Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 61 to 89 of 89

Thread: Atlas V: Boeing Starliner OFT (un-crewed test flight)

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    3,134
    Quote Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
    My guess would be outsourcing.
    Oh, and quality is king but the schedule is GOD.
    Boeing may want to consider a new theology...

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,807
    Wow, this isn't good at all. What happened to the old Boeing?

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2020...an-we-thought/

    UPDATE: OUCH this one is worse.

    https://www.ccn.com/clowns-supervise...try-in-danger/
    Last edited by Roger E. Moore; 2020-Feb-09 at 12:45 AM.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    15,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    Wow, this isn't good at all. What happened to the old Boeing?
    McDonnell. Note that I didn't say "McDonnell-Douglas"; McDonnell culture had previously done to Douglas what it wound up doing to Boeing. That led to events such as the one 20 years ago today, when most of the engineering staff went out on strike. Afterwards the best and brightest who were young enough left en-mass.
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,807
    More on Starliner but with comments on SpaceX spacecraft explosion/loss as well, plus diagram of Starliner.

    https://aeronauticsonline.com/furthe...sule-revealed/
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,188
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    More on Starliner but with comments on SpaceX spacecraft explosion/loss as well, plus diagram of Starliner.

    https://aeronauticsonline.com/furthe...sule-revealed/
    The Crew Dragon static fire explosion was due to a previously unidentified materials incomparability between nitrogen tetroxide and a titanium valve which only presented at the high pressures used by the SuperDraco pressurization system. Not even NASA saw that one coming. They replaced the valve with a non-titanium burst disc.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,807
    Boeing did not do end-to-end checks of the Starliner, dividing up the routine and missing critical problems.

    https://www.engadget.com/2020/02/29/...flight-report/
    https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-t...-testing-gaps/
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    No longer near Grover's Mill
    Posts
    5,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    Boeing did not do end-to-end checks of the Starliner, dividing up the routine and missing critical problems.

    https://www.engadget.com/2020/02/29/...flight-report/
    https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-t...-testing-gaps/
    C’mon, they should know better. They are Boeing after all, not some start-up company run out of a garage by two recent graduates.

    I’ve worked doing integration verification (on the simulation side) and can attest that we found many failures when “fully verified” components are brought together. Everyone knows it happens, and time and money are budgeted (but never quite enough )


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them. - Jimmy Hoffa

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,188
    They need a size 15 (US) Army boot firmly inserted into their posterior orifice. Repeatedly.

    Maybe even a ban from taking part in Commercial Crew Round 2, opening a path for SNC's Dream Chaser. By then it should have flown some Commercial Cargo missions, and SNC is still working on the Crew Dream Chaser hardware.

    https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/n...t-test-reviews

    NASA and Boeing will host a media teleconference at 11 a.m. EST Friday, March 6, to discuss the outcome of the joint independent review team investigation into the primary issues detected during the company’s uncrewed Orbital Flight Test in December as part of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program.

    Participants in the briefing will be:

    Douglas Loverro, associate administrator of NASA’s Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate
    Jim Chilton, senior vice president at Boeing Space and Launch
    Kathy Lueders, manager of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program
    John Mulholland, vice president and manager of Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner Program
    Audio of the teleconference will stream live online at:

    https://www.nasa.gov/live

    To participate in the teleconference, media must contact Joshua Finch at joshua.a.finch@nasa.gov by 10 a.m. Friday for the dial-in information.

    -end-

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    150
    I worked in the aerospace industry form 1976 to 1991. In my experience, these kinds of SNAFUS were very rare in my day. Perhaps they need more people to review software outside of the department where it is compiled. In other words, better quality control.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,807
    61 safety fixes required on Starliner, says NASA

    https://phys.org/news/2020-03-boeing...t-capsule.html
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,188
    Months of work before Boeing even thinks of a Starliner return to flight.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,840
    Quote Originally Posted by otakenji View Post
    I worked in the aerospace industry form 1976 to 1991. In my experience, these kinds of SNAFUS were very rare in my day. Perhaps they need more people to review software outside of the department where it is compiled. In other words, better quality control.
    They didn't even do an end-to-end test of the full system. Or a full-duration test from launch to ISS rendezvous.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,207
    Quote Originally Posted by docmordrid View Post
    Months of work before Boeing even thinks of a Starliner return to flight.
    Been a long time since I've posted here but with so much happening in manned spaceflight I decided it was time to dust off the account.

    I am amazed that that NASA has yet to publicly announce that another unmanned test will be required, its seems utterly impossible that the next Starliner will be allowed to carry a crew.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
    I am amazed that that NASA has yet to publicly announce that another unmanned test will be required, its seems utterly impossible that the next Starliner will be allowed to carry a crew.
    Absolutely agree, and welcome back.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,207
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    Absolutely agree, and welcome back.
    Thanks!

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,807
    Boeing in extremely bad shape, asks for gigantic bailout.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/17/boei...urces-say.html
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    15,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    Boeing in extremely bad shape, asks for gigantic bailout.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/17/boei...urces-say.html
    I wish I wasn't dependent on them for my pension.
    You can't blame Boeing for Covid-19. But they are totally to blame for the 737-Max and Starliner fiascos.

    When I was there, we were taught to identify the root cause of problems.
    The root cause of Boeing's troubles died a couple weeks ago.
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,866
    I saw some discussion of this recently on some finance shows. Boeing is one of the US’s biggest exporters, and is probably in the “too big to be allowed to fail” class. Of course, it isn’t just Boeing - the airliners may also need help due to radical traffic drop-off, and Airbus is hurting too.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,807
    Once more, into the breach... Starliner to fly again. Without crew.

    https://www.cnet.com/news/boeing-to-...ching-the-iss/
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    15,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    Once more, into the breach... Starliner to fly again. Without crew.

    https://www.cnet.com/news/boeing-to-...ching-the-iss/
    "We have chosen to refly our Orbital Flight Test to demonstrate the quality of the Starliner system," Boeing in a brief statement. "Flying another uncrewed flight will allow us to complete all flight test objectives and evaluate the performance of the second Starliner vehicle at no cost to the taxpayer."
    Translation: No WAY NASA was going to let us carry astronauts or pay us for a second flight! We are so screwed!"
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  21. #81
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,866
    Yes, I would have been very surprised if Nasa allowed them to go directly to a crewed flight without a more successful test.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  22. #82
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,207
    Yes they've chosen to refly the OFT in the same way that I 'chose' to retake my driving test after I failed the first time.

  23. #83
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    15,430
    It's not a good time to be Boeing.
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  24. #84
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,360
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    I wouldn't think so as it seems to me that NASA will require another unmanned flight and further delay them from launching astronauts to the ISS.
    I believed that another mission would be required to prove the system works. Sometimes NASA goes into the "safe" mode only to forget that mode later. It may not be good for Boeing, but even they believed it was necessary.

  25. #85
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,807
    A painful article to read: Boeing's fall from grace, in documents now released.

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2020...-unflattering/
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  26. #86
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,866
    Yep, I read that article earlier. Boeing was in a similar position IBM had been at one point: It cost more, but Boeing was the trusted option, so had been the obvious choice. Now, SpaceX is showing higher reliability, gets things done, and is less expensive.

    I don’t see it as necessarily bad, especially in regards to space. That industry was in a rut and needed to be shaken up to move us forward. It is more concerning in aeronautics but hopefully Boeing will learn from this and make some real changes. But who knows? I wouldn’t put it past Musk, Bezos or another contender to move into that too.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  27. #87
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,207
    I was going to write a long post but this comment from the Ars Technica article pretty much says what I was going to:

    This is because the goal isn't to finish a project. The goal is to spread subsystem manufacturing across as many states as possible. That way every senator and congressperson with a production facility in their territory absolutely refuses to let a project die because... unemployment. Boeing then turns even the slightest change in mission or ability into a complete ground-up re-engineering cycle which of, course, extends the development contract and "budget".

    Boeing is addicted to R&D money and it unwillingly turns out ****ty project after ****ty project because the end product was never the goal.

    Why bother manufacturing a product that you can be held liable for when you can make 3x more money kicking a replaceable can of wishes and ideas down the road for decades? The CH-47 which I flew and system tested in the Army for 8 years has been in action for 50+ years in one variation or another. How many replacement helos do you think Boeing has been "developing" in that time? The majority of airframes for the 47s are the original Alpha model frames built in the 60s! They get ORF'd and turned into B, C, D, E, F, SD's, and MD's. In that time technology and materials just haven't matured allowing a new airframe to replace it, really? I guess it was built THAT good, huh. But let's not forget the satellite industry of contractors built around maintenance that are subsidiaries of manufacturers.

    And we wonder why we have a massive defense budget but still fly rigs from 30/40/50 years ago and the new stuff doesn't work.

  28. #88
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    9,130
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    Yep, I read that article earlier. Boeing was in a similar position IBM had been at one point: It cost more, but Boeing was the trusted option, so had been the obvious choice. Now, SpaceX is showing higher reliability, gets things done, and is less expensive.

    I don’t see it as necessarily bad, especially in regards to space. That industry was in a rut and needed to be shaken up to move us forward. It is more concerning in aeronautics but hopefully Boeing will learn from this and make some real changes. But who knows? I wouldn’t put it past Musk, Bezos or another contender to move into that too.
    I read the article and the first comment, very telling, very sad. Development where the process is king, not the apparent target technology.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  29. #89
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,188
    Astronaut Ken Bowersox wrote that selection document.

    His banning Boeing from later lunar cargo bids was a real slap across the face. Now only SpaceX, SNC and N-G can bid.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •