member somewhere in a suitable safety structure in NASA or Boeing for, in their best conscience, saying "I can't sign on that line with what I know to date". I think back to the congressional investigations following the Apollo 1 fire, where (I believe it was Deke Slayton) said that it was "failure of imagination" "We just did not ever imagine that type of risk".
it’s progress that in this case NASA has given itself options. Even if they’d fully appreciated their dire situation, STS-107 had few. Before that, Commander Hoot Gibson, way back on STS-27, was as convinced his crew would perish on reentry and also had few, if any, options. 0918 |
|
Word is it won’t go through - Boeing and LM vastly overvalue what is a company which has lost most of its market to SpaceX already and has more competitors such as Blue Origin rapidly overtaking them.
ULA is the modern day WordPerfect or Kodak…… |
OK - Boeing and NASA and now SpaceX all have plans in place.
What of the rest of us? We need to get roughly 3 Million people into full Gorilla and Orangutan and Chimp-like costumes and be ready to meet those returned from their unexpected stranding in every location they might go. Can we count on support from Uber and Lyft if they are hailed for the rides home? It will be asking a lot, I know, for some to perhaps be shoveling snow in these costumes, but it is so worth the effort. The costumes don't have to be good. Not particularly convincing. They just have to be everywhere. Remember. Apes Together Strong! |
Originally Posted by BlankBox
(Post 11723635)
|
|
"ULA is the modern day WordPerfect or Kodak……"
Hmmm - but WordPerfect was so much better than Word - I spent a happy 45 minutes trying to format a contract last week in Word- just a nightmare |
But it was complex, only really usable by experts, and expensive. It was abandoned by the customer market and the company went under because it had so many overheads and inefficient practices.
You can't beat the market. |
|
|
NASA:
NASA and Boeing teams are "go" to proceed with undocking the uncrewed #Starliner from the @Space_Station on Friday, Sept. 6. Undocking coverage is set to begin at 5:45pm ET (2145 UTC), with Starliner touching down at 12:03am (0403 UTC) on Sept. 7. |
Love the headline reference - and the readers comments are brilliant……
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/0...s-on-saturday/ SUBMARINES IN SPACE — The Starliner spacecraft has started to emit strange noises On Saturday NASA astronaut Butch Wilmore noticed some strange noises emanating from a speaker inside the Starliner spacecraft. "I've got a question about Starliner," Wilmore radioed down to Mission Control, at Johnson Space Center in Houston. "There's a strange noise coming through the speaker ... I don't know what's making it."….. https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....15d67e9787.png |
Everyone is freaking out over this, but there are many logical explanations.
Although Starliner is *most* likely haunted, it could also be aliens, space whales, sophon interference, forever lost cosmonauts banging on the hatch begging to be let in, or simply the Babadook. |
Sound.
That sound is the stop of an hydraulic ram. Pipes are talking. Intermittent high pressure halting against a dam ...a relief valve doing its job...imo
bear |
|
The strange sounds are the plaintiff wailing of Boeing stockholders shrieking "Get us outta here!"
- Ed |
Originally Posted by cavuman1
(Post 11727344)
The strange sounds are the plaintiff wailing of Boeing stockholders shrieking "Get us outta here!"
|
No spooky stuff people...
NASA confirm that it's Audio Feedback. |
Comes home tonight -
Any bets on how many issues in the way home....? |
Uneventful return....
|
During tests of the Starliner crew module's 12 RCS thrusters, before the re-entry burn, one of them failed.
So they have at least one failed thruster to examine and to confirm the cause. (The other failed thrusters all being on the service module which was discarded and burnt up during re-entry) |
In one way (without the weight of two people), it landed perfectly. Hats off to the Chute team :)
It's a shame that - from my understanding - the main, or most, or if any, of the suspect thrusters are meant to be jettisoned (different module?), before re-entry. As there was no human risk, I wonder if it would have been possible to land it with all the 'suspect' thrusters on board? Would have been invaluable information to Boeing and to NASA. ORAC, as per comment above, are you saying that only one thruster got back, as in the '12' should have got back? |
The majority of the failed thrusters were on the service module which was discarded before re-entry and burns up, meaning none could be recovered.
The command module thrusters are only used after the service module has been discarded in order to align and control the capsule during re-entry. There are 12 of these thrusters which were tested prior to re-entry and one failed. That’s not a major problem, they are used in pairs and the remaining 10 were more than adequate for re-entry. But it does mean they have one failed thruster available for strip down and examination, which should allow them to confirm the failure mode which, so far, has been based on ground tests and simulations. |
Short answer, no.
The bad thrusters were on the Service Module. The service module has to be jettisoned to expose the heat shield. If the SM had been left in place it would have begun to burn up during reentry and probably exploded causing further damage and probable loss of the vehicle. |
Starliner POST landing update - only 7mins - but informative...
|
Crew ride home prepping for launch with 2 empty seats…
Falcon 9 B1085-2 for the Crew 9 mission is rolling at KSC ahead of launching two humans to the ISS. It will be launching from SLC-40, as SpaceX utilizes that pad's upgrades for Crew Dragon. |
That’s two more of their launch slots gone - only around 3. Must be a toss up if they pull out rather than spend another few $100M with no prospect of a return on their investment/estment.
NEWS: NASA will no longer use Boeing's Starliner for two crew rotation missions next year, and will instead use @SpaceX’s Crew Dragon for the missions to the International Space Station. https://spacenews.com/nasa-further-d...rliner-flight/ NASA further delays first operational Starliner flight |
Any one want to make a bet?
SUNDAY NEWS: @Boeing’s new CEO Kelly Ortberg says he's looking at “doing less and doing it better,” wanting to focus resources on commercial aircraft and defense divisions — He expects to decide which units are to be divested by year-end. → Starliner program has been marred by years of glitches with more than $1.8 billion in cost overruns and delays despite NASA awarding Boeing nearly twice as much funding as it did to @SpaceX in 2014 — Boeing is still trying to resolve issues experienced during Starliner's test flight in the hope of eventually getting it certified for regular flights. Meanwhile, SpaceX Dragon spacecraft made 43 visits to the ISS since 2019, carrying both crew and cargo for NASA — The agency recently even hired SpaceX to rescue two Americans stuck at the space station, after Starliner’s problems forced the agency to order the vehicle to return to Earth empty. → Boeing and Lockheed Martin have been trying to sell their United Launch Alliance (ULA) joint venture over the past year. In the last decade, Boeing's ULA has fallen behind major technological leaps made by SpaceX, which has slashed the cost of space travel by reusing boosters and building a majority of components in-house. → Boeing’s space portfolio also includes a lucrative contract for NASA’s SLS moon rocket, though it’s expected to cost about $2 billion per launch while SpaceX is working on a much cheaper alternative. SpaceX has recently showcased its revolutionary Raptor 3 engine and, two weeks ago, successfully achieved all the mission goals set forth for Starship Flight 5, including the unprecedented engineering feat of a mid-air capture of its Super Heavy Booster with Mechazilla — and Starship Flight 6 is said to happen very soon. → Boeing may decide to keep some products like spy satellites and the clandestine X-37B space plane. “Boeing was supposed to be the sure bet. If they walk away, it’s a sad thing for America, for competition and for access to space.” said Chad Anderson, Managing Partner of Space Capital |
Things space-wise are not going so well for Boeing.
A Boeing-built geostationary satellite, Intelsat 33e, which had been in use for 8 years failed recently. It's been discovered that it has broken up into many pieces which is unusual for a geostationary telecommunications satellite. They normally have a service life of 15 years. Intelsat is still investigating what caused the in-orbit breakup of Intelsat 33e, the second in a series of four EpicNG (next-generation) high throughput satellites Boeing built for the operator. The first in this series, Intelsat-29e, was declared a total loss in 2019 after three years in orbit. |
What is happening with Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft?
Among the options NASA and Boeing are considering: A Starliner cargo flight. |
Another little nugget buried in there: "Boeing has told NASA it will no longer bid on fixed-price space contracts in the future."
Personally, I think it's flown it's last trip. |
https://spacenews.com/boeing-reports...llars-in-2024/
Boeing reports Starliner losses of more than half a billion dollars in 2024 WASHINGTON — Boeing took more than a half-billion dollars in charges on its CST-100 Starliner program in 2024, bringing its cumulative losses on the commercial crew vehicle to just over $2 billion. In the company’s 10-K annual filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Feb. 3, Boeing said it took $523 million in charges on Starliner in 2024. The company blamed the losses on “schedule delays and higher testing and certification costs as well as higher costs for post certification missions.” The company had reported a $125 million charge in the second quarter and a $250 million charge in the third quarter. The company warned Jan. 23 it would take an additional loss in the fourth quarter but did not disclose a figure when it released its financial results five days later. The annual loss implies a $148 million loss in the fourth quarter. The $523 million in charges is the most Boeing has recorded in a single year on Starliner, exceeding $489 million it reported in 2019. The company’s cumulative charges on Starliner are now just over $2 billion. “Risk remains that we may record additional losses in future periods,” the company stated in the 10-K filing. Boeing executives did not address Starliner in a Jan. 28 earnings call. Neither the company nor NASA have publicly discussed when Starliner might fly again, and whether it would be a crewed or uncrewed test flight versus an operational mission. At a Jan. 30 meeting of NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel, committee members said they had been brief by NASA about the investigation into the problems Starliner experienced during the Crew Flight Test mission. While NASA reported “significant progress” on some issues, the thruster problems that eventually led NASA to bring the spacecraft back uncrewed remain unresolved. “The details shared by NASA gave us confidence that they are focusing on the right core issues and the related path to safely flying Starliner,” Paul Hill, a member of the panel, said at the briefing, but offered no details on when Starliner might fly again. |
I'll be very surprised to ever see that fly again.
|
:ooh::ooh:
So, you probably won't believe how desperate Starliner's flight to the space station got last summer ... https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/0...usters-failed/ https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....80ef165612.png |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:34. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.