Author Topic: Boeing's CST-100: Progress to Commercial Crew and funding uncertainties  (Read 13879 times)

Offline Chris Bergin

Chris Gebhardt with the status update:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/08/boeings-cst-100-progress-commercial-crew-funding-uncertainties/

Includes more epic work from L2 artist Nathan Koga.
« Last Edit: 08/11/2015 02:17 pm by Chris Bergin »
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline RichAM

  • Member
  • Posts: 99
  • Texas
  • Liked: 29
  • Likes Given: 76
Really interesting and solid read! Thanks Chris Gebhardt! I hope both vehicles are fully supported as it's crazy not to get these online as soon as possible, in a lot of senses.


Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
Good article. Good summary of where we stand on commercial crew.

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12053
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7347
  • Likes Given: 3749
Nice article Chris G. Lots of well-presented good information there. Thanks
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Chris Gebhardt with the status update:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/08/boeings-cst-100-progress-commercial-crew-funding-uncertainties/

Includes more epic work from L2 artist Nathan Koga.
Thanks for the great update Chris G. Now if we were only flying...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline tesla

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • Researcher
  • State College, PA, USA
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 100
Great article chris!

May I ask a question. Would it be possible to write one rather technical article about the cst 100 with lots of data about the spacecraft included? Most people, like me, know so little about it...
Go SLS and Orion! God bless America.

Offline Gary NASA

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 626
  • KSC
  • Liked: 4867
  • Likes Given: 67
Boeing don't allow for the release of the data you would be looking for.

Offline Chris Bergin

Obviously this covers politics, but per one moved post, we have an active thread for that. I say a good thread, it's mainly "I know best!!" posts, but that's politics.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38187.msg1415318#msg1415318

But yeah, everyone knows politics is unavoidable when the article is half about that. Let's just try and be very specific to the article and not NASA's overall political funding.
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline jtrame

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 309
  • W4FJT
  • Knoxville, TN
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 346
Boeing don't allow for the release of the data you would be looking for.

I don't think a few pictures from C3PF would violate the rules and I think a little PR wouldn't be a bad thing for them.  The CST-100 page on the Boeing website is a few years old, for example.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
I don't think a few pictures from C3PF would violate the rules

Yes, it would.  it would show Boeing processes and design features. 

Offline MattMason

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1062
  • Space Enthusiast
  • Indiana
  • Liked: 772
  • Likes Given: 2016
I don't think a few pictures from C3PF would violate the rules

Yes, it would.  it would show Boeing processes and design features.

...And that would be exposing Boeing's proprietary information. This is now an ultra-competitive world, more so than the first space race. We as the general public haven't a "right" to see the innards of everything that Boeing or any other spacecraft builder decides to make. The fact that we haven't seen much about the CST-100 accentuates how Boeing is keeping tight-lipped about their design.

Even a mere space enthusiast like me knows that NSF members who have worked in the industry would never post information that violates the confidences (or IP, ITAM and Federal law) earned by this site. Let's not get Chris B. and others into trouble, m'okay? :)
"Why is the logo on the side of a rocket so important?"
"So you can find the pieces." -Jim, the Steely Eyed

Offline jtrame

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 309
  • W4FJT
  • Knoxville, TN
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 346
Of course I meant photos that Boeing took and released themselves.  Staged from angles that do not give away any proprietary information.  PR stuff.  They could use a little PR on this.

Offline MattMason

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1062
  • Space Enthusiast
  • Indiana
  • Liked: 772
  • Likes Given: 2016
Of course I meant photos that Boeing took and released themselves.  Staged from angles that do not give away any proprietary information.  PR stuff.  They could use a little PR on this.

They're Boeing.

They've already won the contract. They already fly, very reliably, other spacecraft into space. A manned spacecraft should be no bother.

PR is only for when your PowerPoints and mockups and renderings aren't convincing. Boeing has brought results, which is sufficient to the only people to whom they are selling: NASA.

Boeing is not obligated to impress or inform us, the forum reader or space enthusiast. That will come along when the first CST-100 docks at ISS and returns.
"Why is the logo on the side of a rocket so important?"
"So you can find the pieces." -Jim, the Steely Eyed

Offline jtrame

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 309
  • W4FJT
  • Knoxville, TN
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 346
Of course I meant photos that Boeing took and released themselves.  Staged from angles that do not give away any proprietary information.  PR stuff.  They could use a little PR on this.

They're Boeing.

They've already won the contract. They already fly, very reliably, other spacecraft into space. A manned spacecraft should be no bother.

PR is only for when your PowerPoints and mockups and renderings aren't convincing. Boeing has brought results, which is sufficient to the only people to whom they are selling: NASA.

Boeing is not obligated to impress or inform us, the forum reader or space enthusiast. That will come along when the first CST-100 docks at ISS and returns.

You never stop marketing.  I don't expect engineers to understand that, that's what I do.  You're in my "sandbox" now.

When only 1 out of a hundred in the street know what commercial crew is, then you haven't done do diligence on your marketing.  And Congress has no pressure to fully fund it either.  Show me the full funding, show me the money. 

No, it's not the whole answer, in fact it's only a small factor.  But don't dismiss it outright.  You never stop marketing.


Offline D_Dom

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
  • Liked: 481
  • Likes Given: 152
If I had to guess I would be hard pressed to name a more universally respected brand than Boeing. You don't like their marketing style, I get that. Do you understand Boeing marketing strategy? Who do you consider their target audience?
Can't say I understand marketing, being a technical person and all that implies, but I recognize results.
Space is not merely a matter of life or death, it is considerably more important than that!

Offline JBF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1459
  • Liked: 472
  • Likes Given: 914
If I had to guess I would be hard pressed to name a more universally respected brand than Boeing. You don't like their marketing style, I get that. Do you understand Boeing marketing strategy? Who do you consider their target audience?
Can't say I understand marketing, being a technical person and all that implies, but I recognize results.

Marketing is one thing, bribery and theft is something else. Boeing has been convicted on both.
"In principle, rocket engines are simple, but that’s the last place rocket engines are ever simple." Jeff Bezos

Offline texas_space

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 393
  • Ex Terra, Scientia
  • Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex, USA
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 8
Chris,
Not sure if NSF.com folks do this or not, but certainly Boeing has public relations (PR) people working for them.  HSF is a prestige thing.  Any chance inquiries have been made to their PR folks?
"We went to the moon nine times. Why fake it nine times, if we faked it?" - Charlie Duke

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1