Boeing Starliner
Discussion
Itsallicanafford said:
FMOB said:
LivLL said:
FMOB said:
Just keeps getting worse for Boeing, looks like a satellite they built has just fallen apart in space..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8d886l028o
Was is hit? It's been up there eight years already.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8d886l028o
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq55ww5j7e2o.amp
A satellite built by a key US company is lost, a few weeks before a US election…
Edited by Itsallicanafford on Wednesday 23 October 12:35
FMOB said:
LivLL said:
FMOB said:
Just keeps getting worse for Boeing, looks like a satellite they built has just fallen apart in space..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8d886l028o
Was is hit? It's been up there eight years already.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8d886l028o
Could have exploded I guess.
ChocolateFrog said:
FMOB said:
LivLL said:
FMOB said:
Just keeps getting worse for Boeing, looks like a satellite they built has just fallen apart in space..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8d886l028o
Was is hit? It's been up there eight years already.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8d886l028o
Could have exploded I guess.
One can imagine the conversation, yes sir we can only offer a repair, can you return the unit?
ChocolateFrog said:
How else could something fall apart in space that has negligible forces acting on it?
Could have exploded I guess.
Satellites have on board fuel reservoirs and tanks in order to be able to fire their manoeuvering thrusters. From time to time these can malfunction and occasionally cause an explosion.Could have exploded I guess.
Beati Dogu said:
Like several other US corporations recently, Boeing has just got rid of their DEI department. Hopefully it’s not too late for them.
They’re also looking to offload their space business and the jointly owned ULA (with Lockheed Martin)
Reorganising their HR structure to remove DEI roles is window dressing to please a few noisy activists. It will make no difference to the company at all. They’re also looking to offload their space business and the jointly owned ULA (with Lockheed Martin)
DEI was not the cause of Boeing's problems ...
Thread revival!
From Ars Technica's Eric Berger, but is now being posted widely.
NASA "ended months of speculation about the next flight of Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft, confirming Monday that the vehicle will carry only cargo to the International Space Station.
...NASA also said it has reached an agreement with Boeing to modify the Commercial Crew contract, signed in 2014, that called for six crewed flights to the space station following certification of the spacecraft. Now the plan is to fly Starliner-1 carrying cargo, and then up to three additional missions before the space station is retired."
From Ars Technica's Eric Berger, but is now being posted widely.
NASA "ended months of speculation about the next flight of Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft, confirming Monday that the vehicle will carry only cargo to the International Space Station.
...NASA also said it has reached an agreement with Boeing to modify the Commercial Crew contract, signed in 2014, that called for six crewed flights to the space station following certification of the spacecraft. Now the plan is to fly Starliner-1 carrying cargo, and then up to three additional missions before the space station is retired."
Reddit has some numbers on this:
SpaceX is contracted for 14 missions for 56 astronauts, +2 (Bob and Doug) that were part of Demo-2, so total of 58 people to the ISS, for $4.93b + 525m development costs (CCDev2 + CCiCap contracts) = $5.455b, or $94m per astronaut delivered. They will actually deliver 54 astronauts and return 56 as Crew-9 had to leave two crew members behind to bring home Barry Wilmore and Sunita Williams.
Boeing will have delivered 14 astronauts up for $3.8bn + $562m development costs = $4.342bn, or $310m per astronaut delivered, or $362m per astronaut delivered and returned.
In comparison, NASA paid ~$90m per astronaut for Soyuz, or $64-185m per astronaut for a full Space Shuttle (although this isn't a good comparison)
SpaceX is contracted for 14 missions for 56 astronauts, +2 (Bob and Doug) that were part of Demo-2, so total of 58 people to the ISS, for $4.93b + 525m development costs (CCDev2 + CCiCap contracts) = $5.455b, or $94m per astronaut delivered. They will actually deliver 54 astronauts and return 56 as Crew-9 had to leave two crew members behind to bring home Barry Wilmore and Sunita Williams.
Boeing will have delivered 14 astronauts up for $3.8bn + $562m development costs = $4.342bn, or $310m per astronaut delivered, or $362m per astronaut delivered and returned.
In comparison, NASA paid ~$90m per astronaut for Soyuz, or $64-185m per astronaut for a full Space Shuttle (although this isn't a good comparison)
RacingStripes said:
Mental that they found the sample rate of data and storage capability on IFT1 and 2 weren't sufficient to detect anomalies. You would think those would be absolutely covered in many of the finest sensors known to man. With some pretty large hard drives.
What does that mean in layman’s term and how did it affect the mission?I think he's suggesting that computers are the solution to everything. In reality, OVER RELIANCE on computers leads to slackness, sloppy thinking and the missing of details that should have been picked up by HUMANS applying their technical knowledge and skills.
The problems with Starliner are a microcosm of the general problems we are having with people expecting software systems to do all the donkey work. Eventually, such thinking leads to dead people.
The problems with Starliner are a microcosm of the general problems we are having with people expecting software systems to do all the donkey work. Eventually, such thinking leads to dead people.
LivLL said:
RacingStripes said:
Mental that they found the sample rate of data and storage capability on IFT1 and 2 weren't sufficient to detect anomalies. You would think those would be absolutely covered in many of the finest sensors known to man. With some pretty large hard drives.
What does that mean in layman s term and how did it affect the mission?For example, if the instrumentation had a sample rate of once per second, but the anomaly only lasted 1/10th of a second, then there's a 90% chance the anomaly would not be detected.
In the past sample rates were often quite low due to limited storage for the data, often on tape recorders, but with modern data storage capabilities that is no longer a viable excuse
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff