Author Topic: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6  (Read 160871 times)

Online 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 edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4917
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 7149
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #1 on: 05/19/2022 07:35 am »
Why is there no Wet dress rehearsal this time? I remember OFT-1 did one... Or is there one planned for today?
To expand on Jim's laconic reply: ULA conducted a WDR for the new Atlas V variant (N22) prior to OFT 1. ULA do not regularly conduct WDRs (or static fires) for every single launch - that's a SpaceX thing - though they may do it for Atlas V variants. Since a N22 WDR has already been conducted (to test the new DEC systems, mainly), there is no need for one for OFT 2.
Just because there's a job req out there doesn't mean the job isn't being done now. People are in acting roles all the time when people retire or get promoted and they haven't found a permanent replacement immediately.
And even when a post is already going to be filled internally by the person in the acting role, it will often be advertised externally (and internally) anyway as a matter of course.
We learned at the news conference Boeing is going open the Starliner door on the pad and then close it and seal it again. Not an exact quote but something like, "Our guys will go up there and open the door."
The door is accessed via the crew access arm (CAA). The CAA seals to the exterior of the capsule around the door (like the access arms for any other crewed vehicle I can think of) so opening the door is to a conditioned interior space, not just flapping about in the breeze. Since crew being able to open the door and enter the capsule is a rather important part of crewed launch, exercising that capability is not exactly surprising behaviour.

Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #2 on: 05/19/2022 08:21 am »
Why is there no Wet dress rehearsal this time? I remember OFT-1 did one... Or is there one planned for today?
To expand on Jim's laconic reply: ULA conducted a WDR for the new Atlas V variant (N22) prior to OFT 1. ULA do not regularly conduct WDRs (or static fires) for every single launch - that's a SpaceX thing - though they may do it for Atlas V variants. Since a N22 WDR has already been conducted (to test the new DEC systems, mainly), there is no need for one for OFT 2.
Just because there's a job req out there doesn't mean the job isn't being done now. People are in acting roles all the time when people retire or get promoted and they haven't found a permanent replacement immediately.
And even when a post is already going to be filled internally by the person in the acting role, it will often be advertised externally (and internally) anyway as a matter of course.
We learned at the news conference Boeing is going open the Starliner door on the pad and then close it and seal it again. Not an exact quote but something like, "Our guys will go up there and open the door."
The door is accessed via the crew access arm (CAA). The CAA seals to the exterior of the capsule around the door (like the access arms for any other crewed vehicle I can think of) so opening the door is to a conditioned interior space, not just flapping about in the breeze. Since crew being able to open the door and enter the capsule is a rather important part of crewed launch, exercising that capability is not exactly surprising behaviour.
The context of my part of this is that I don't think Boeing is trying to practice or learn anything operationally except that the door works or not.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal - Animal Farm by George Orwell

Offline Herb Schaltegger

Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #3 on: 05/19/2022 01:00 pm »
The context of my part of this is that I don't think Boeing is trying to practice or learn anything operationally except that the door works or not.

Jeez, man - TRIM YOUR QUOTES.

And what you “believe” has no direct connection to reality. Every launch operation involves practice - repetition, process, and routines are deadly-important when mission- and especially life-critical functions are involved. You want everyone involved to have zero question or hesitation about what they are supposed to do and why, not have them fumbling around trying to remember if one latch gets opened before another, or if a hose is supposed to be pressurized before it’s connected or after.

So every repetition is important, no matter what you believe.
« Last Edit: 05/19/2022 07:27 pm by zubenelgenubi »
Ad astra per aspirin ...

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11711
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 6427
  • Likes Given: 3183
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #4 on: 05/19/2022 01:17 pm »
The WDR is primarily, but not exclusively for the LV only. It also tests the interfaces between the LV and the spacecraft. Given Boeing's recent history with Starliner's LV/Spacecraft interface screwups, I believe a WDR would be appropriate, if only for the interfacing. In my opinion of course.
« Last Edit: 05/19/2022 01:18 pm by clongton »
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12857
  • N. California
  • Liked: 12143
  • Likes Given: 1337
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #5 on: 05/19/2022 01:58 pm »
The WDR is primarily, but not exclusively for the LV only. It also tests the interfaces between the LV and the spacecraft. Given Boeing's recent history with Starliner's LV/Spacecraft interface screwups, I believe a WDR would be appropriate, if only for the interfacing. In my opinion of course.
I know, right?

I honestly think they just don't care for more tests, and they figure they'll find out during flight.  "Damn the torpedoes" and all that.

There's no real crew on board, and if this flight doesn't succeed (even if the fault is the LV's), I don't think they're going to finance #4...

Testing adds risk (e.g. time exposed to the elements) and I can see their point of view.  Get it over with, one way or the other.
« Last Edit: 05/19/2022 02:12 pm by meekGee »
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Ike17055

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 232
  • Liked: 191
  • Likes Given: 114
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #6 on: 05/19/2022 02:05 pm »
https://twitter.com/ulalaunch/status/1526992552100089860

Quote
Fueling of the #AtlasV first stage is underway at Space Launch Complex-41. The launch team is pumping 25,000 gallons of storable, room-temperature RP-1 fuel, a highly refined kerosene, into the rocket for Thursday's #Starliner launch. bit.ly/av_oft-2

Pic by @nasahqphoto

Hopeful for Starliner here...but it is hard to look at this sign and not see it as "Goofed 2"

« Last Edit: 05/19/2022 02:06 pm by Ike17055 »

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3114
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 2421
  • Likes Given: 937
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #7 on: 05/19/2022 02:10 pm »
The WDR is primarily, but not exclusively for the LV only. It also tests the interfaces between the LV and the spacecraft. Given Boeing's recent history with Starliner's LV/Spacecraft interface screwups, I believe a WDR would be appropriate, if only for the interfacing. In my opinion of course.
A WDR costs money. Boeing is already in the hole on the fixed-price Starliner contract, so they must have carefully evaluated the cost/benefit of a WDR. If they felt that the WDR was highly unlikely to uncover any issues that could be mitigated, then they correctly decided not to incur the expense. My guess: Boeing correctly considers Atlas V to be highly reliable and the N22 configuration has already been through a WDR and a successful launch for OFT-1, so the probability of finding an issue was evaluated as small. Recall that the actual launch can be stopped any time up to nearly T-0, so it is on effect the same as a WDR, and it is uncrewed.

Offline deadman1204

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1357
  • USA
  • Liked: 1201
  • Likes Given: 1748
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #8 on: 05/19/2022 02:23 pm »
So excited that its finally happening.

While I worry about Boeing, I really hope this goes well!

Offline AstroWare

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 285
  • Arizona
  • Liked: 213
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #9 on: 05/19/2022 02:34 pm »
Is OFT-2 using the same capsule as OFT-1? Or is this the first flight of this capsule? I understand they plan to build (2) but idk which one this one is.

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3114
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 2421
  • Likes Given: 937
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #10 on: 05/19/2022 02:38 pm »
Is OFT-2 using the same capsule as OFT-1? Or is this the first flight of this capsule? I understand they plan to build (2) but idk which one this one is.
There is one retired capsule (S1) and two active capsules (S2 and S3). OFT-1 used S3. OFT-2 uses S2.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Starliner

Offline Vettedrmr

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1065
  • Hot Springs, AR
  • Liked: 1446
  • Likes Given: 2398
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #11 on: 05/19/2022 02:38 pm »
I know, right?

I honestly think they just don't care for more tests, and they figure they'll find out during flight.  "Damn the torpedoes" and all that.

I disagree.  Boeing/ULA did a WDR on the previous launch attempt, and while the booster is a different serial #, I believe it's the same configuration.  So I don't know what kind of risks they'd actually be retiring with another WDR.
Aviation/space enthusiast, retired control system SW engineer, doesn't know anything!

Offline AstroWare

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 285
  • Arizona
  • Liked: 213
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #12 on: 05/19/2022 02:39 pm »


... Recall that the actual launch can be stopped any time up to nearly T-0, so it is on effect the same as a WDR, and it is uncrewed.

The difference is likely in the thoroughness of the data review. WDR would have time to do a full review where a standard countdown will only have quick-look and automated limit checking. But since this is not the first launch, the automated limit checking should have a good baseline pass/fail criteria...

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4917
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 7149
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #13 on: 05/19/2022 03:09 pm »
The WDR is primarily, but not exclusively for the LV only. It also tests the interfaces between the LV and the spacecraft. Given Boeing's recent history with Starliner's LV/Spacecraft interface screwups, I believe a WDR would be appropriate, if only for the interfacing. In my opinion of course.
A WDR is a rehearsal for events up to t0. The previous OFT issues occurred after staging, and were not caught by the WDR that was conducted (as expected, because the issue was confined to the spacecraft, and occurred after separation, so the LV was not involved or at fault). Unless there are expected to be brand new LV issues introduced since OFT-2 (i.e. no) an additional WDR would not be of any practical benefit, but would risk a recurrence of the now known valve corrosion issues until that design flaw can be mitigated more permanently.

Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #14 on: 05/19/2022 03:52 pm »
Quote
The context of my part of this is that I don't think Boeing is trying to practice or learn anything operationally except that the door works or not.

Jeez, man - TRIM YOUR QUOTES.

And what you “believe” has no direct connection to reality. Every launch operation involves practice - repetition, process, and routines are deadly-important when mission- and especially life-critical functions are involved. You want everyone involved to have zero question or hesitation about what they are supposed to do and why, not have them fumbling around trying to remember if one latch gets opened before another, or if a hose is supposed to be pressurized before it’s connected or after.

So every repetition is important, no matter what you believe.
I'm in total agreement but what I am saying is they could be learning a lot more from this iteration.  May 12, 2022:
Quote
The Commercial Crew Program within Space & Launch is seeking a Flight Management and Integration First Line Manager (Level K) based at Kennedy Space Center, FL.
 

It almost looks like this position is all about the CFT-1. Look at the responsibilities.

Quote
Primary Responsibilities​

Develop and release of Flight Test unique documentation including test definition (TDD), requirements (TRD), procedures and report.

Coordinate Flight Test unique milestone reviews.

Coordinate Test as You Operate (TAYO) exception approval.

End-to-End Test and CEIT requirements development and planning.

Staff Test Director console as member of Mission Support Team.

Integration and delivery of products for DRD 104, 109 and Flight Test Readiness Review (FTRR).

Lead Flight Execution Team for Test Flights and PCMs, providing day to day decisions and ensuring issue resolution to maintain progress to plan per Flight Production Schedule.

Mission and cargo requirements integration, documentation (MRD) and reviews.

Coordinate agendas for SMMT meetings.

Integrate plans and products for and execution of PCM payment Milestones Reviews.

Update, maintain and release contract deliverables.

Mission Support Room management including BMCC/MSR integration and operation, Mission Support Team training & certification, Sim/Rehearsal planning & execution.

Develop and executes project and process plans, implements policies and procedures and sets operational goals.

Work with functional and business unit management to acquire resources for projects and processes, provide technical management of suppliers and lead process improvements.

Implement plans to ensure business, technical and customer requirements are achieved.

Assign authority and responsibilities to employees to execute the plan.

Reviews plans' execution, makes appropriate adjustments, and resolve issues.

Monitor appropriate metrics to ensure performance to plan.

Develop workgroup, project or operational goals, objectives and related metrics to ensure alignment with Company vision/strategy.

Generate requirements and analyze technical approach, statement of work, labor and deliverables for workgroup, projects or process to ensure a quality product is received.

Interface directly with external customers and suppliers to clarify technical requirements and issues.

Develop and maintain relationships and partnerships with customers, stakeholders, peers, partners and direct reports.

Provide oversight and approval of technical approaches, products and processes.

Manage, develop and motivate employees.

Coach, counsel, mentor and provide developmental opportunities and job assignments to enhance employee performance and expand capabilities.

Provide on-going developmental feedback.

Recognize contributions of individuals and teams to improve employee satisfaction and retain a skilled and motivated workforce.

Convey organizational messages to facilitate the accomplishment of workgroup, project or process goals.

Proactively communicate with employees, peers and customers. Keep others informed by communicating project status, conducting and participating in team meetings, providing presentations and listening to employee concerns and suggestions.

Enforce company rules and policies regarding ethical behavior, safety, security, use of company property, time charging, etc.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal - Animal Farm by George Orwell

Offline AstroWare

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 285
  • Arizona
  • Liked: 213
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #15 on: 05/19/2022 04:36 pm »


The WDR is primarily, but not exclusively for the LV only. It also tests the interfaces between the LV and the spacecraft. Given Boeing's recent history with Starliner's LV/Spacecraft interface screwups, I believe a WDR would be appropriate, if only for the interfacing. In my opinion of course.
A WDR is a rehearsal for events up to t0. The previous OFT issues occurred after staging, and were not caught by the WDR that was conducted (as expected, because the issue was confined to the spacecraft, and occurred after separation, so the LV was not involved or at fault). Unless there are expected to be brand new LV issues introduced since OFT-2 (i.e. no) an additional WDR would not be of any practical benefit, but would risk a recurrence of the now known valve corrosion issues until that design flaw can be mitigated more permanently.

Well, to play devil's advocate here (not really my opinion I think I'd have made the same call)

A WDR doesn't just check design issues. Stuff breaks all the time, even on stable designs. And it can break anytime too. I don't have a list of all the items that can't be checked until the pad... I bet the list is small but non-zero.

For example, what about a GSE valve issue? These have been found during terminal counts before.

Scenario 1: No WDR
Starliner is integrated and rolled to pad for launch. Launch scrub. 2 day delay = 2 day additional environmental exposure.

Scenario 2: WDR *before* Starliner integration
Once starliner is ready for integration, booster stack performs WDR. Valve issue discovered. 2 day delay. Then starliner is integrated and launched. No additional environmental exposure.

There is also PR aspects of a launch attempt scrub vs. a WDR scrub...

There is also scheduled risks. If you have a hard launch window (say ISS is very busy) you may not want to risk a launch attempt scrub if it means waiting a week or more for the next window. (VIF isn't a controlled environment I learned recently...)

And always cost. WDRs cost money. But So do Scrubs. Which costs more and who incurs the cost is beyond me! I'm just an engineer. That's what program managers are for.

Offline niwax

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1352
  • Germany
    • SpaceX Booster List
  • Liked: 1900
  • Likes Given: 159
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #16 on: 05/19/2022 06:19 pm »


The WDR is primarily, but not exclusively for the LV only. It also tests the interfaces between the LV and the spacecraft. Given Boeing's recent history with Starliner's LV/Spacecraft interface screwups, I believe a WDR would be appropriate, if only for the interfacing. In my opinion of course.
A WDR is a rehearsal for events up to t0. The previous OFT issues occurred after staging, and were not caught by the WDR that was conducted (as expected, because the issue was confined to the spacecraft, and occurred after separation, so the LV was not involved or at fault). Unless there are expected to be brand new LV issues introduced since OFT-2 (i.e. no) an additional WDR would not be of any practical benefit, but would risk a recurrence of the now known valve corrosion issues until that design flaw can be mitigated more permanently.

Well, to play devil's advocate here (not really my opinion I think I'd have made the same call)

A WDR doesn't just check design issues. Stuff breaks all the time, even on stable designs. And it can break anytime too. I don't have a list of all the items that can't be checked until the pad... I bet the list is small but non-zero.

For example, what about a GSE valve issue? These have been found during terminal counts before.

Scenario 1: No WDR
Starliner is integrated and rolled to pad for launch. Launch scrub. 2 day delay = 2 day additional environmental exposure.

Scenario 2: WDR *before* Starliner integration
Once starliner is ready for integration, booster stack performs WDR. Valve issue discovered. 2 day delay. Then starliner is integrated and launched. No additional environmental exposure.

There is also PR aspects of a launch attempt scrub vs. a WDR scrub...

There is also scheduled risks. If you have a hard launch window (say ISS is very busy) you may not want to risk a launch attempt scrub if it means waiting a week or more for the next window. (VIF isn't a controlled environment I learned recently...)

And always cost. WDRs cost money. But So do Scrubs. Which costs more and who incurs the cost is beyond me! I'm just an engineer. That's what program managers are for.

There is significant precedent for this: the F9 static fires. The misconception is that they are some sort of last minute safety test, their main function is actually avoiding scrubs. It's much cheaper to scrub a static fire once or twice and only have to book range assets and close off airspace once, at least while your rocket and GSE are still relatively new.
Which booster has the most soot? SpaceX booster launch history! (discussion)

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #17 on: 05/19/2022 07:18 pm »
It might be possible to recover service module using HIAD and mid air recovery, see ULA SMART concept. Not something Boeing would be doing anytime soon, especially with deadwood they have for management.


Sent from my SM-T733 using Tapatalk


Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33378
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 58742
  • Likes Given: 26259
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #18 on: 05/19/2022 07:32 pm »

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8843
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Sometimes it feels like Trantor in the time of Hari Seldon
  • Liked: 5327
  • Likes Given: 47859
Re: Boeing's Starliner (CST-100) - Discussion Thread 6
« Reply #19 on: 05/19/2022 07:35 pm »
As a member...
Virtually all of the posts in this new discussion thread are re-hashes of discussions thoroughly hashed out in the recently locked discussion thread.

SoftwareDude, you're re-posting the exact same stuff!

I suggest moving on.  I hope developments in the next hours will provide fodder for fresh discussions, not rehashing the same old boring hash.

Or, I might have to report to moderator.
« Last Edit: 05/19/2022 07:35 pm by zubenelgenubi »
Support your local planetarium! (COVID-panic and forward: Now more than ever.)
My current avatar is saying "i wants to go uppies!"

 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0