• Starliner, will it ever fly?

    From JF Mezei@21:1/5 to All on Wed Oct 20 00:18:58 2021
    Just read another article that says the next Boeing Starliner test
    flight won't be before sometime in first half of 2022, and first manned
    flight hopefully by end of 2022.


    With SpaceX reliably providing the crew taxi/Uber service, Starliner
    isn't needed. Is it possible that Boeing is trying to find a face-saving
    way out of that contract for a Starliner nobody needs?

    Another possible reason would be lack of cash. Bombardier started 2
    business jet and the C-series project concurrently, and the second the
    C-Series was late, the company ran out of cash. Killing he Lear 85
    wasn't enough and it ended up draining cash from all divisions, so the
    rail division no longer had the cash to increase workforce to deliver on
    time and within quality standards. (to a point where New York Cuty told Bombarder to not bother bidding again). (All that is left of Bombardier
    today is the Global 7500 and Challenger business jets, the rest of the
    empire was all liquidated).

    With Boeing having problems with the 737 and 787, coumpounded with
    COVID, if Starliner is not judged strategic, I could see why it would be
    easy for Boeing to just starve it of the cash needed to boost
    workforce/man hours to complete the project.

    What are the odds of Starliner getting finished and going into production/manned launches vs Boeing and NASA agreeing that Starliner is
    not needed anymore ?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Sylvia Else@21:1/5 to JF Mezei on Wed Oct 20 15:34:31 2021
    On 20-Oct-21 3:18 pm, JF Mezei wrote:
    Just read another article that says the next Boeing Starliner test
    flight won't be before sometime in first half of 2022, and first manned flight hopefully by end of 2022.


    With SpaceX reliably providing the crew taxi/Uber service, Starliner
    isn't needed. Is it possible that Boeing is trying to find a face-saving
    way out of that contract for a Starliner nobody needs?

    Another possible reason would be lack of cash. Bombardier started 2
    business jet and the C-series project concurrently, and the second the C-Series was late, the company ran out of cash. Killing he Lear 85
    wasn't enough and it ended up draining cash from all divisions, so the
    rail division no longer had the cash to increase workforce to deliver on
    time and within quality standards. (to a point where New York Cuty told Bombarder to not bother bidding again). (All that is left of Bombardier today is the Global 7500 and Challenger business jets, the rest of the
    empire was all liquidated).

    With Boeing having problems with the 737 and 787, coumpounded with
    COVID, if Starliner is not judged strategic, I could see why it would be
    easy for Boeing to just starve it of the cash needed to boost
    workforce/man hours to complete the project.

    What are the odds of Starliner getting finished and going into production/manned launches vs Boeing and NASA agreeing that Starliner is
    not needed anymore ?


    I think I read somewhere, that Starliner has an ability to lift the
    orbit of the ISS that Dragon lacks. Unfortunately, I cannot find a
    reference.

    But even if that's true, NASA would certainly be better off paying
    SpaceX to develop that capability, than hoping that Starliner will
    eventually deliver.

    Sylvia.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Snidely@21:1/5 to All on Tue Oct 19 22:56:41 2021
    Sylvia Else pounded on thar keyboard to tell us
    On 20-Oct-21 3:18 pm, JF Mezei wrote:
    Just read another article that says the next Boeing Starliner test
    flight won't be before sometime in first half of 2022, and first manned
    flight hopefully by end of 2022.


    With SpaceX reliably providing the crew taxi/Uber service, Starliner
    isn't needed. Is it possible that Boeing is trying to find a face-saving
    way out of that contract for a Starliner nobody needs?

    Another possible reason would be lack of cash. Bombardier started 2
    business jet and the C-series project concurrently, and the second the
    C-Series was late, the company ran out of cash. Killing he Lear 85
    wasn't enough and it ended up draining cash from all divisions, so the
    rail division no longer had the cash to increase workforce to deliver on
    time and within quality standards. (to a point where New York Cuty told
    Bombarder to not bother bidding again). (All that is left of Bombardier
    today is the Global 7500 and Challenger business jets, the rest of the
    empire was all liquidated).

    With Boeing having problems with the 737 and 787, coumpounded with
    COVID, if Starliner is not judged strategic, I could see why it would be
    easy for Boeing to just starve it of the cash needed to boost
    workforce/man hours to complete the project.

    What are the odds of Starliner getting finished and going into
    production/manned launches vs Boeing and NASA agreeing that Starliner is
    not needed anymore ?


    I think I read somewhere, that Starliner has an ability to lift the orbit of the ISS that Dragon lacks. Unfortunately, I cannot find a reference.

    But even if that's true, NASA would certainly be better off paying SpaceX to develop that capability, than hoping that Starliner will eventually deliver.


    NASA doesn't want a sole provider. They've already had that, and if
    SpaceX had to stand down ....

    /dps

    --
    "That’s where I end with this kind of conversation: Language is
    crucial, and yet not the answer."
    Jonathan Rosa, sociocultural and linguistic anthropologist,
    Stanford.,2020

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Sylvia Else@21:1/5 to Snidely on Wed Oct 20 17:56:55 2021
    On 20-Oct-21 4:56 pm, Snidely wrote:

    NASA doesn't want a sole provider.  They've already had that, and if
    SpaceX had to stand down ....


    They have a sole provider now.

    If they got SpaceX to address the near term problem, they could ditch
    Boeing in favour of a company more likely to deliver.

    Sylvia.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Sylvia Else@21:1/5 to Snidely on Wed Oct 20 18:23:37 2021
    On 20-Oct-21 6:15 pm, Snidely wrote:
    On Tuesday, Sylvia Else exclaimed wildly:
    On 20-Oct-21 4:56 pm, Snidely wrote:

    NASA doesn't want a sole provider.  They've already had that, and if
    SpaceX had to stand down ....


    They have a sole provider now.

    If they got SpaceX to address the near term problem, they could ditch
    Boeing in favour of a company more likely to deliver.

    There's someone who can deliver in two years, without already being as
    far along as Boeing?  Even Dragon wasn't that fast.

    /dps


    On the showing so far, one would have to wonder whether Boeing will ever deliver. At some point, one has to cut one's losses.

    Sylvia.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Snidely@21:1/5 to All on Wed Oct 20 00:15:48 2021
    On Tuesday, Sylvia Else exclaimed wildly:
    On 20-Oct-21 4:56 pm, Snidely wrote:

    NASA doesn't want a sole provider. They've already had that, and if SpaceX >> had to stand down ....


    They have a sole provider now.

    If they got SpaceX to address the near term problem, they could ditch Boeing in favour of a company more likely to deliver.

    There's someone who can deliver in two years, without already being as
    far along as Boeing? Even Dragon wasn't that fast.

    /dps

    --
    "That's a good sort of hectic, innit?"

    " Very much so, and I'd recommend the haggis wontons."
    -njm

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Otto J. Makela@21:1/5 to JF Mezei on Wed Oct 20 15:02:34 2021
    JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

    Just read another article that says the next Boeing Starliner test
    flight won't be before sometime in first half of 2022, and first
    manned flight hopefully by end of 2022.

    I assume it was this? https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/19/science/nasa-boeing-starliner.html
    --
    /* * * Otto J. Makela <om@iki.fi> * * * * * * * * * */
    /* Phone: +358 40 765 5772, ICBM: N 60 10' E 24 55' */
    /* Mail: Mechelininkatu 26 B 27, FI-00100 Helsinki */
    /* * * Computers Rule 01001111 01001011 * * * * * * */

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frank Scrooby@21:1/5 to All on Wed Oct 20 05:11:34 2021
    Hi all,

    What kind of contract had Boeing got with NASA for Starliner? IF its one of their traditional "Cost+ work done+ performance bonus for delivery" then do they have any incentive to actually deliver. NASA carries on paying the bills, no matter how big and
    inflated they are, and no matter how far behind schedule Boeing slips.

    Better to give them a stiff deadline and promise swift grimly financial penalties if the deadlines are not met. Then we'll quickly see how fast Boeing (or any of the other traditional providers) can deliver.

    It took the US something like six years between Kennedy's speech and Armstrong's footstep.s The US built THREE launch vehicles (ok so two of them went on to moonlight as ICBMs) and capsule systems in that period, and did an insane amount of testing (
    remembering reading recently that the Mercury capsule had as many as 20 test vehicles (some scale models) before they put the chimp inside).

    Admittedly the motto of Apollo was "Spend everything except Time", implying blank checques all round.

    The moon race wasn't won because the scientists and engineers of the 60s were smarter or better than those of today. It was won because the companies who built the hardware were hungry for success. Nowadays companies are run by people who have no concern
    for the company's purpose and are only hungry to improve their own personal bottom line.

    It's not just an aerospace / space tech problem. It's just more pronounced there.

    What would happen at Boeing is NASA decided to hank funding tomorrow? Who would get fired? Not the suits at the top. What would the shareholders say?

    Anyway, this is way too depressing. I'm pretty sure that SpaceX could develop the reboost capacity if they wanted /. needed to.

    I'm sure Boeing could do it too if someone was holding a figurative gun to their pocket book.

    Regards
    Frank

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JF Mezei@21:1/5 to Snidely on Thu Oct 21 15:52:10 2021
    On 2021-10-20 03:15, Snidely wrote:

    There's someone who can deliver in two years, without already being as
    far along as Boeing? Even Dragon wasn't that fast.

    I understand that after the Columbia Shuttle stand down, NASA wanted 2 distinct taxis so if one goes down, ISS can still function.

    But, with ISS funding ending 2025 (NASA has to go by that until it is
    extended, right?), does it make sense to still push for 2 suppliers when
    SpaceX has demonstrated it's ability to deliver? (and re-use)



    When you look at Dragon overall, SpaceX has been sending cargo ship
    to/from for years reliably, and now has done crewed transport a few
    times. They already have running docking system, tested re-entry/landing
    etc.

    SpaceX recent private flight shows that it has more capacity to launch
    than what NASA needs.


    Boeing has about half a flight on its sleeve. And isn't showing signs of
    being motivated or in a hurry to get Starliner into "production" (aka:
    routine manned flights to ISS).

    I find it ery odd that a company like Boeing can't fix Starliner in a
    timely fashion.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JF Mezei@21:1/5 to Alain Fournier on Thu Oct 21 21:47:52 2021
    On 2021-10-21 21:38, Alain Fournier wrote:

    Yes they do have an incentive to deliver. NASA has been a very lucrative client of Boeing for a very long time. If they don't deliver, they will probably never get another contract from NASA. SpaceX is no longer an unproven startup and Blue Origin is starting to have some credibility so
    NASA now has other options for future contracts.

    If Boeing is aware that they will never be able to compete against the
    new kids on the block, then it doesn't have much incentive to spend more
    money on Starliner. Right now their limited cash is better spent
    fixing 787 and 737 problems.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alain Fournier@21:1/5 to Frank Scrooby on Thu Oct 21 21:38:13 2021
    On Oct/20/2021 at 08:11, Frank Scrooby wrote :
    Hi all,

    What kind of contract had Boeing got with NASA for Starliner? IF its one of their traditional "Cost+ work done+ performance bonus for delivery" then do they have any incentive to actually deliver. NASA carries on paying the bills, no matter how big and
    inflated they are, and no matter how far behind schedule Boeing slips.

    Yes they do have an incentive to deliver. NASA has been a very lucrative
    client of Boeing for a very long time. If they don't deliver, they will probably never get another contract from NASA. SpaceX is no longer an
    unproven startup and Blue Origin is starting to have some credibility so
    NASA now has other options for future contracts.


    Alain Fournier

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Greg (Strider) Moore@21:1/5 to All on Fri Oct 22 07:53:11 2021
    "Frank Scrooby" wrote in message news:546c9eac-e028-4616-b906-0e6895b73074n@googlegroups.com...

    Hi all,

    What kind of contract had Boeing got with NASA for Starliner? IF its one of >their traditional "Cost+ work done+ performance bonus for delivery" then do >they have any incentive to actually deliver. NASA carries on paying the >bills, no matter how big and inflated they are, and no matter how far
    behind schedule Boeing slips.


    I believe this contract was at a fixed price.

    I do know Boeing is eating the cost of the reflight. NASA basically told
    them they had to do a reflight and that NASA wasn't paying for it.

    So Boeing has an incentive to get this thing flying.
    And yes, NASA wants at least two domestic sources for access to space.

    As for a replacement, while Sierra Nevada's uncrewed Dream Chaser has been selected for the Commercial Resupply Services-2 program, they are still
    working on a crewed version and a statement in 2020 said they hoped to fly a crew version within 5 years. So it's a long shot, but does give an option.

    We could, by the end of the decade have 3-4 various commercial passengers vehicles to orbit.
    I do think Boeing will fly Starliner, but both it and Dream Chaser are
    burdened with the cost of their launch vehicles (compared to Falcon).

    --
    Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
    CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net
    IT Disaster Response - https://www.amazon.com/Disaster-Response-Lessons-Learned-Field/dp/1484221834/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Greg (Strider) Moore@21:1/5 to JF Mezei on Fri Oct 22 12:58:04 2021
    "JF Mezei" wrote in message news:LxjcJ.5528$LZ1.1748@fx40.iad...

    On 2021-10-20 03:15, Snidely wrote:

    There's someone who can deliver in two years, without already being as
    far along as Boeing? Even Dragon wasn't that fast.

    I understand that after the Columbia Shuttle stand down, NASA wanted 2 >distinct taxis so if one goes down, ISS can still function.

    But, with ISS funding ending 2025 (NASA has to go by that until it is >extended, right?), does it make sense to still push for 2 suppliers when >SpaceX has demonstrated it's ability to deliver? (and re-use)



    When you look at Dragon overall, SpaceX has been sending cargo ship
    to/from for years reliably, and now has done crewed transport a few
    times. They already have running docking system, tested re-entry/landing
    etc.

    SpaceX recent private flight shows that it has more capacity to launch
    than what NASA needs.


    Boeing has about half a flight on its sleeve. And isn't showing signs of >being motivated or in a hurry to get Starliner into "production" (aka: >routine manned flights to ISS).

    I find it ery odd that a company like Boeing can't fix Starliner in a
    timely fashion.

    Strictly speaking, NASA may not need this for ISS.
    BUT, one of the goals of the Commercial Crew program was to encourage
    multiple methods to orbit IN GENERAL.
    The idea is that we are going to become a spacefaring nation and as such we need to develop the infrastructure similar to how the Air Mail program
    helped flying.

    --
    Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
    CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net
    IT Disaster Response - https://www.amazon.com/Disaster-Response-Lessons-Learned-Field/dp/1484221834/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JF Mezei@21:1/5 to All on Fri Oct 22 20:07:01 2021
    On 2021-10-22 12:58, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:

    The idea is that we are going to become a spacefaring nation and as such we need to develop the infrastructure similar to how the Air Mail program
    helped flying.


    For as much as I have criticized premature claims by SpaceX fans, the
    company did en up proving re-usability and thus vastly lower launch
    costs. It ahs also seriously increase launch frequency. It has been
    able to create crewed vehicle. And all this in relatively short time
    period.

    Boeing clearly hasn'yt put a high priority on getting Starliner working,
    In part because it is not part of a critical part anymore since SpaceX
    filled that gap.

    If Boeing can't compete against the new kids on the block, it it
    possible it is retrenching on portions where it still has a market (such
    as making satellites) ?

    aka: out of complex manned systems where it can't compete, and stays in satellites where the new kids on the block like SpaceX are absent?

    This would explain the lack of priority/enthousiam for Starliner.



    Question: in creating ULA, has Boeing lost much of its in-house
    engineering talent to ULA?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Snidely@21:1/5 to All on Mon Nov 1 19:48:42 2021
    Remember when JF Mezei bragged outrageously? That was Tuesday:
    Just read another article that says the next Boeing Starliner test
    flight won't be before sometime in first half of 2022, and first manned flight hopefully by end of 2022.


    With SpaceX reliably providing the crew taxi/Uber service, Starliner
    isn't needed. Is it possible that Boeing is trying to find a face-saving
    way out of that contract for a Starliner nobody needs?

    Another possible reason would be lack of cash. Bombardier started 2
    business jet and the C-series project concurrently, and the second the C-Series was late, the company ran out of cash. Killing he Lear 85
    wasn't enough and it ended up draining cash from all divisions, so the
    rail division no longer had the cash to increase workforce to deliver on
    time and within quality standards. (to a point where New York Cuty told Bombarder to not bother bidding again). (All that is left of Bombardier today is the Global 7500 and Challenger business jets, the rest of the
    empire was all liquidated).

    With Boeing having problems with the 737 and 787, coumpounded with
    COVID, if Starliner is not judged strategic, I could see why it would be
    easy for Boeing to just starve it of the cash needed to boost
    workforce/man hours to complete the project.

    What are the odds of Starliner getting finished and going into production/manned launches vs Boeing and NASA agreeing that Starliner is
    not needed anymore ?

    FWIW, Boeing is taking the splash for the valve corrosion delay, to the
    tune of $185M beyond the January $410M for the reflight.

    <URL:https://spacenews.com/boeing-takes-185-million-charge-because-of-starliner-delays/>

    <quote>
    When Boeing took the original earnings charge, it said it did so
    because it committed to redo the uncrewed flight test at no expense to
    NASA, a point a Boeing executive reaffirmed at the Oct. 19 briefing. “There’s no additional charges that will be going to the government for this. This is something that The Boeing Company will make sure we’ve
    got covered as we get this vehicle prepared,” said John Vollmer, vice president and program manager for Boeing’s commercial crew program.
    [...]
    “I will say that we are 100% committed to fulfilling our contract with
    the government, and we intend to do that,” he said.
    </quote>

    By now, I'm sure we all have seen Scott Manley's review of the crewed
    program's candidate class:
    <URL:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM2UpLIpRhI>
    Which of them would you have chosen?

    As Greg noted, Dream Chaser is currently /still in development/ as a
    /cargo/ craft, with manned capability somewhere beyond that. DCCargo
    plays a role (and maybe a roll) in Blue Origin's _Orbital Reef_
    proposal, but so does Starliner. <URL:https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/10/a-once-quiet-battle-to-replace-the-space-station-suddenly-is-red-hot/>
    Note that Sierra Nevada offspring Sierra Space is also developing
    inflatable modules (similar to Bigelow's, perhaps starting with the
    same NASA patents, but a different implementation).

    /dps

    --
    But happiness cannot be pursued; it must ensue. One must have a reason
    to 'be happy.'"
    Viktor Frankl

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frank Scrooby@21:1/5 to All on Tue Nov 2 00:20:38 2021
    Hi all,

    If Boeing is building Starliner on a fixed budget (which must be QUITE the novel experience for them)then how much money have they already sunk, and how much more can they spend before the penalties for exiting the contract start to look appealing
    compared with the cost of continuing?

    I thought there was another company that had completed and tested a cargo resupply, or did I hallucinate that one. It was a strictly cargo vehicle, launched on one of the super expensive boosters that the usual suspects love to supply.

    While I do not believe it is beneficial for SpaceX to be without competition in the short term it might just be what the global space industry (or at least the parts of it that are run for profit, unlike the Russian and Chinese programs (and may be the
    French/Euro) that are strictly speaking National Pride programs). If NASA reaches a point where they simply get tired of waiting and decide to make SpaceX their only supplier the rest of the industry might finally get the proverbial kick in the forks
    that they need.

    Anyway, just my Tuesday morning quarterback-ing. Everything I know about running a Space Program I learned playing Kerbal Space Program.

    Regards
    Frank

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Snidely@21:1/5 to All on Tue Nov 2 01:18:46 2021
    Frank Scrooby was thinking very hard :

    I thought there was another company that had completed and tested a cargo resupply, or did I hallucinate that one. It was a strictly cargo vehicle, launched on one of the super expensive boosters that the usual suspects love to supply.

    Cygnus? Northrup Grumman as the absorber of Orbital Sciences
    Corporation.

    Launched on various versions of Antares and Atlas V. Since Nov 2017,
    launched on an Antares 230+, most recently the /Ellison Onizuka/ on
    August 10, about 83 days ago.

    Definitely not planned to be upgraded to crew, and definitely not cargo
    return. However, NG is developing the Lunar Gateway HALO from these
    modules.

    The Japanese can still launch HTV, most recently in May of 2020, and
    there's been mention of cargo return and crewed versions, but the
    enhanced cargo HTV-X has not yet debuted, and it is one-way only.


    /dps

    --
    Killing a mouse was hardly a Nobel Prize-worthy exercise, and Lawrence
    went apopleptic when he learned a lousy rodent had peed away all his
    precious heavy water.
    _The Disappearing Spoon_, Sam Kean

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)