Stranded in Orbit: What's Next for Boeing's Starliner Capsule

Dec 20, 2019
14
6
15
The more NASA tries to give Boeing (and Lockheed) a leg up on SpaceX, the more Boeing (and Lockheed) screws up. They get more money for the same job, more leeway, more side support and more Congressional backing. Come on Musk, don't fail me now!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Warren Taylor
Dec 20, 2019
6
4
15
Starliner probably made the in-orbit burn thinking that it had to correct for too steep an angle of attack. I can hear the astronauts slated for the Crewed Test Flight, now; "Okay, whatever we do, we don't let it fly on autopilot!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Warren Taylor
Dec 20, 2019
5
3
15
So...Boing-Boing's Starliner fails to make 'crucial' orbit & trip to space station, and NASA's Bridenstein sings "Don't worry, be happy!" Let's recap- Boing-Boing's capsule autopilot read its sensors incorrectly, repeatedly tried to re-orient itself until it could no longer fly its mission? Uh, sounds vaguely similar to another 'autopilot' problem, doesn't it? Man you couldn't write this stuff! Yeah, I know, this is a gross mischaracterization of what happened. Still, reading Bridenstein's airy description of all the various 'milestones' the flight could still achieve you might think this failed flight was in reality a fantastic success. Incredibly, one actually listed by Bridenstein would be the "capsule's safe landing." Jeezus, yeah, that's a resonable goal, Jim. I think it bears mentioning Boing-Boing & ULA are still 'blazing a historic path' using Russian RD-180 first stage engines and as currectly configured they cannot compete with Space X. Bridenstein IS director of NASA, not Boing-Boing, right?
 

MFC

Dec 20, 2019
1
0
10
What are the plans for the resupply cargo the Dreamliner was carrying? I suppose another Dragon cargo mission at NASAs (taxpayers) expense.
 
Dec 21, 2019
2
1
10
i thought it was bad enough that boeing was depending on the United Launch Alliance Atlas V (with russian rocket engines) to launch the CST-100 to the space station but they cannot even do that
 
Dec 20, 2019
9
5
15
So...Boing-Boing's Starliner fails to make 'crucial' orbit & trip to space station, and NASA's Bridenstein sings "Don't worry, be happy!" Let's recap- Boing-Boing's capsule autopilot read its sensors incorrectly, repeatedly tried to re-orient itself until it could no longer fly its mission? Uh, sounds vaguely similar to another 'autopilot' problem, doesn't it? Man you couldn't write this stuff! Yeah, I know, this is a gross mischaracterization of what happened. Still, reading Bridenstein's airy description of all the various 'milestones' the flight could still achieve you might think this failed flight was in reality a fantastic success. Incredibly, one actually listed by Bridenstein would be the "capsule's safe landing." Jeezus, yeah, that's a resonable goal, Jim. I think it bears mentioning Boing-Boing & ULA are still 'blazing a historic path' using Russian RD-180 first stage engines and as currectly configured they cannot compete with Space X. Bridenstein IS director of NASA, not Boing-Boing, right?
Very Elequent!
Bravo for intelligence.
Bridenstine is a shill.
13 months and you are canned!
 
Dec 21, 2019
1
1
15
I have been concerned that Boeing has chosen not to perform an inflight abort test without crew aboard during an actual launch, relying instead on their computer models. I am no less concerned that NASA is permitting this. By contrast, SpaceX has chosen to do a full uncrewed inflight abort test with Crew- Dragon, even though they were apparently not required to do that. We have no shortage of examples where software and computer modeling alone can be in error, and cost lives. A real world inflight abort test must be required of Boeing, and this latest computer error supports the need for that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Warren Taylor

ASK THE COMMUNITY