I consider it unlikely that complete and believable story will be made public. Nor should it. NASA oversight does not imply public release.
...SpaceX welcomed NASA engineers into their team and they actively worked together, with SpaceX trying to learn as much as possible. The same source also mentioned that Boeing, on the other hand, dismissed the idea of embedding NASA engineers and expertise in the Starliner team. They seemingly also didn't bother to take NASA's advice.
In my experience, some "NASA engineers" are knowledgeable and helpful, and some -- aren't. I can totally understand a desire to not have outsiders "embedded" into a team.
That said, I still haven't heard a complete and believable story about how an inappropriate tape got used and who figured that out and when. I'd think that a detailed NASA review and approval of the materials list would have happened very early in the program, so either Boeing used an unapproved material or it was never discovered that what they did use wasn't approved.
Contrary to what you might believe, NASA doesn't have the last word on materials used in constructing Starliner.
Contrary to what you might believe, NASA doesn't have the last word on materials used in constructing Starliner.
"Commercial Crew Transportation System Certification Requirements for NASA Low Earth Orbit Missions"
https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/504982main_CCTSCR_Dec-08_Basic_Web.pdf says that NASA-STD-6016, "Standard Manned Spacecraft Requirements for Materials and Processes", is fully applicable, and it flows a lot of stuff associated with materials. I find it hard to believe that Boeing doesn't have to disclose what materials they're using for review, if not approval, and I'm still unclear about how this fell through the cracks.
Steve Stitch mentioned the tape in reference to a NASA database (materials db perhaps?)which means Boeing is using NASA data to decide where to use the tape.
Stich said that entries in a NASA database were “a bit inconsistent” about the tape’s flammability that led to its use in environments where it could pose a hazard.
From
https://spacenews.com/first-starliner-crewed-flight-delayed-to-2024/This coming from Stitch sounds like NASA is taking at least some amount of blame for the tape issue.
Contrary to what you might believe, NASA doesn't have the last word on materials used in constructing Starliner.
"Commercial Crew Transportation System Certification Requirements for NASA Low Earth Orbit Missions" https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/504982main_CCTSCR_Dec-08_Basic_Web.pdf says that NASA-STD-6016, "Standard Manned Spacecraft Requirements for Materials and Processes", is fully applicable, and it flows a lot of stuff associated with materials. I find it hard to believe that Boeing doesn't have to disclose what materials they're using for review, if not approval, and I'm still unclear about how this fell through the cracks.
I didn't say that Boeing doesn't have to disclose what materials they are using. They have always revealed what materials they were using.
What I said was that Boeing has the final word about what materials they use, not NASA. Just as long as that use of materials complies with NASA-STD-6016 and associated NASA-STD-6001.
About how this "fell through the cracks". That is actually pretty obvious: Boeing assumed that NO part of its wiring harness got any hotter than 155 degrees Celsius (the upper thermal insulation limit of P-213 tape).
But after the not quite successful OFT-1 NASA started paying a whole lot more attention to what Boeing was doing. Mostly on NASA's "suggestion", the OFT-2 mission featured substantially more measurements and tests of all sorts of aspects of Starliner.
It would not surprise me at all if measurements from OFT-2 revealed that Starliner's wiring harness got substantially hotter than expected. Which would lead to certain items being looked at a lot better/more intense than previously was the case.
Steve Stitch mentioned the tape in reference to a NASA database (materials db perhaps?)which means Boeing is using NASA data to decide where to use the tape.
Stich said that entries in a NASA database were “a bit inconsistent” about the tape’s flammability that led to its use in environments where it could pose a hazard.
From https://spacenews.com/first-starliner-crewed-flight-delayed-to-2024/
This coming from Stitch sounds like NASA is taking at least some amount of blame for the tape issue.
The database in question is MAPTIS. It is not actually one database, but a collection of several material properties databases. It contains, among other things, flammability data for many materials used in spacecraft construction.
I don't know for certain if P-213 tape is in MAPTIS, but Stich's comments suggest that it is. His comments also suggest that the data on P-213 might not be entirely accurate or complete.
Given that the CCP contractors must comply to a NASA materials standard, having inaccurate or incomplete flammability data sitting in MAPTIS (which is recommended for use from that same NASA materials standard), would indeed shift some of the "blame" towards NASA. But it does not release the contractors from their own responsibility to always double check.
It would not surprise me at all if measurements from OFT-2 revealed that Starliner's wiring harness got substantially hotter than expected.
Is there any evidence for this or is this just speculation on your part?
It would not surprise me at all if measurements from OFT-2 revealed that Starliner's wiring harness got substantially hotter than expected.
Is there any evidence for this or is this just speculation on your part?
First four words: "It would not surprise me..." Of course there's no published evidence of it publicly, if it was it would have been referenced.
Of course there's no published evidence of it publicly, if it was it would have been referenced.
I wanted to give the OP the benefit of the doubt in case there was something reported from OFT-2 that I didn't recall. There was a thermal control issue, but AFAIK it was something getting too cold, not the opposite, at least to the extent I could find anything about it.
https://www.theverge.com/2022/5/25/23138395/boeing-cst-100-starliner-nasa-undocking-landing-oft-2the Boeing team noticed that some of Starliner’s thermal systems used to cool the spacecraft showed extra cold temperatures, and the engineering team had to manage that during the docking.
Not a great source, I'll admit.
Boeing confident in achieving six flights to the ISS despite Starliner delay
...
Mark Nappi, vice president and program manager of the CST-100 Starliner at Boeing, asserted there is 'no reason to change our plans with the six flights, plus CST fits well into the window that we have, and there are additional flights that are available outside of those six with other customers, so I think we are still committed like we have been in the past'.”
(emphasis added)
Based on such an equivocating endorsement from someone not in the C-suite at Boeing Corp,I'd be very worried if I was working on the project.
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2023/08/starliner-update/
To sell any additional missions Boeing will need to find alternative to Atlas. Most likely Vulcan but not a given. NASA could surrender an Atlas assigned to ISS mission on condition Boeing provides an LV at their cost.
Boeing confident in achieving six flights to the ISS despite Starliner delay
...
Mark Nappi, vice president and program manager of the CST-100 Starliner at Boeing, asserted there is 'no reason to change our plans with the six flights, plus CST fits well into the window that we have, and there are additional flights that are available outside of those six with other customers, so I think we are still committed like we have been in the past'.”
(emphasis added)
Based on such an equivocating endorsement from someone not in the C-suite at Boeing Corp,I'd be very worried if I was working on the project.
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2023/08/starliner-update/
To sell any additional missions Boeing will need to find alternative to Atlas. Most likely Vulcan but not a given. NASA could surrender an Atlas assigned to ISS mission on condition Boeing provides an LV at their cost.
We don't know who pays. We only know it's not NASA, since this is a fixed-price contract. Boeing is contracted to provide the CCP services, so it would be Boeing "surrendering" that Atlas, not NASA. But what is the advantage to NASA, or Boeing, or ULA?
Boeing would probably need NASA's concurrence, since presumably NASA signed off on Boeing's use of Atlas and probably has not signed off on Boeing's use of another LV. However, I'm fairly sure Migration to another LV was explicitly mentioned and I know it has been discussed extensively.
The advantage to Boeing and to ULA is complicated. Presumably ULA wants to fly all remaining Atlas, so they will need to move that Atlas to another customer. This may means that the deal is contingent on Kuiper buying that Atlas. If (big if) they can move one or more Atlases to Kuiper, they can get them off the books faster and shut down the Atlas support infrastructure sooner. Depending on the actual contract details between ULA and Boeing, this could be a win. But it requires Boeing/ULA/NASA to crew-certify Starliner on Vulcan.
It would not surprise me at all if measurements from OFT-2 revealed that Starliner's wiring harness got substantially hotter than expected.
Is there any evidence for this or is this just speculation on your part?
The fact that I used the phrase "it would not surprise met at all IF...." should tell you that I am speaking my own opinion.
Of course there's no published evidence of it publicly, if it was it would have been referenced.
I wanted to give the OP the benefit of the doubt in case there was something reported from OFT-2 that I didn't recall. There was a thermal control issue, but AFAIK it was something getting too cold, not the opposite, at least to the extent I could find anything about it. https://www.theverge.com/2022/5/25/23138395/boeing-cst-100-starliner-nasa-undocking-landing-oft-2
the Boeing team noticed that some of Starliner’s thermal systems used to cool the spacecraft showed extra cold temperatures, and the engineering team had to manage that during the docking.
Not a great source, I'll admit.
The thermal control issue was about the general thermal control system, which takes heat away from the entire spacecraft. It does not preclude localized parts of the wiring harness getting hotter than expected. Mind you, the wiring harness is by far not the only source of heat in the spacecraft.
coming from a non spacex fan boy, i have little to no faith that starliner will have as high as a launch cadence as Dragon, Dream Chaser, SSII-SSIII, ect, ect. Starliner has been riddled with issues, timeline wise, budget wise, and vehicle wise. The last Sarliner mission couldve failed due to thruster issues, and not to mention it got delayed by a year. It was a success, but success is not always garunteed, ESPECIALLY when it comes to the spaceflight world. We need paitence. But at this point, we have BEEN patient with Starliner. Starliner flew a year before Dragon did. Dragon had a very serious issue with the SuperDracos, and it still was able to fly without one issue during CD-2. The only issue during the entire launch as far as im aware were weather, and after launch, during splashdown, the boats violating the keep out zone. Starliner, meanwhile, has literally gotten days away from launching to a minute later, a 3 year delay occurs. Starliner has potential, except the company making it really isn't being that smart about it.
Starliner flew a year before Dragon did.
Crew dragon’s maiden flight March 2019
Starliner’s maiden flight December 2019
Starliner flew a year before Dragon did.
Crew dragon’s maiden flight March 2019
Starliner’s maiden flight December 2019
oh ok, my memory is fuzzy so i remember it being in 2018
Starliner flew a year before Dragon did.
Crew dragon’s maiden flight March 2019
Starliner’s maiden flight December 2019
oh ok, my memory is fuzzy so i remember it being in 2018
Oh, and there were many dragon 2 flights (crewed and cargo) in the timespan between Starliner’s first and second flights…
[…] But asked whether Boeing plans to continue with the program long-term, he (John Shannon) suggested that was in doubt. “It’s a great question. And I wish I had the answer to it right now,” he said. […]
The way that I parse it:
Boeing can't abandon the NASA contract despite the huge financial losses as it would have huge implications for other NASA + military contracts
Boeing is not rushing to pay ULA for Vulcan human rating due to the recent rumors of issues with Blue Reef and general global economic cooling
So, things we knew already. No secret squirrel business.
And Boeing, as expected, doesn’t acknowledge the elephant in the room - even if the commercial LEO market as a whole were clear, what proportion of it would they win against SpaceX? Boeing’s cost of putting Starliner on Vulcan would have to go on their seat price.
Starliner has a lot of negatives, most notably extreme tardiness, high cost, and lack of LVs after its sixth mission. However, it does have one advantage over Crew Dragon: it is configured to support five crew. In the CLD era, this might become important.
Recall that originally both Crew Dragon and Starliner were designed to support seven crew. Crew Dragon was cut back to four, and Gwynne Shotwell said that it cannot now be increased.