-
#1440
by
wolfpack
on 21 Mar, 2020 17:28
-
True.
I'd guess Starliner fares better under a nationalization, because it's still "Boeing" at that point. I'd be less sure about a merger with NG or something like that. Bigger leadership change that way and that usually ripples its way through everything.
I'm sure Starliner will see another flight but I think it's farther away than maybe even we thought just a month ago.
-
#1441
by
PM3
on 21 Mar, 2020 18:40
-
I'd guess Starliner fares better under a nationalization, because it's still "Boeing" at that point.
This would contradict the concept of Commercial Crew. Starliner would be effectively run by the government then. SpaceX would be competing against the government. Wouldn't this invalidate the whole Commercial Crew contracting setup? How to handle that?
-
#1442
by
gongora
on 21 Mar, 2020 19:56
-
I'd guess Starliner fares better under a nationalization, because it's still "Boeing" at that point.
This would contradict the concept of Commercial Crew. Starliner would be effectively run by the government then. SpaceX would be competing against the government. Wouldn't this invalidate the whole Commercial Crew contracting setup? How to handle that?
This is really starting to go down a rabbit hole. Last I checked Boeing hasn't been nationalized. Let's see how this plays out. They're a huge company that should be able to raise funds if they actually tried.
-
#1443
by
PM3
on 21 Mar, 2020 20:07
-
They're a huge company that should be able to raise funds if they actually tried.
Like General Motors 11 years ago?
-
#1444
by
gongora
on 21 Mar, 2020 20:25
-
Boeing is stronger than GM was.
-
#1445
by
PM3
on 21 Mar, 2020 20:39
-
Boeing is stronger than GM was.
GM had 20 % equity ratio (as of Dec 31, 2008), Boeing has -6 % (as of Dec. 31, 2019).
GM was profitable when the financial crisis hit, Boeing is deficient for a while now.
-
#1446
by
Eric Hedman
on 22 Mar, 2020 02:45
-
I'd guess Starliner fares better under a nationalization, because it's still "Boeing" at that point.
This would contradict the concept of Commercial Crew. Starliner would be effectively run by the government then. SpaceX would be competing against the government. Wouldn't this invalidate the whole Commercial Crew contracting setup? How to handle that?
This is really starting to go down a rabbit hole. Last I checked Boeing hasn't been nationalized. Let's see how this plays out. They're a huge company that should be able to raise funds if they actually tried.
Would you lend them money without federal loan guarantees? I sure wouldn't. I think at minimum they will get loan guarantees. They won't be nationalized. They will survive in some form. We need a domestic supplier of commercial aircraft.
-
#1447
by
mgeagon
on 22 Mar, 2020 09:31
-
If Boeing demonstrates a need for a government bail out, it will most certainly get one, along with thousands of other entities large and small during this crisis. This may even translate into more funding for Starliner, as it is deemed essential for continued space access and Congress is suddenly in a very "giving" mood. IMO, end of August seems very ambitious for CFT, but end of year might have an outside chance of being realistic.
-
#1448
by
volker2020
on 22 Mar, 2020 09:42
-
As for the windows, if they ever have to go to VFR flight rules in a spacecraft, it may be better to pull the big abort handle and go home instead (as long as the auto-abort doesn't cause the spacecraft to demolish the ISS on its way down.)
I remember when I first found out that having a window was a NASA requirement for commercial crew. My first thought was something along the lines of, "You'd think NASA would know how to write design constraints by now."
Listen, I'm not saying that the windows on Dragon and Starliner are useless and serve no technical/in-flight purpose... no wait, that's exactly what I'm saying.
I mean, they're not exactly Gemini windows, are they? If what you want is to look away from the station while docking, then yes, they're very well positioned.
It would probably irk me less if their primary role was, well, just about anything but transport to a space station. On a Lunar return capsule, sure, put the window wherever you want. But the reason Dragon and Starliner exist is to dock to the ISS, and neither of the companies (nor apparently NASA) thought the windows should be positioned such that the crews could actually see what they were doing if they had to dock manually. It drives me mad.
I'm sorry, but I've wanted to go on this rant for more than a little while now, and I'm sure they are more of you out there who feel the same way.
I always thought that windows are primary there for the psyche of the astronauts. Do you want to go to space, inside a locked up metal coffin, without the chance to look outside?
-
#1449
by
MarkM
on 22 Mar, 2020 12:09
-
Boeing is stronger than GM was.
GM had 20 % equity ratio (as of Dec 31, 2008), Boeing has -6 % (as of Dec. 31, 2019).
GM was profitable when the financial crisis hit, Boeing is deficient for a while now.
Please give back up to your statements. I do not know where you got your equity ratio from but clearly your second statement is factually incorrect.
As per their annual filings for 2019 (investors.boeing.com) they did post a 636 million loss- due to the fallout from the 737 Max debacle but their previous 4 years were: 10.46bill, 8.458bill, 5.034bill and 5.176bill profit (not deficient)
zubenelgenubi: fixed quote
-
#1450
by
SoftwareDude
on 02 Apr, 2020 19:34
-
Now that Boeing is paying its senior employees to retire, what is the chance of Starliner ever flying?
-
#1451
by
mn
on 02 Apr, 2020 20:02
-
Now that Boeing is paying its senior employees to retire, what is the chance of Starliner ever flying?
I'd say about 99.9999%
-
#1452
by
abaddon
on 02 Apr, 2020 20:28
-
It's always disappointing coming in to this thread seeing it has been updated, only to find it's someone wondering again if Starliner will be cancelled. It's not interesting.
Would be nice if people can just accept that Starliner is going to fly, even though we don't know exactly when yet.
-
#1453
by
Rocket Science
on 03 Apr, 2020 20:22
-
As for the windows, if they ever have to go to VFR flight rules in a spacecraft, it may be better to pull the big abort handle and go home instead (as long as the auto-abort doesn't cause the spacecraft to demolish the ISS on its way down.)
I remember when I first found out that having a window was a NASA requirement for commercial crew. My first thought was something along the lines of, "You'd think NASA would know how to write design constraints by now."
Listen, I'm not saying that the windows on Dragon and Starliner are useless and serve no technical/in-flight purpose... no wait, that's exactly what I'm saying.
I mean, they're not exactly Gemini windows, are they? If what you want is to look away from the station while docking, then yes, they're very well positioned.
It would probably irk me less if their primary role was, well, just about anything but transport to a space station. On a Lunar return capsule, sure, put the window wherever you want. But the reason Dragon and Starliner exist is to dock to the ISS, and neither of the companies (nor apparently NASA) thought the windows should be positioned such that the crews could actually see what they were doing if they had to dock manually. It drives me mad.
I'm sorry, but I've wanted to go on this rant for more than a little while now, and I'm sure they are more of you out there who feel the same way.
I always thought that windows are primary there for the psyche of the astronauts. Do you want to go to space, inside a locked up metal coffin, without the chance to look outside?
Using the Apollo CM as an example; the windows were not just there for a view or rendezvous and docking. Upon Primary GNC, loss of EMS and computer failure the CMP could fly a manual re-entry using the "scribe lines" on the widow to set up "entry attitude-angle" with horizon via RCS direct. Then again using the RCS hand controller continue to fly using the "back-up FDAI and g-meter" to maintain design limits and heating for reference...
-
#1454
by
edkyle99
on 04 Apr, 2020 20:33
-
Gee wiz folks. This isn't sports. I'm rooting for any and every company that tries to advance or contribute to space flight, in any way. All of them have setbacks. All of them.
- Ed Kyle
-
#1455
by
Lemurion
on 05 Apr, 2020 17:03
-
It's always disappointing coming in to this thread seeing it has been updated, only to find it's someone wondering again if Starliner will be cancelled. It's not interesting.
Would be nice if people can just accept that Starliner is going to fly, even though we don't know exactly when yet.
I have been really critical of certain aspects of Boeing's program, especially when it comes the QA failings, and I am not going to walk that back. I don't like what I've seen described of Boeing's culture and I think they need a lot more oversight and testing before they put people on Starliner.
But all those concerns add up to a delay, not a program cancellation. Boeing has been mishandling some things but they have also been making progress. At this point I think the only thing that would stop Starliner from flying is if the government pulls an Avro Arrow on it and orders the whole program shut down and the capsules cut apart with chainsaws--and that's not going to happen.
-
#1456
by
Coastal Ron
on 05 Apr, 2020 17:37
-
I have been really critical of certain aspects of Boeing's program, especially when it comes the QA failings, and I am not going to walk that back. I don't like what I've seen described of Boeing's culture and I think they need a lot more oversight and testing before they put people on Starliner.
But all those concerns add up to a delay, not a program cancellation...
Well said, and I agree on all points.
NASA needs at least two LEO crew transportation systems, and though Boeing has screwed up many things, they are recoverable.
Starliner can, and should, fly. Just a matter of when that we should all be discussing.
-
#1457
by
Swedish chef
on 05 Apr, 2020 19:19
-
Starliner can, and should, fly. Just a matter of when that we should all be discussing.
I do not wanna do this, but I am coming out as an contrarian on this issue. We live in Coronatimes, people are dying everywhere. Im guessing that Boeing will need to conserve money and the faith of the company so in this case i will guess that NASA draws the short straw. Starliner will be cancelled, insert corporate reason here.
-
#1458
by
ncb1397
on 05 Apr, 2020 19:50
-
Starliner can, and should, fly. Just a matter of when that we should all be discussing.
I do not wanna do this, but I am coming out as an contrarian on this issue. We live in Coronatimes, people are dying everywhere. Im guessing that Boeing will need to conserve money and the faith of the company so in this case i will guess that NASA draws the short straw. Starliner will be cancelled, insert corporate reason here.
Its just wishful thinking. Ending a $4.2 billion dollar contract (with a stable customer unlike the airlines) doesn't necessarily help with a company's cash needs. Boeing just took a $14 billion dollar loan, which would account for their ~$600 million dollar 2019 loss for about 20 years and is 28x the size of SpaceX's recent cash infusion. If anything, you should be worried more about Dragon. Unlike Boeing's loan, their cash needs are not met for the foreseeable future and the commercial crew contract appears to be underbid like the CRS 1 Dragon contract.
-
#1459
by
Coastal Ron
on 05 Apr, 2020 19:58
-
Starliner can, and should, fly. Just a matter of when that we should all be discussing.
I do not wanna do this, but I am coming out as an contrarian on this issue. We live in Coronatimes, people are dying everywhere. Im guessing that Boeing will need to conserve money and the faith of the company so in this case i will guess that NASA draws the short straw. Starliner will be cancelled, insert corporate reason here.
I think you are using confusing and incorrect terms.
NASA wants and needs redundant LEO transportation to the ISS, and unless Congress changes the funding of the Commercial Crew program they will NOT cancel the Boeing contract. Which BTW would open them to cancellation charges that NASA would have to pay Boeing, so not a bad financial deal for Boeing, but Congress has shown no indication they care about Boeing's shortcomings with Starliner.
As for Boeing, they could withdraw from the Commercial Crew contract. However if they did that they would be liable for the cancellation costs on their end, not NASA.
Boeing had $10B cash on hand as of the end of 2019, and they are still generating revenue on military programs. I don't think they will withdraw from the Commercial Crew program. But if they do, NASA would likely switch to Sierra Nevada, since they were the 3rd competitor on the crew program, and they are already under contract for cargo deliveries with Dream Chaser. But I don't see that as likely at this point...