Boeing/NASA Starliner still stuck at ISS, plagued by multiple problems

[Ace-Garageguy]

 

[MeatMan]

5 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

 

I didn't get through it all but its sad to see what Boeing has become.
Their QC people don't seem to have a grasp of ...well, quality control.
Management seems to be totally lacking in the production and engineering areas.
I just hope their new CEO can fix the mess before its too late.

[Brian Austin]

Space missions always have problems.  This mission was a shakedown cruise.

Astronaut Suni Williams came from my hometown, and there is a school named after her.

[Ace-Garageguy]

1 hour ago, Brian Austin said:

Space missions always have problems.  This mission was a shakedown cruise.

Ummmm...look at what Nasa/Boeing have spent vs. what they've accomplished, and then look at what ol' Elon has spent vs. what he's accomplished.

Sorry, but they're not even playing in the same league.

EDIT: And, ummmmm...in 1969 we (meaning the USA) could get multiple crews to the moon and home safely, including one somewhat eventful flight that needed a few "duct-tape" repairs on the return trip...but it still got home, on time.

If you recall, those were the days before fully developed CAD/CAE/CAM capability, and apps to flush the toilet.

Thinking something hasn't been lost somewhere along the line in some quarters is just delusional.

Edited August 17, 2024 by Ace-Garageguy
CLARITY

[1930fordpickup]

The problem today is every decision is based on money. Not what will be better in 10 years but what will help the spread sheet this month. 

Bringing more fuel to the fire of those who question we were ever there. Way to go Boeing and the rest that are having the same problems 50 years later with better tech..

[Brian Austin]

FWIW...What are the astronauts doing while they're at the ISS?

https://www.space.com/boeing-starliner-astronauts-iss-duties-nasa

 

"...In the meantime, however, Wilmore and Williams have been tasked to other activities on the ISS. They knew what they were signing up for. Both are former U.S. Navy test pilots with experience in developmental programs and long deployments, and that's a large reason they were selected for this current mission, known as Crew Flight Test (CFT).

...

The astronauts were "fully trained" on all ISS duties, meaning Williams and Wilmore have been doing extra maintenance and a large share of science during their time on board. Appropriately sized spacesuits were set aside if the astronauts are asked to take on extra-vehicular activities. As for the supplies, the ISS always has a four-month contingency of food, oxygen and other critical items that Williams and Wilmore have been using. "

Edited August 18, 2024 by Brian Austin

[bobthehobbyguy]

And in their spare time they are tearing up sheets to make a long rope to get back.

[OldTrucker]

My guess would be they are saying, "no way" to getting back in that piece of soon to be space junk! LoL

[bobthehobbyguy]

What baffles me was the decision to OK the mission when there were known problems. It's different if there was an unanticipated problem while in space.

The Challenger disaster happen because the o-rings failed because of a known weakness becuase of the cold. You'd think they would have been more cautious.

[stavanzer]

7 minutes ago, bobthehobbyguy said:

What baffles me was the decision to OK the mission when there were known problems. It's different if there was an unanticipated problem while in space.

The Challenger disaster happen because the o-rings failed because of a known weakness because of the cold. You'd think they would have been more cautious.

Yeah, but that is not how they do things anymore, either at Woeing or NASA. The Image is more important than the Substance. Now that the Astronauts are indeed "stuck" they are trying to cover up the issue and insist that "Nobody is Stuck", they just have to wait until the Starliner completes a few more tests before it is safe to come home in.

I'll make a prediction on how this ends. The Un-Manned Starliner will eventually be jettisoned turn 'burn up in orbit' (i.e. Hide the Evidence), and Musk's Crew Dragon will be used to bring everybody home. But, it will take a long time, and the NASA spokesperson's nose will grow a bit longer with every news conference.

[Brian Austin]

Oh, lighten up people.  Conspiracy theories aren't helpful.

 

In other news, Sunita Williams participated in a California-based triathalon.

https://www.space.com/17643-space-triathlon-astronaut-sunita-williams.html

[bobthehobbyguy]

The bad news is the astronauts may not get back to Febuary. The good news is Ford will have the parts to fix their cars.h

[bobthehobbyguy]

On 8/18/2024 at 7:46 AM, bobthehobbyguy said:

What baffles me was the decision to OK the mission when there were known problems. It's different if there was an unanticipated problem while in space.

The Challenger disaster happen because the o-rings failed because of a known weakness becuase of the cold. You'd think they would have been more cautious.

And if that wasn't dumb to send up with issues it turns out that the NASA suits aren't compatible with space x suits complicating using space x dragon for a ride home. Arrgh!!

[stavanzer]

What is that line from Raiders of the Lost Ark??

"Top Men!"

[Ace-Garageguy]

12 hours ago, bobthehobbyguy said:

And if that wasn't dumb to send up with issues it turns out that the NASA suits aren't compatible with space x suits complicating using space x dragon for a ride home. Arrgh!!

One would certainly think that, as both vehicles are apparently capable of docking with the ISS, there would be across-the-board compatibility among primary life-support systems, the individual suit being the most primary.

If there's not, mechanical adapters to hook one to the other shouldn't be all that hard to whip up, could be done Earthside and carried up with the SpaceX vehicle.

I know nothing about the electrical requirement of the suits, but the same goes, I'd think.

Then again, the way everything is done today, the suits probably have multiple layers of useless microprocessor complication making any kind of simple adaptation much more difficult.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EDIT: If you can get past the irritating AI/computer narration, there's a little info here on poor decision making.

 

 

Edited August 22, 2024 by Ace-Garageguy
BAD WORD

[Ace-Garageguy]

A deeper dive into the technical faults. I don't know if it's actually factual, or just yootoob clickbait.

 

[Lunajammer]

On 8/16/2024 at 9:31 PM, Ace-Garageguy said:

...in 1969 we (meaning the USA) could get multiple crews to the moon and home safely,

...Thinking something hasn't been lost somewhere along the line in some quarters is just delusional.

While I agree with all this, I think there is also more socio-political pressure than there was 50-years ago. Culturally, our current appetite for risk is far from what it was when the space program was being run by war generation men ready and willing to wager their lives on somewhat precarious technology. Fallout from failure today is vastly farther reaching than in 1967. Almost nobody I know knows what Apollo 1 was, but they all know vividly where they were when Challenger went. A high profile failure today could fatally damage whole industries. There is no room for even the implication of chance.

Edited August 22, 2024 by Lunajammer

[Ace-Garageguy]

1 hour ago, Lunajammer said:

While I agree with all this, I think there is also more socio-political pressure than there was 50-years ago. Culturally, our current appetite for risk is far from what it was when the space program was being run by war generation men ready and willing to wager their lives on somewhat precarious technology.

No argument there.

We've become a risk-averse culture, and a large part of what has been lost (that I referred to earlier) is the basic concept of "guts".

It accounts for everything from bloated middle-management that's primarily concerned with blame-spreading if something goes awry, to the go-along-to-get-along-keep-your-head-down mentality embraced by so many, and includes the "happy wife, happy life" code of masculine conduct.

Edited August 22, 2024 by Ace-Garageguy
TYPO

[bobthehobbyguy]

Just saw in the news that the starliner is returning without the astronauts and in a separate article the space x will be bringing them back next year.

[bobthehobbyguy]

The mistake of sending up a craft with issues presents another potential issue. The thruster failure could cause the starliner to crash into the ISS. Plus the unlocking sequence is meant to be manned and without the crew it will require possibly unproven software to handle the undocking.

And a note of irony the starliner vehicle name Calypso was a Greek God who held a man captive.

 

[bobthehobbyguy]

And the saga continues. Today is the day for Starliner to unlock.

Will it crash into the ISS, burn up, or actually make it back to earth.

[peteski]

Only time will tell . . .

At least it is unmanned.

[ranma]

On 8/22/2024 at 12:38 PM, Lunajammer said:

in 1967. Almost nobody I know knows what Apollo 1 was,

Nasa had failures in almost all of it's programs. As have aircraft manufactures though out avational flight. It was a risk then as it is now.  Picking on Boeing isn't helping! Please look at the history of failed air craft such as the BOAC Comet. DC 9's had lots of issues, and it's not only American aircraft, but other nations have failures to. I was born just a few weeks after January 26, 1967 The day that claimed the lives of three Apollo astronauts. What is unknown is how many Russian's died in preflight/in flight mishaps Going to space is a roll of the dice as it were! 

Though the space shuttle had a decent record there was a loss of 14 people in two different accidents. One (Challenger) could have been avoided by delaying launch, and checking boosters ect because of the freezing temps that were in Florida at the time. Columbia is another story, what actually failed were blamed on heat shield tiles, But it could have been a airframe issue after 24 safe Flights. Space is  extreme cold re entering earth is extreme heat.

[Richard Bartrop]

I know we love to trot out or favourite narratives at times like this,  but there is a difference between not being risk averse, and just being careless.

Boeing has had a recent history of costly errors where in come cases, people have paid with their lives.   In some cases, it because of dumb things like not installing bolts that should be there.  There's been a lot of talk about whether the corporate culture is to blame, but basically, they've gotten sloppy.   I'm going to venture that whatever is wrong with Starliner can be traced to some stupid, simple thing like a nut that didn't get tightened, and something that that got signed off on, but shouldn't have.   They took their chances launching the thing, and this is the one time, and this is the one time it bit them in the behind.  They're already looking pretty bad, and if they're being cautious now, it's because they're looking at how another set of high profile casualties will make them look even worse. 

As to the narrative that they didn't worry as much about human life back in the good old days,  after the Apollo ! fire, it was over a year and a half before they risked another manned mission, so they were cautious about these things back then too.

[Rodent]

1 hour ago, Richard Bartrop said:

I'm going to venture that whatever is wrong with Starliner can be traced to some stupid, simple thing like a nut that didn't get tightened, and something that that got signed off on, but shouldn't have.

They may never know. The thrusters don't return to Earth.