Boeing Starliner

Author
Discussion

RobDickinson

31,343 posts

253 months

Thursday 4th August 2016
quotequote all
Its a fixed price contract so they I assume would try avoid unnecessary pork?

Flooble

5,565 posts

99 months

Thursday 4th August 2016
quotequote all
You'd have hoped so, but they are old hands at "change control" and extracting extra cash, very easy to do when your customer has no other options. Not so easy when your customer can just tell you "that's all you get, we'll go elsewhere". Hence why it doesn't seem like these late issues are such a big deal.

Eric Mc

121,779 posts

264 months

Thursday 4th August 2016
quotequote all
60 years ago, rockets and missiles were being built by many more companies than today - Northrop, Convair, Martin, Boeing, Hughes, Douglas, McDonnell, Ryan, Lockheed etc so there was a large element of competition. That all disappeared with the company mergers of the 60s to the 90s leaving only two big suppliers.

With the advent of SpaceX and other new players, at least some element of competition has been restored.

Simpo Two

85,149 posts

264 months

Thursday 4th August 2016
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
60 years ago, rockets and missiles were being built by many more companies than today - Northrop, Convair, Martin, Boeing, Hughes, Douglas, McDonnell, Ryan, Lockheed etc so there was a large element of competition. That all disappeared with the company mergers of the 60s to the 90s leaving only two big suppliers.

With the advent of SpaceX and other new players, at least some element of competition has been restored.
The difference as I see it, though may be wrong, is that the older companies you list were 'proper' companies that were ultimately working for Government contracts. The new ones seem to be individual internet billionares playing; I find it hard to take them seriously.

Flooble

5,565 posts

99 months

Thursday 4th August 2016
quotequote all
Interesting take on things Simpo. Given that the "proper aerospace company" Boeing Starliner so far has achieved ... well ... nothing. While the "internet plaything" SpaceX Dragon is regularly shipping cargo to the ISS.

Eric Mc

121,779 posts

264 months

Thursday 4th August 2016
quotequote all
The world has changed since the 50s. If an individual starts a company out of an enthusiasm rather than pure financial imperative, then that's the way it is.

If you look at the foundation of companies like Lockheed, Martin, Boeing etc in the first quarter of the 20th century, they were created by enthusiastic individuals captivated by the world of flight. It was only later that they became large industrial concerns.

I also always liken North American Aviation Inc to the types of Californian companies that are now big into computing and the internet. If you look at the age range and shere exuberance and cockiness of the people who founded NAA in the 1930s, you can see parallels.

MartG

Original Poster:

20,622 posts

203 months

Thursday 4th August 2016
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
The difference as I see it, though may be wrong, is that the older companies you list were 'proper' companies that were ultimately working for Government contracts.
All those 'proper' companies started off in a similar way to SpaceX, often driven by one person. The clue is in the company names - Jack Northrop, Glenn Martin, Billy Boeing, Allan and Malcolm Loughead ( Lockheed ) etc. wink

Beati Dogu

8,862 posts

138 months

Thursday 4th August 2016
quotequote all
There was also Howard Hughes, who started with a mining tool company he inherited from his father as a teenager.

Boeing actually used to be a logging company, which is why they're located in the Pacific northwest.

Eric Mc

121,779 posts

264 months

Thursday 4th August 2016
quotequote all
William Boeing sold out quite early on. The real genius behind Boeing was Bill Allen - who saw it grow to the powerhouse it eventually became.

scubadude

2,618 posts

196 months

Thursday 4th August 2016
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
William Boeing sold out quite early on. The real genius behind Boeing was Bill Allen - who saw it grow to the powerhouse it eventually became.
I Saw what you did there, nice logging reference... from small acorns etc ;-)

Eric Mc

121,779 posts

264 months

Thursday 4th August 2016
quotequote all
Not to mention hydro-electricity.

MartG

Original Poster:

20,622 posts

203 months

Thursday 13th October 2016
quotequote all
Seems they've found a fix for the aero-acoustic problem

http://www.ulalaunch.com/ula-and-boeing-unveil-atl...


Eric Mc

121,779 posts

264 months

Thursday 13th October 2016
quotequote all
Piccy -


MartG

Original Poster:

20,622 posts

203 months

Thursday 13th October 2016
quotequote all
The fix seems to have been to add a skirt to the base of the spacecraft

MartG

Original Poster:

20,622 posts

203 months

Wednesday 3rd May 2017
quotequote all
Starliner's RCS thrusters have passed qualification testing

http://www.spaceflightinsider.com/organizations/bo...

MartG

Original Poster:

20,622 posts

203 months

Friday 13th October 2017
quotequote all
Atlas V launcher for unmanned Starliner test flight being prepared



pic from Boeing

More info http://www.boeing.com/space/starliner/

MartG

Original Poster:

20,622 posts

203 months

Friday 27th October 2017
quotequote all
Centaur stage adapter with avionics being installed



Starliner support structure in progress.


MartG

Original Poster:

20,622 posts

203 months

MartG

Original Poster:

20,622 posts

203 months

Wednesday 14th February 2018
quotequote all
Starliner training article at Houston, along with the Orion one. No Dragon capsule one there as training is done in house by SpaceX



Though there is a mockup of the stowage compartment for cargo Dragon there



Edited by MartG on Wednesday 14th February 18:43

MartG

Original Poster:

20,622 posts

203 months

Sunday 18th March 2018
quotequote all
Rocketdyne has delivered Starliner's re-entry thrusters

http://www.rocket.com/article/aerojet-rocketdyne-s...