Total Members Voted: 61
Voting closed: 09/07/2024 11:32 am
Quote from: SoftwareDude on 09/10/2024 04:02 pmStarliner did not return with the software configuration, including low-level code, required to return astronauts to Earth. That part remains untested. Instead, a special return configuration, including a previous version of the software from OFT-2, was used.You are so far wrong on this it isn't funny. 1 MDL file was changed, and it wasn't even necessary to do so. It was only changed for optimizing the return and not enabling an uncrewed one. NO PRIOR OFT-2 SOFTWARE WAS USED. Period. The exact same FSW was used regardless of which return was performed.
Starliner did not return with the software configuration, including low-level code, required to return astronauts to Earth. That part remains untested. Instead, a special return configuration, including a previous version of the software from OFT-2, was used.
...What I said was based on what was said in the teleconference, “4 week install” “software does not support automated return” and discussions here. Where does your information come from?
Quote from: SoftwareDude on 09/10/2024 08:27 pm...What I said was based on what was said in the teleconference, “4 week install” “software does not support automated return” and discussions here. Where does your information come from?The specifics of the modified Mission Data Load weren't detailed during the teleconferences, but my takeaway was that the change enabled autonomous handling of contingency event vs handing control to the pilots and asking for help. I'd liken it to an aircraft which is capable both of being crewed and of flying autonomously. When crewed, certain contingency events cause the autopilot to disengage (standard practice on airliners), but that's not an option when flying autonomously, so it then needs to automatically deal with the contingencies.A good question that I've not heard asked is why both capabilities weren't predeveloped and preloaded?I understand that with the capsule being the lifeboat for its crew, there was little expectation that it would ever fly uncrewed again, but there must be plans in place for events such as the capsule being damaged by MMOD and needing to autonomously depart the docking port to make way for a rescue capsule, so you'd think the software for that would already be in place. But in truth, we don't know if that capability is retained by Dragon capsules or if an updated MDL would be required if such a circumstance arose.
Quote from: dondar on 09/06/2024 01:51 pmNASA didn't believed in SpaceX and bothered with "their" company only. That's all.That would be wrong
NASA didn't believed in SpaceX and bothered with "their" company only. That's all.
Quote from: kdhilliard on 09/10/2024 09:10 pmQuote from: SoftwareDude on 09/10/2024 08:27 pm...What I said was based on what was said in the teleconference, “4 week install” “software does not support automated return” and discussions here. Where does your information come from?The specifics of the modified Mission Data Load weren't detailed during the teleconferences, but my takeaway was that the change enabled autonomous handling of contingency event vs handing control to the pilots and asking for help. I'd liken it to an aircraft which is capable both of being crewed and of flying autonomously. When crewed, certain contingency events cause the autopilot to disengage (standard practice on airliners), but that's not an option when flying autonomously, so it then needs to automatically deal with the contingencies.A good question that I've not heard asked is why both capabilities weren't predeveloped and preloaded?I understand that with the capsule being the lifeboat for its crew, there was little expectation that it would ever fly uncrewed again, but there must be plans in place for events such as the capsule being damaged by MMOD and needing to autonomously depart the docking port to make way for a rescue capsule, so you'd think the software for that would already be in place. But in truth, we don't know if that capability is retained by Dragon capsules or if an updated MDL would be required if such a circumstance arose.I don’t remember the exact words except y “ Boeing has a lengthy software install process that takes four weeks.” Does not sound like a MDL change.
Saying that "SpaceX" didn't want to pay "themselves" for anything is quite another story. It is a lie.l
They were offering design features (I claim that many Boeing design features originate in NASA actually, the pedigree is unmistakable),
More of it SpaceX was constrained in resources of all types (money included) t
to develop NASA procured system.
If you said that SpaceX design was too risky for NASA as it was proposed (see heatshield holes for legs, Hydrazine on the landing zone etc.),
Quote from: jusvans on 09/10/2024 06:24 pmQuote from: SoftwareDude on 09/10/2024 04:02 pmStarliner did not return with the software configuration, including low-level code, required to return astronauts to Earth. That part remains untested. Instead, a special return configuration, including a previous version of the software from OFT-2, was used.You are so far wrong on this it isn't funny. 1 MDL file was changed, and it wasn't even necessary to do so. It was only changed for optimizing the return and not enabling an uncrewed one. NO PRIOR OFT-2 SOFTWARE WAS USED. Period. The exact same FSW was used regardless of which return was performed.What I said was based on what was said in the teleconference, “4 week install” “software does not support automated return” and discussions here. Where does your information come from?
Quote from: kdhilliard on 09/10/2024 09:10 pmQuote from: SoftwareDude on 09/10/2024 08:27 pm...What I said was based on what was said in the teleconference, “4 week install” “software does not support automated return” and discussions here. Where does your information come from?The specifics of the modified Mission Data Load weren't detailed during the teleconferences, but my takeaway was that the change enabled autonomous handling of contingency event vs handing control to the pilots and asking for help. I'd liken it to an aircraft which is capable both of being crewed and of flying autonomously. When crewed, certain contingency events cause the autopilot to disengage (standard practice on airliners), but that's not an option when flying autonomously, so it then needs to automatically deal with the contingencies.A good question that I've not heard asked is why both capabilities weren't predeveloped and preloaded?I understand that with the capsule being the lifeboat for its crew, there was little expectation that it would ever fly uncrewed again, but there must be plans in place for events such as the capsule being damaged by MMOD and needing to autonomously depart the docking port to make way for a rescue capsule, so you'd think the software for that would already be in place. But in truth, we don't know if that capability is retained by Dragon capsules or if an updated MDL would be required if such a circumstance arose.I think the rationale at the time was it wouldn't fly uncrewed so a specific version wasn't developed. I remember hearing at a presser that it didn't necessarily need to be updated either, but it was a nice to have. Plus, if you did make 2 "optimized" versions, that would double the verification work for essentially the same file.
Quote from: jusvans on 09/11/2024 05:09 amQuote from: kdhilliard on 09/10/2024 09:10 pmQuote from: SoftwareDude on 09/10/2024 08:27 pm...What I said was based on what was said in the teleconference, “4 week install” “software does not support automated return” and discussions here. Where does your information come from?The specifics of the modified Mission Data Load weren't detailed during the teleconferences, but my takeaway was that the change enabled autonomous handling of contingency event vs handing control to the pilots and asking for help. I'd liken it to an aircraft which is capable both of being crewed and of flying autonomously. When crewed, certain contingency events cause the autopilot to disengage (standard practice on airliners), but that's not an option when flying autonomously, so it then needs to automatically deal with the contingencies.A good question that I've not heard asked is why both capabilities weren't predeveloped and preloaded?I understand that with the capsule being the lifeboat for its crew, there was little expectation that it would ever fly uncrewed again, but there must be plans in place for events such as the capsule being damaged by MMOD and needing to autonomously depart the docking port to make way for a rescue capsule, so you'd think the software for that would already be in place. But in truth, we don't know if that capability is retained by Dragon capsules or if an updated MDL would be required if such a circumstance arose.I think the rationale at the time was it wouldn't fly uncrewed so a specific version wasn't developed. I remember hearing at a presser that it didn't necessarily need to be updated either, but it was a nice to have. Plus, if you did make 2 "optimized" versions, that would double the verification work for essentially the same file.Thanks for answering. It clears up a lot about what is going on. I think Berger was quoting Stich.
Stumbled into this picture on video, enlarged video to full screen, did a print screen, converted png to jpg, and attached to this mess, er, message. The link to the video is https://x.com/i/status/1834688533430518100 and was found on twitter @sherifftv and dated Sep 13 Ellie in Space and at 9:42 +|- of an 11+ minute video a falling object is seen in the middle of video portion of the image. Sorry I am not up to speed enough to crop out the upper part of the image or to circle the falling object of interest in the video. Hopefully the still picture that is attached (first time trying to attach an image) is usable and/or there is enough info to find the video and skip to the appropriate place on the video. In this day and age, start with the question if this is real and proceed from there. Hopefully the attributions are sufficient for anyone trying to track down this video.
Quote from: duh on 09/15/2024 04:25 pmStumbled into this picture on video, enlarged video to full screen, did a print screen, converted png to jpg, and attached to this mess, er, message. The link to the video is https://x.com/i/status/1834688533430518100 and was found on twitter @sherifftv and dated Sep 13 Ellie in Space and at 9:42 +|- of an 11+ minute video a falling object is seen in the middle of video portion of the image. Sorry I am not up to speed enough to crop out the upper part of the image or to circle the falling object of interest in the video. Hopefully the still picture that is attached (first time trying to attach an image) is usable and/or there is enough info to find the video and skip to the appropriate place on the video. In this day and age, start with the question if this is real and proceed from there. Hopefully the attributions are sufficient for anyone trying to track down this video.Based on the diagram at:https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpeg21x7n7qoand the photo in this news story:https://www.nbcnews.com/science/space/boeing-starliner-launch-today-international-space-station-rcna29597it would appear that the thing that popped off covered the window, not the hatch. Some sort of a remove-before-flight protective cover to keep the window clean.The video shows the service module attached to the capsule so it must have been pre-launch. Not a great look but likely of no consequence to the mission.
My crystal ball shows Boeing making a statement about the Starliner program no earlier than ... Friday the 13th.
Reuters reports that Ted Colbert, president and CEO of Boeing Defense, Space and Security, will be leaving the company effective immediately.https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeing-defense-head-ted-colbert-leave-2024-09-20/