Quote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 02:42 amQuote from: Comga on 07/04/2022 12:48 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 12:27 amQuote from: Vahe231991 on 07/03/2022 11:31 pmIn case anyone's aware, the CFT will be the first manned mission to be launched atop the Atlas V since the Faith 7 mission in May 1963. As pointed out elsewhere in this forum, since the Atlas V will launch all operational manned Starliner missions, it is intended to carry out the last manned launches involving an SLV that carries the name of a Cold War ICBM, since the Gemini missions were launched atop the Titan ICBM.(My bold) Anyone who has concluded this must think that Starliner-6 will be the last Starliner flight, that there will never be a Starliner flight except the CFT and the six operational CCP missions. So no non-NASA flights and no flights except to ISS. This is not yet known.Pick, pick, pick1) Vahe probably meant that all currently contracted Starliner flights will launch atop the Atlas V.2) While it's hard to make predictions, especially about the future, it's pretty much headed that way, illustrations not withstanding.The fundamental basis of the post is incorrect, but minimizing expectations for Starliner is what concerns you?A lot of us, including me, think Starliner will only fly another seven times at most. That does not make it true, so I think we need to continue to make sure that its a prediction and not Boeing's stated plan.And on what basis do you think it will only fly another seven times, show your working as they say.
Quote from: Comga on 07/04/2022 12:48 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 12:27 amQuote from: Vahe231991 on 07/03/2022 11:31 pmIn case anyone's aware, the CFT will be the first manned mission to be launched atop the Atlas V since the Faith 7 mission in May 1963. As pointed out elsewhere in this forum, since the Atlas V will launch all operational manned Starliner missions, it is intended to carry out the last manned launches involving an SLV that carries the name of a Cold War ICBM, since the Gemini missions were launched atop the Titan ICBM.(My bold) Anyone who has concluded this must think that Starliner-6 will be the last Starliner flight, that there will never be a Starliner flight except the CFT and the six operational CCP missions. So no non-NASA flights and no flights except to ISS. This is not yet known.Pick, pick, pick1) Vahe probably meant that all currently contracted Starliner flights will launch atop the Atlas V.2) While it's hard to make predictions, especially about the future, it's pretty much headed that way, illustrations not withstanding.The fundamental basis of the post is incorrect, but minimizing expectations for Starliner is what concerns you?A lot of us, including me, think Starliner will only fly another seven times at most. That does not make it true, so I think we need to continue to make sure that its a prediction and not Boeing's stated plan.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 12:27 amQuote from: Vahe231991 on 07/03/2022 11:31 pmIn case anyone's aware, the CFT will be the first manned mission to be launched atop the Atlas V since the Faith 7 mission in May 1963. As pointed out elsewhere in this forum, since the Atlas V will launch all operational manned Starliner missions, it is intended to carry out the last manned launches involving an SLV that carries the name of a Cold War ICBM, since the Gemini missions were launched atop the Titan ICBM.(My bold) Anyone who has concluded this must think that Starliner-6 will be the last Starliner flight, that there will never be a Starliner flight except the CFT and the six operational CCP missions. So no non-NASA flights and no flights except to ISS. This is not yet known.Pick, pick, pick1) Vahe probably meant that all currently contracted Starliner flights will launch atop the Atlas V.2) While it's hard to make predictions, especially about the future, it's pretty much headed that way, illustrations not withstanding.The fundamental basis of the post is incorrect, but minimizing expectations for Starliner is what concerns you?
Quote from: Vahe231991 on 07/03/2022 11:31 pmIn case anyone's aware, the CFT will be the first manned mission to be launched atop the Atlas V since the Faith 7 mission in May 1963. As pointed out elsewhere in this forum, since the Atlas V will launch all operational manned Starliner missions, it is intended to carry out the last manned launches involving an SLV that carries the name of a Cold War ICBM, since the Gemini missions were launched atop the Titan ICBM.(My bold) Anyone who has concluded this must think that Starliner-6 will be the last Starliner flight, that there will never be a Starliner flight except the CFT and the six operational CCP missions. So no non-NASA flights and no flights except to ISS. This is not yet known.
In case anyone's aware, the CFT will be the first manned mission to be launched atop the Atlas V since the Faith 7 mission in May 1963. As pointed out elsewhere in this forum, since the Atlas V will launch all operational manned Starliner missions, it is intended to carry out the last manned launches involving an SLV that carries the name of a Cold War ICBM, since the Gemini missions were launched atop the Titan ICBM.
Responding in a new thread, since this is Off-topic for the Atlas N22 CFT threadQuote from: Star One on 07/04/2022 08:50 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 02:42 amQuote from: Comga on 07/04/2022 12:48 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 12:27 amQuote from: Vahe231991 on 07/03/2022 11:31 pmIn case anyone's aware, the CFT will be the first manned mission to be launched atop the Atlas V since the Faith 7 mission in May 1963. As pointed out elsewhere in this forum, since the Atlas V will launch all operational manned Starliner missions, it is intended to carry out the last manned launches involving an SLV that carries the name of a Cold War ICBM, since the Gemini missions were launched atop the Titan ICBM.(My bold) Anyone who has concluded this must think that Starliner-6 will be the last Starliner flight, that there will never be a Starliner flight except the CFT and the six operational CCP missions. So no non-NASA flights and no flights except to ISS. This is not yet known.Pick, pick, pick1) Vahe probably meant that all currently contracted Starliner flights will launch atop the Atlas V.2) While it's hard to make predictions, especially about the future, it's pretty much headed that way, illustrations not withstanding.The fundamental basis of the post is incorrect, but minimizing expectations for Starliner is what concerns you?A lot of us, including me, think Starliner will only fly another seven times at most. That does not make it true, so I think we need to continue to make sure that its a prediction and not Boeing's stated plan.And on what basis do you think it will only fly another seven times, show your working as they say.I infer this from the following. It is an armchair prediction of future events, so feel free to disagree. --Starliner will be human-rated on Atlas V. All remaining Atlas Vs have been allocated, Seven of them are allocated to Starliner. --To fly more than seven flights, Starliner must be human-rated on additional launchers, and this is likely to be at least somewhat expensive. Vulcan is the only realistic alternative that I know of. --Starliner-on-Atlas is at least 50% more expensive than Crew Dragon on F9 and is probably more than 100% more expensive, per flight -- F9 is much cheaper than Vulcan -- The expended Crew Dragon trunk is much cheaper than the expended Starliner service module. --Starliner is so behind schedule that crewed Starship is likely to be available before Starliner could fly on Vulcan.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 12:21 pmResponding in a new thread, since this is Off-topic for the Atlas N22 CFT threadQuote from: Star One on 07/04/2022 08:50 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 02:42 amQuote from: Comga on 07/04/2022 12:48 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 12:27 amQuote from: Vahe231991 on 07/03/2022 11:31 pmIn case anyone's aware, the CFT will be the first manned mission to be launched atop the Atlas V since the Faith 7 mission in May 1963. As pointed out elsewhere in this forum, since the Atlas V will launch all operational manned Starliner missions, it is intended to carry out the last manned launches involving an SLV that carries the name of a Cold War ICBM, since the Gemini missions were launched atop the Titan ICBM.(My bold) Anyone who has concluded this must think that Starliner-6 will be the last Starliner flight, that there will never be a Starliner flight except the CFT and the six operational CCP missions. So no non-NASA flights and no flights except to ISS. This is not yet known.Pick, pick, pick1) Vahe probably meant that all currently contracted Starliner flights will launch atop the Atlas V.2) While it's hard to make predictions, especially about the future, it's pretty much headed that way, illustrations not withstanding.The fundamental basis of the post is incorrect, but minimizing expectations for Starliner is what concerns you?A lot of us, including me, think Starliner will only fly another seven times at most. That does not make it true, so I think we need to continue to make sure that its a prediction and not Boeing's stated plan.And on what basis do you think it will only fly another seven times, show your working as they say.I infer this from the following. It is an armchair prediction of future events, so feel free to disagree. --Starliner will be human-rated on Atlas V. All remaining Atlas Vs have been allocated, Seven of them are allocated to Starliner. --To fly more than seven flights, Starliner must be human-rated on additional launchers, and this is likely to be at least somewhat expensive. Vulcan is the only realistic alternative that I know of. --Starliner-on-Atlas is at least 50% more expensive than Crew Dragon on F9 and is probably more than 100% more expensive, per flight -- F9 is much cheaper than Vulcan -- The expended Crew Dragon trunk is much cheaper than the expended Starliner service module. --Starliner is so behind schedule that crewed Starship is likely to be available before Starliner could fly on Vulcan.Other than the fact that Vulcan is meant to be human rated from the get go. Not everyone wishes to use Space X. We saw that with Project Kuiper where every launcher other than Space X was used. Related to this you’re assuming costumers will always choose the cheapest option in fact there maybe be a whole variety of reasons from a desire to maintain a variety of options as Space Force do with their national security launches to a desire not to give work to a commercial revival. Orbital Reef at least from its art work includes the use of other human rated vehicles and not Dragon or Starship. Long story short money is not always, and shouldn’t be the only deciding factor in these decisions. I personally believe this is important to avoid a monopoly position arising in the sector. Even if it means interfering in the market as the longer term outcome is more important than short term gains.
I infer this from the following. It is an armchair prediction of future events, so feel free to disagree. --Starliner will be human-rated on Atlas V. All remaining Atlas Vs have been allocated, Seven of them are allocated to Starliner. --To fly more than seven flights, Starliner must be human-rated on additional launchers, and this is likely to be at least somewhat expensive. Vulcan is the only realistic alternative that I know of. --Starliner-on-Atlas is at least 50% more expensive than Crew Dragon on F9 and is probably more than 100% more expensive, per flight -- F9 is much cheaper than Vulcan -- The expended Crew Dragon trunk is much cheaper than the expended Starliner service module. --Starliner is so behind schedule that crewed Starship is likely to be available before Starliner could fly on Vulcan.
Other than the fact that Vulcan is meant to be human rated from the get go. Not everyone wishes to use Space X. We saw that with Project Kuiper where every launcher other than Space X was used. Related to this you’re assuming costumers will always choose the cheapest option in fact there maybe be a whole variety of reasons from a desire to maintain a variety of options as Space Force do with their national security launches to a desire not to give work to a commercial revival. Orbital Reef at least from its art work includes the use of other human rated vehicles and not Dragon or Starship. Long story short money is not always, and shouldn’t be the only deciding factor in these decisions. I personally believe this is important to avoid a monopoly position arising in the sector. Even if it means interfering in the market as the longer term outcome is more important than short term gains.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 12:21 pmI infer this from the following. It is an armchair prediction of future events, so feel free to disagree. --Starliner will be human-rated on Atlas V. All remaining Atlas Vs have been allocated, Seven of them are allocated to Starliner. --To fly more than seven flights, Starliner must be human-rated on additional launchers, and this is likely to be at least somewhat expensive. Vulcan is the only realistic alternative that I know of. --Starliner-on-Atlas is at least 50% more expensive than Crew Dragon on F9 and is probably more than 100% more expensive, per flight -- F9 is much cheaper than Vulcan -- The expended Crew Dragon trunk is much cheaper than the expended Starliner service module. --Starliner is so behind schedule that crewed Starship is likely to be available before Starliner could fly on Vulcan.Not the bolded either. Some of NSF folk suggest that New Glenn will actually be the next launch vehicle to carry Starliner after Atlas V is retired, not Vulcan
Orbital reef is a commercial venture. Meaning it has to make a profit. If a Starliner seat on Atlas costs a space tourist $80m, while a seat on Dragon costs the tourist $50M, I struggle to see how Orbital Reef stays operational by using Starliner. Else a competitor will put them out of business charging tourists $30M less for the same experience using Dragon.
Quote from: Alvian@IDN on 07/04/2022 02:56 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 12:21 pmI infer this from the following. It is an armchair prediction of future events, so feel free to disagree. --Starliner will be human-rated on Atlas V. All remaining Atlas Vs have been allocated, Seven of them are allocated to Starliner. --To fly more than seven flights, Starliner must be human-rated on additional launchers, and this is likely to be at least somewhat expensive. Vulcan is the only realistic alternative that I know of. --Starliner-on-Atlas is at least 50% more expensive than Crew Dragon on F9 and is probably more than 100% more expensive, per flight -- F9 is much cheaper than Vulcan -- The expended Crew Dragon trunk is much cheaper than the expended Starliner service module. --Starliner is so behind schedule that crewed Starship is likely to be available before Starliner could fly on Vulcan.Not the bolded either. Some of NSF folk suggest that New Glenn will actually be the next launch vehicle to carry Starliner after Atlas V is retired, not Vulcan"Prediction is hard, especially the future". Since I think Vulcan may miss the window against Starship, I guess it's clear that I think New Glenn will miss even worse. But I'm just guessing.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 04:14 pmQuote from: Alvian@IDN on 07/04/2022 02:56 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 12:21 pmI infer this from the following. It is an armchair prediction of future events, so feel free to disagree. --Starliner will be human-rated on Atlas V. All remaining Atlas Vs have been allocated, Seven of them are allocated to Starliner. --To fly more than seven flights, Starliner must be human-rated on additional launchers, and this is likely to be at least somewhat expensive. Vulcan is the only realistic alternative that I know of. --Starliner-on-Atlas is at least 50% more expensive than Crew Dragon on F9 and is probably more than 100% more expensive, per flight -- F9 is much cheaper than Vulcan -- The expended Crew Dragon trunk is much cheaper than the expended Starliner service module. --Starliner is so behind schedule that crewed Starship is likely to be available before Starliner could fly on Vulcan.Not the bolded either. Some of NSF folk suggest that New Glenn will actually be the next launch vehicle to carry Starliner after Atlas V is retired, not Vulcan"Prediction is hard, especially the future". Since I think Vulcan may miss the window against Starship, I guess it's clear that I think New Glenn will miss even worse. But I'm just guessing.Given that it'll take time for SpaceX to make slight adjustments to the area near the Starbase launch site for the Starship in order for the FAA to clear the last hurdle to SpaceX conducting the first launch of the Starship, the Vulcan rocket in all probability will fly before the Starship does.
Quote from: Vahe231991 on 07/05/2022 02:00 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 04:14 pmQuote from: Alvian@IDN on 07/04/2022 02:56 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 12:21 pmI infer this from the following. It is an armchair prediction of future events, so feel free to disagree. --Starliner will be human-rated on Atlas V. All remaining Atlas Vs have been allocated, Seven of them are allocated to Starliner. --To fly more than seven flights, Starliner must be human-rated on additional launchers, and this is likely to be at least somewhat expensive. Vulcan is the only realistic alternative that I know of. --Starliner-on-Atlas is at least 50% more expensive than Crew Dragon on F9 and is probably more than 100% more expensive, per flight -- F9 is much cheaper than Vulcan -- The expended Crew Dragon trunk is much cheaper than the expended Starliner service module. --Starliner is so behind schedule that crewed Starship is likely to be available before Starliner could fly on Vulcan.Not the bolded either. Some of NSF folk suggest that New Glenn will actually be the next launch vehicle to carry Starliner after Atlas V is retired, not Vulcan"Prediction is hard, especially the future". Since I think Vulcan may miss the window against Starship, I guess it's clear that I think New Glenn will miss even worse. But I'm just guessing.Given that it'll take time for SpaceX to make slight adjustments to the area near the Starbase launch site for the Starship in order for the FAA to clear the last hurdle to SpaceX conducting the first launch of the Starship, the Vulcan rocket in all probability will fly before the Starship does.As of now, Starship is trying for July-August, SLS is trying for August-September, and Vulcan is trying for December/January. But the time from Vulcan first launch to Vulcan first operational launch is likely to be short, while Starship will likely need multiple test launches before a true operational launch.
Quote from: Star One on 07/04/2022 02:35 pmOther than the fact that Vulcan is meant to be human rated from the get go. Not everyone wishes to use Space X. We saw that with Project Kuiper where every launcher other than Space X was used. Related to this you’re assuming costumers will always choose the cheapest option in fact there maybe be a whole variety of reasons from a desire to maintain a variety of options as Space Force do with their national security launches to a desire not to give work to a commercial revival. Orbital Reef at least from its art work includes the use of other human rated vehicles and not Dragon or Starship. Long story short money is not always, and shouldn’t be the only deciding factor in these decisions. I personally believe this is important to avoid a monopoly position arising in the sector. Even if it means interfering in the market as the longer term outcome is more important than short term gains.Your opinion is just as valid as mine. I just responded when you asked me to. Starliner would have been overwhelmingly superior if it CFT had flown in 2017 as originally expected, and more viable if delivered in 2020 when Crew Dragon Demo-2 flew. If F9 re-usability had not worked out or if Crew Dragon had slipped as badly as Starliner, Starliner might be dominant. But we are where we are. I also feel that the "anybody but SpaceX" companies may not remain viable or may be forced to change their position. OneWeb was originally in this category, but reality intruded.
Quote from: Star One on 07/04/2022 02:35 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 12:21 pmResponding in a new thread, since this is Off-topic for the Atlas N22 CFT threadQuote from: Star One on 07/04/2022 08:50 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 02:42 amQuote from: Comga on 07/04/2022 12:48 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/04/2022 12:27 amQuote from: Vahe231991 on 07/03/2022 11:31 pmIn case anyone's aware, the CFT will be the first manned mission to be launched atop the Atlas V since the Faith 7 mission in May 1963. As pointed out elsewhere in this forum, since the Atlas V will launch all operational manned Starliner missions, it is intended to carry out the last manned launches involving an SLV that carries the name of a Cold War ICBM, since the Gemini missions were launched atop the Titan ICBM.(My bold) Anyone who has concluded this must think that Starliner-6 will be the last Starliner flight, that there will never be a Starliner flight except the CFT and the six operational CCP missions. So no non-NASA flights and no flights except to ISS. This is not yet known.Pick, pick, pick1) Vahe probably meant that all currently contracted Starliner flights will launch atop the Atlas V.2) While it's hard to make predictions, especially about the future, it's pretty much headed that way, illustrations not withstanding.The fundamental basis of the post is incorrect, but minimizing expectations for Starliner is what concerns you?A lot of us, including me, think Starliner will only fly another seven times at most. That does not make it true, so I think we need to continue to make sure that its a prediction and not Boeing's stated plan.And on what basis do you think it will only fly another seven times, show your working as they say.I infer this from the following. It is an armchair prediction of future events, so feel free to disagree. --Starliner will be human-rated on Atlas V. All remaining Atlas Vs have been allocated, Seven of them are allocated to Starliner. --To fly more than seven flights, Starliner must be human-rated on additional launchers, and this is likely to be at least somewhat expensive. Vulcan is the only realistic alternative that I know of. --Starliner-on-Atlas is at least 50% more expensive than Crew Dragon on F9 and is probably more than 100% more expensive, per flight -- F9 is much cheaper than Vulcan -- The expended Crew Dragon trunk is much cheaper than the expended Starliner service module. --Starliner is so behind schedule that crewed Starship is likely to be available before Starliner could fly on Vulcan.Other than the fact that Vulcan is meant to be human rated from the get go. Not everyone wishes to use Space X. We saw that with Project Kuiper where every launcher other than Space X was used. Related to this you’re assuming costumers will always choose the cheapest option in fact there maybe be a whole variety of reasons from a desire to maintain a variety of options as Space Force do with their national security launches to a desire not to give work to a commercial revival. Orbital Reef at least from its art work includes the use of other human rated vehicles and not Dragon or Starship. Long story short money is not always, and shouldn’t be the only deciding factor in these decisions. I personally believe this is important to avoid a monopoly position arising in the sector. Even if it means interfering in the market as the longer term outcome is more important than short term gains.Orbital reef is a commercial venture. Meaning it has to make a profit. If a Starliner seat on Atlas costs a space tourist $80m, while a seat on Dragon costs the tourist $50M, I struggle to see how Orbital Reef stays operational by using Starliner. Else a competitor will put them out of business charging tourists $30M less for the same experience using Dragon.
Bezos is sufficiently wealthy and motivated I suspect to maintain a stance of anyone but Space X if he so wishes. Also his company is hardly in the same position as One Web.
Price is not always the deciding factor of success in a market. You only have to look at the iPhone to see this. It has always been the more expensive option yet has had no issue selling or turning a profit for Apple.
Quote from: Star One on 07/05/2022 09:37 amPrice is not always the deciding factor of success in a market. You only have to look at the iPhone to see this. It has always been the more expensive option yet has had no issue selling or turning a profit for Apple.Yes, but to be more expensive, you must offer something more or different. Starliner is basically the same service as crew dragon.
Quote from: deadman1204 on 07/05/2022 07:34 pmQuote from: Star One on 07/05/2022 09:37 amPrice is not always the deciding factor of success in a market. You only have to look at the iPhone to see this. It has always been the more expensive option yet has had no issue selling or turning a profit for Apple.Yes, but to be more expensive, you must offer something more or different. Starliner is basically the same service as crew dragon.Right, it's not about price, it's about value. The question is "what value can Starliner offer that Dragon does not/can't?". If you can't answer that question, then the value equation favors Dragon.
Quote from: r8ix on 07/05/2022 09:34 pmQuote from: deadman1204 on 07/05/2022 07:34 pmQuote from: Star One on 07/05/2022 09:37 amPrice is not always the deciding factor of success in a market. You only have to look at the iPhone to see this. It has always been the more expensive option yet has had no issue selling or turning a profit for Apple.Yes, but to be more expensive, you must offer something more or different. Starliner is basically the same service as crew dragon.Right, it's not about price, it's about value. The question is "what value can Starliner offer that Dragon does not/can't?". If you can't answer that question, then the value equation favors Dragon.A 5th seat, for one thing.
Right, it's not about price, it's about value. The question is "what value can Starliner offer that Dragon does not/can't?". If you can't answer that question, then the value equation favors Dragon.
ISS reboost is another.
For some purchasers, "It's not SpaceX" is a sufficient added-value statement.That might be for policy reasons (e.g. NASA wants a second source) or for more personal motivation.
Quote from: whitelancer64 on 07/05/2022 09:39 pmQuote from: r8ix on 07/05/2022 09:34 pmQuote from: deadman1204 on 07/05/2022 07:34 pmQuote from: Star One on 07/05/2022 09:37 amPrice is not always the deciding factor of success in a market. You only have to look at the iPhone to see this. It has always been the more expensive option yet has had no issue selling or turning a profit for Apple.Yes, but to be more expensive, you must offer something more or different. Starliner is basically the same service as crew dragon.Right, it's not about price, it's about value. The question is "what value can Starliner offer that Dragon does not/can't?". If you can't answer that question, then the value equation favors Dragon.A 5th seat, for one thing.Both vessels claim 7 seats on their respective web pages, but neither is currently scheduled to carry more than 4, as near as I can tell.Quote from: Robert_the_Doll on 07/05/2022 09:45 pmISS reboost is another.This is a definite value-add for NASA, though it a) hasn't been demonstrated yet, and b) Elon (*grain of salt) kind of offered to add that capability since the late unpleasantness in Ukraine. It is not, however, of any value to private non-ISS potential customers.Quote from: Kiwi53 on 07/05/2022 10:09 pmFor some purchasers, "It's not SpaceX" is a sufficient added-value statement.That might be for policy reasons (e.g. NASA wants a second source) or for more personal motivation.That is a definite possibility, and very difficult to put a number on.So we've got some possible value here, and the question then becomes: "Is it enough".I don't know the answer to that.
Quote from: Robert_the_Doll on 07/05/2022 09:45 pmISS reboost is another.But NASA has finished buying all the Commercial Crew missions through the end of the ISS program in 2030. If Boeing is going to win any new business for Starliner, it has to be for Commercial LEO Destinations (CLD) in the 2030s, or perhaps free-flyer missions until those stations are deployed.Boeing's value proposition for Starliner might ultimately be their willingness to continue operating Starliner for as long as the CLD stations are operating, while SpaceX tells CLD providers that their stations will have to accommodate a transition from Crew Dragon to Starship at some point in the 2030s. One thing that Starship has in common with Shuttle is that LEO station crew rotation is not among its most practical use-cases. It doesn't have enough orbital endurance to double as a lifeboat for a long-duration crew. Shuttle couldn't do any ISS crew rotation without a complementary Soyuz manifest, and Starship creates a similar market niche for a much more basic reentry vehicle with storable liquid propulsion. If SpaceX feels they have better things to do beyond earth orbit in the 2030s, Starliner could fill that niche. Starliner could be the 2020s crew capsule supporting 2020s vintage space stations in the 2040s. It depends on Dragon's longevity, really.
If Starliner costs less to use than an F9, why would the tickets be more expensive on a Starliner?
It should be straightforward for a cargo Starship to deliver unoccupied "crew taxis" to a CLD and bring them back to earth for servicing. A "crew taxi is just a simplified Crew Dragon, and in normal use it will not EDL by itself. When a crewed Starship arrives at the CLD, the taxi shuttles crew back and forth between the Starship and the CLD. The taxi can serve as a lifeboat and EDL in an emergency. Much cheaper: the taxi has enough endurance to keep the crew alive for (say) two weeks, and a crewed Starship is on standby to fetch the crew.
Quote from: Kansan52 on 07/06/2022 01:51 amIf Starliner costs less to use than an F9, why would the tickets be more expensive on a Starliner?What does this even mean? They are not comparable. You need to compare Starliner-on-Atlas V with Crew Dragon-on-F9.F9 is a partly reusable launch vehicle. It's less expensive than Atlas or Vulcan, which are expendable.Starliner is a partially reusable crewed spacecraft. It is less expensive than Starliner because Starliner expends its expensive service module.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 07/06/2022 03:09 amQuote from: Kansan52 on 07/06/2022 01:51 amIf Starliner costs less to use than an F9, why would the tickets be more expensive on a Starliner?What does this even mean? They are not comparable. You need to compare Starliner-on-Atlas V with Crew Dragon-on-F9.F9 is a partly reusable launch vehicle. It's less expensive than Atlas or Vulcan, which are expendable.Starliner Crew Dragon is a partially reusable crewed spacecraft. It is less expensive than Starliner because Starliner expends its expensive service module.Since it's already mentioned in this thread that the Crew Dragon is less expensive to operate due it to being partially reusable, you mistakenly stated "Starliner is a partially reusable crewed spacecraft" instead of "Crew Dragon is a partially reusable crewed spacecraft".
Quote from: Kansan52 on 07/06/2022 01:51 amIf Starliner costs less to use than an F9, why would the tickets be more expensive on a Starliner?What does this even mean? They are not comparable. You need to compare Starliner-on-Atlas V with Crew Dragon-on-F9.F9 is a partly reusable launch vehicle. It's less expensive than Atlas or Vulcan, which are expendable.Starliner Crew Dragon is a partially reusable crewed spacecraft. It is less expensive than Starliner because Starliner expends its expensive service module.
NASA requiring redundancy? Well, after 2030 NASA no longer requires LEO crew transport at all, given ISS wil no longer exist. So not them.
Quote from: M.E.T. on 07/06/2022 01:14 amNASA requiring redundancy? Well, after 2030 NASA no longer requires LEO crew transport at all, given ISS wil no longer exist. So not them.Sorry but that statement is wrong. NASA will continue to send crews to LEO after 2030 under the Commercial LEO Destinations (CLD) program. (to Blue Origin's Orbital Reef, NanoRack's Starlab Space Station and the Axiom Station)
Quote from: Robert_the_Doll on 07/05/2022 09:45 pmISS reboost is another.But Starliner has not yet demonstrated this, and Crew and Cargo Dragons might able to do it also, assuming someone pays for it. The Dragons are a better choice because they do more missions per year. Cygnus-on-F9 would also be much cheaper for this. Cygnus has already demonstrated reboost. Apparently, the berthing port used by Cygnus is better situated for reboost than the docking ports used by Starliner and Dragon.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 07/07/2022 04:00 pmQuote from: Robert_the_Doll on 07/05/2022 09:45 pmISS reboost is another.But Starliner has not yet demonstrated this, and Crew and Cargo Dragons might able to do it also, assuming someone pays for it. The Dragons are a better choice because they do more missions per year. Cygnus-on-F9 would also be much cheaper for this. Cygnus has already demonstrated reboost. Apparently, the berthing port used by Cygnus is better situated for reboost than the docking ports used by Starliner and Dragon.This subject has been covered plenty of times, Dragon's Draco thrusters positions and small size don't make it ideal for job.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 07/07/2022 07:30 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/07/2022 04:00 pmQuote from: Robert_the_Doll on 07/05/2022 09:45 pmISS reboost is another.But Starliner has not yet demonstrated this, and Crew and Cargo Dragons might able to do it also, assuming someone pays for it. The Dragons are a better choice because they do more missions per year. Cygnus-on-F9 would also be much cheaper for this. Cygnus has already demonstrated reboost. Apparently, the berthing port used by Cygnus is better situated for reboost than the docking ports used by Starliner and Dragon.This subject has been covered plenty of times, Dragon's Draco thrusters positions and small size don't make it ideal for job.The former, yes. The latter, no. Small size is *not* a disadvantage for ISS reboost thrusters (ask any ISS loads & dynamics engineer). The space shuttle did ISS reboost for years with smaller thrusters than Dragon.
Quote from: Jorge on 07/08/2022 12:18 amQuote from: TrevorMonty on 07/07/2022 07:30 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 07/07/2022 04:00 pmQuote from: Robert_the_Doll on 07/05/2022 09:45 pmISS reboost is another.But Starliner has not yet demonstrated this, and Crew and Cargo Dragons might able to do it also, assuming someone pays for it. The Dragons are a better choice because they do more missions per year. Cygnus-on-F9 would also be much cheaper for this. Cygnus has already demonstrated reboost. Apparently, the berthing port used by Cygnus is better situated for reboost than the docking ports used by Starliner and Dragon.This subject has been covered plenty of times, Dragon's Draco thrusters positions and small size don't make it ideal for job.The former, yes. The latter, no. Small size is *not* a disadvantage for ISS reboost thrusters (ask any ISS loads & dynamics engineer). The space shuttle did ISS reboost for years with smaller thrusters than Dragon.For the purposes of this thread, ISS reboost is relevant only if NASA would decide to add additional Starliner flights to ISS because of this capability.Can a Starliner CCP mission perform reboost in addition to the other CCP requirements on the saem mission? (crew support, small cargo, six-month loiter, lifeboat)? If so, they already have six or seven reboost opportunities. If not, they would need additional Starliner missions for reboost. But those missions aren't on the CCP contract, so presumably NASA will go out for competitive bids. Cygnus-on-F9 would probably win.My personal guess: Starliner will not win additional flights to perform ISS reboost.
One top NASA official called Boeing’s inability to get its CST-100 Starliner capsule into regular use an “existential” challenge.
But asked whether Boeing plans to continue with the program long-term, he suggested that was in doubt. “It’s a great question. And I wish I had the answer to it right now,” he [John Shannon] said.The concern, he said, is that the private market for space travel is uncertain and plans for commercial space stations that would provide a need for regular launches have yet to materialize, even though NASA has started to invest in those and Boeing is a partner with Blue Origin and Sierra Space on one.“They’re just not at a level of maturity where I can write them into any kind of a business case and say that yeah, this is something that’s going to kind of get us over the hump,” he said.