Boeing Screws Up Again

Boeing was supposed to launch it Starliner space transport capsule On Tuesday August 3

The launch was scrubbed when engineers discovered an unusual configuration of valves in the service module propulsion system

This follows a failed test flight in December 2019 where a timing issue between the booster and spacecraft resulted in the spacecraft randomly firing its thrusters and expending its fuel so could not dock with ISS

Nasa later found some 80 deficiencies with Boeing software, some so serious were the problems that could have caused loss of capsule and crew had it been manned

NASA has paid Boeing 4.6 billion, 400 million over the original contract price Space X Crew Dragon only got 2.6 billion

Think it is time we sh*tcan this turkey and move on ............

a reply to: firerescue

They don't know if the electrical storm the night before had anything to do with the problem or not.

a reply to: firerescue

That sounds like sabotage to me. How many Chinese do they have working there for them or in contractual positions? Once is an accident, twice is a coincidence, 80+ times is sabotage...

a reply to: firerescue

Sounds like someone is betting against Boeing in the Market .

Someone that has enough power to keep causing these Screw ups.

Follow the money

a reply to: firerescue

yet ANOTHER EXAMPLE of MANY why its time to realize that this isnt the NASA of the "right stuff" era but ANOTHER bloated, mismanaged , wasteful , fraudulent, more concerned with power/greed/and who can we shake down taxpayer fleecing government agency.

its time to totally burn to the ground (figuratively) NASA and start over

along with realize the private sector can do a better, faster , cheaper and more efficient job of next level of space tech and travel. Especially given the clearly financial benefits to them..

now there is a place for a new NASA for research and exploration... but not total domination and control.

for crying out loud this NASA program is overbudget and so far behind schedule it isnt even funny.

Hell there are two private companies that not only have WORKING space vehicles, but getting ready for people to do space travel (yes limited trip) while this TURKEY isnt even past prototype/ testing stage.

how many examples do you need to be hit with up the side of the head before you cancel this and STOP WASTING TAXPAYER MONEY.

scrounger

a reply to: scrounger

Uhm....this is the private sector. This is Boeing's attempt to match the SpaceX Crew Dragon capsule. NASA is paying for it, but this is all on Boeing and their inability to do anything right lately. NASA also helped pay to develop the Crew Dragon. Both were developed under the Commercial Crew Program.

a reply to: NightFlight

Boeing doesn't need anyone to sabotage them lately. Their KC-46 is a complete disaster, the T-7A is running into problems, the 787 has halted deliveries over construction issues, the 737 Max problems, and the Starliner failed to meet pretty much any of their goals, other than getting into space, on the first flight. Now this.

a reply to: firerescue

I think as far as astronauts are concerned Id much prefer starliner over the dragon capsule. For one none of the starliners have blown up the same cant be said for the Dragon capsule. Space ex has the coolest however they change its design every time they rebuild one even NASA at this point has asked them to settle on a design.

Next reusability Boeing has that by far being able to be reused up to 10 times. Dragon is only rated for 1 launch with human passengers then it gets to do payload only and even then its reuse is limited to 3 times. Boeing is trying to design a craft so anyone can launch into space they envision a spaceport where people could buy tickets just like an airport.

Next starship is a variety of launch systems it can be cargo manned launch they have a moon variant and a deep-space version and even one that can deliver fuel to other starships in orbit. Each is set up for a specific task. A dragon capsule in its current configurations is not going to get you to mars.

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow
a reply to: firerescue

Sounds like someone is betting against Boeing in the Market .

Someone that has enough power to keep causing these Screw ups.

Follow the money

Boeing betted against itself when it allowed McDonell Douglas to take over Boeing management during the merger that Boeing payed with ITS OWN MONEY!!

Boeing used to be a engineering driven company that would place R&D over profit prior to the merger.

McDonell Douglas was a profit driven company that happen to have some nice planes and government contracts.

Boeing buys MD but brings in all their executive team and Boeing had been a shell of its former self ever since.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: scrounger

Uhm....this is the private sector. This is Boeing's attempt to match the SpaceX Crew Dragon capsule. NASA is paying for it, but this is all on Boeing and their inability to do anything right lately. NASA also helped pay to develop the Crew Dragon. Both were developed under the Commercial Crew Program.

um hate to point out that the boeing program was BEFORE and part of NASA manned space program

they only opened it up to other companies due to how badly behind and overbudget they have been all this time
with the added pressure that unless we use russia we were not getting men / women into space

in fact i think you will find that boeing contract is government run where the others were given specs and hands off..

but for sake of discussion lets say all were under same hands off program

why in hell if two have succeeded to the point of being a realistic (but expensive) civilian tourist activity that you are STILL PUMPING taxpayer money into this clearly overbudget and behind schedule program..

NASA (as other government agencies) cant cancel projects that are clear failures and keep pumping money to it..

as i state, its just another agency that cares more which "important people" think , protect their own power and budgets over using taxpayer money in most cost effective RESPONCIBLE way.

after the on budget and time (give or take but especially compared to this Charley Foxtrot) of these two companies what more proof do you need NASA as an organization needs to be "burned to the ground" (not litterally) and everyone fired.
then hire those not responsible for this mess

scrounger

a reply to: scrounger

Uhm, I hate to point out that you're wrong. Starliner wasn't designed until they were awarded the initial contract for the Commercial Crew Program in 2010. Boeing, SpaceX, Sierra Nevada, and Blue Origin were initially selected, with SpaceX and Boeing eventually being downselected as the final two. SpaceX received $75M for Crew Dragon and a manned Falcon 9, Sierra Nevada received $80M for Dream Chaser, Blue Origin got $22M for their capsule, and Boeing got $92.3M for Starliner.

Under CCiCap, SpaceX received $440M, Sierra Nevada $212.5M, and Boeing $460M with Blue Origin dropping out. In 2014, SpaceX and Boeing received $2.6B and $4.2B respectively, after NASA didn't select Sierra Nevada at the end of CCtCap. Starliner was never the sole craft being developed, and never had cost overruns so bad that they had to open up the program to other companies.

As for the "two that have succeeded" only one has. SpaceX is the only one that has successfully gone into space, and docked with the ISS. Both the Virgin and Blue Origin flights didn't go into orbit, and were technically suborbital. SpaceX has the unmanned Dragon, and the manned Crew Dragon, but no one else is going into orbit. As I pointed out earlier, Boeing has managed to screw up just about every program they have touched in the last 15 years or more. And space flight is far harder than flight.

Boeing has been working on the core stage of the SLS, which was part of the NASA manned space program. That had nothing to do with Starliner, and that program accounted for almost half of the $11.9B that had been spent on the program as of 2018.

a reply to: Zaphod58

ill admit got some of my timeline wrong the main issue still stands.

NASA has bungled manned space program

for example you mentioned the SLS program

that STILL has not had a working system in any way all this time and money spent.

while as you stated the companies have gone sub orbital and only one has gotten to the space station..

NASA darling project that was supposed to be ALREADY doing this is still so far behind and overbudget to be a joke

we are in agreement that boeing could not fly a kite on a windy day with a balloon assist take off.

but the issue still stands NASA id say after skylab and outside of some of the probes has been a overbudget , underperforming (when they do have something) and behind schedule cluster flock.

in the rush the old NASA (tragically) only lost three astronauts.
the current lost TWO whole shuttle crews and space ships.. all by even the most stringent criteria though GROSS incompetence and criminal negligence..
with still much denial, diverting blame and no one held accountable.

yet even at sub orbital and one orbital the three companies have done MORE and in shorter amount of time on (relatively) their own over the whole NASA program to this date within (again give or take) on budget.

as you pointed out the SLS program still hasnt (to my knowledge) even gotten off the damn ground.. no matter what companies have worked on it..

every mistake, overrun , change, ect is costing taxpayers BILLIONS...

its time to admit NASA needs to be redone from the ground up and STOP PAYING FOR overbudget and behind schedule programs..
if something is going off the rails, needs to be addressed and if needed STOPPED DEAD much sooner than is currently done... or to be honest ususally never stopped unless pushed hard.

scrounger

a reply to: Zaphod58

Thats why they make lightning arrestor and grounding cables .........

a reply to: firerescue

Which doesn't guarantee that a bolt doesn't hit just right and cause some damage. I've seen aircraft that were properly grounded take minor damage to systems from lighting strikes. Lighting arrestors and grounding reduce the odds of damage significantly, but there is still a chance of taking damage.

What caused the valves to malfunction isn’t clear, although Boeing said in an earlier statement that they had ruled out software problems. One possibility is damage such as water intrusion during a severe thunderstorm shortly after the rocket was rolled out to the pad Aug. 2.

spacenews.com...

Strange the X37B has had a relatively hassle free run so far.

edit: useless banter

a reply to: dragonridr

I disagree and your information is out dated, the Dragon capsules have since been certified for being reused on manned missions. The latest manned(Crew 2) mission used the same capsule that was used for SpaceX first manned mission.

One of the Starliner's first would be Astronauts retired early after the first Starliner failure, though he said it was for family reasons it gives the impression that the astronauts do not trust Boeing.

SoaceX tests to failure, that is what happened with the Dragon capsule that exploded during testing. SoaceX fixed the problem and has since launched 10 people to the ISS on three launches. It is by all professional assessments much safer that the Space Shuttle. No one is making the same claim about the Starliner.

The only thing the Starliner can do and is needed for from the American side is boost up burns, that is using it's engines to push the ISS into a higher orbit, something it needs periodically as it slowly loses altitude, the SpaceX Dragon is not capable of this.

I think Boeing's Starliner will be scrapped if it fails again. Likely the Dream Chaser by Sierra Nevada will be given a chance as it has a space plane that has been awarded cargo mission contracts and would not take much to become human rated, not only can it perform the boost up burns, it also lands softly like the Space Shuttle on a runway this is ideal for sensitive experiments, no current space craft currently offers this.

a reply to: jrod

Problem with Dream Chaser is that it uses an Atlas V as its booster, same as Boeing Starliner. The Atlas V is being retired
next year when authority to purchase the Russian RD-180 engines expires.

Dream Chaser can also use ULA (United Launch Alliance - Boeing/Lockheed-Marin) Vulcan heavy lifter .

Problem here is Blue Origin Be-4 Met/Lox engine - which like Boeing SLS is billions over budget and years late . Was Supposed to fly in 2017, now scheduled for 2022.

Blue Origin was founded by Jeff "Space Cadet" Bezos, who recently steeped down as CEO of Amazon to concentrate
on Blue Origin

The capsule has been destacked and will be returned to the factory. The remaining four valves will have to undergo deeper repair, possibly including replacing wiring and other related systems. It's suspected that the high humidity of Florida caused moisture to get into the system and cause the problems, but no external corrosion was found. The delay puts the Commercial Crew Program on indefinite hold.

www.techtimes.com...