-
#1300
by
drnscr
on 19 May, 2024 23:51
-
-
#1301
by
DanClemmensen
on 20 May, 2024 00:01
-
-
#1302
by
Metalskin
on 20 May, 2024 01:52
-
Today is the second anniversary of the launch of the successful Orbital Flight Test of Starliner, Boe OFT 2.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Orbital_Flight_Test_2
How many dragon launches have been flown since then?
Twelve. Six crewed and six cargo.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Dragon_2
I think he was asking how many flights since the OFT 2, which according to Wiki was May 22, 2022.
Based on your link from Wikipedia, there have been 6 (unless I've misunderstood something).My bad, didn't realise it was split between two tables.
-
#1303
by
DanClemmensen
on 30 May, 2024 15:48
-
There is still this huge missunderstanding about the starliner "contract".
Its milestone based. NASA hasn't been paying buckets of money to boeing the last couple years. There is no "cancel it to save money". Boeing gets paid when they successfully do a crew test, then they get paid once they enter service.
Its not costing nasa money to let boeing keep trying.
NASA pays the salaries of the NASA personnel that interact with Boeing, among other costs to the taxpayer.
-
#1304
by
24Launch
on 30 May, 2024 20:32
-
There is still this huge missunderstanding about the starliner "contract".
Its milestone based. NASA hasn't been paying buckets of money to boeing the last couple years. There is no "cancel it to save money". Boeing gets paid when they successfully do a crew test, then they get paid once they enter service.
Its not costing nasa money to let boeing keep trying.
NASA pays the salaries of the NASA personnel that interact with Boeing, among other costs to the taxpayer.
Yes, this exactly! Thank you for reminding folks that while Boeing is eating the costs from their side, they are not reimbursing NASA for all the time spent by the growing cadre of NASA personnel who have been roped in all these years helping Boeing try to figure out how to build a proper space capsule.
-
#1305
by
Vettedrmr
on 31 May, 2024 00:00
-
There is still this huge missunderstanding about the starliner "contract".
Its milestone based. NASA hasn't been paying buckets of money to boeing the last couple years. There is no "cancel it to save money". Boeing gets paid when they successfully do a crew test, then they get paid once they enter service.
Its not costing nasa money to let boeing keep trying.
NASA pays the salaries of the NASA personnel that interact with Boeing, among other costs to the taxpayer.
Yes, this exactly! Thank you for reminding folks that while Boeing is eating the costs from their side, they are not reimbursing NASA for all the time spent by the growing cadre of NASA personnel who have been roped in all these years helping Boeing try to figure out how to build a proper space capsule.
I will say this, though: problem solving, regardless of the source, makes you a better engineer. Even if it's a stupid problem, you'll learn *why* stupid was approved, and will learn the signs of stupidity that you will be attuned to on your next project.
-
#1306
by
Jim
on 31 May, 2024 13:03
-
There is still this huge missunderstanding about the starliner "contract".
Its milestone based. NASA hasn't been paying buckets of money to boeing the last couple years. There is no "cancel it to save money". Boeing gets paid when they successfully do a crew test, then they get paid once they enter service.
Its not costing nasa money to let boeing keep trying.
NASA pays the salaries of the NASA personnel that interact with Boeing, among other costs to the taxpayer.
Yes, this exactly! Thank you for reminding folks that while Boeing is eating the costs from their side, they are not reimbursing NASA for all the time spent by the growing cadre of NASA personnel who have been roped in all these years helping Boeing try to figure out how to build a proper space capsule.
these people would be employed regardless, they just would be doing other jobs.
-
#1307
by
meekGee
on 31 May, 2024 14:42
-
There is still this huge missunderstanding about the starliner "contract".
Its milestone based. NASA hasn't been paying buckets of money to boeing the last couple years. There is no "cancel it to save money". Boeing gets paid when they successfully do a crew test, then they get paid once they enter service.
Its not costing nasa money to let boeing keep trying.
NASA pays the salaries of the NASA personnel that interact with Boeing, among other costs to the taxpayer.
Yes, this exactly! Thank you for reminding folks that while Boeing is eating the costs from their side, they are not reimbursing NASA for all the time spent by the growing cadre of NASA personnel who have been roped in all these years helping Boeing try to figure out how to build a proper space capsule.
these people would be employed regardless, they just would be doing other jobs.
How is this better?
Or are you suggesting that those other jobs are also a waste of time?
-
#1308
by
whitelancer64
on 31 May, 2024 16:55
-
There is still this huge missunderstanding about the starliner "contract".
Its milestone based. NASA hasn't been paying buckets of money to boeing the last couple years. There is no "cancel it to save money". Boeing gets paid when they successfully do a crew test, then they get paid once they enter service.
Its not costing nasa money to let boeing keep trying.
NASA pays the salaries of the NASA personnel that interact with Boeing, among other costs to the taxpayer.
Yes, this exactly! Thank you for reminding folks that while Boeing is eating the costs from their side, they are not reimbursing NASA for all the time spent by the growing cadre of NASA personnel who have been roped in all these years helping Boeing try to figure out how to build a proper space capsule.
these people would be employed regardless, they just would be doing other jobs.
How is this better?
Or are you suggesting that those other jobs are also a waste of time?
I think Jim is saying the cost to NASA for employing those people are the same regardless of whether they are working on Starliner or something else.
-
#1309
by
meekGee
on 31 May, 2024 18:00
-
There is still this huge missunderstanding about the starliner "contract".
Its milestone based. NASA hasn't been paying buckets of money to boeing the last couple years. There is no "cancel it to save money". Boeing gets paid when they successfully do a crew test, then they get paid once they enter service.
Its not costing nasa money to let boeing keep trying.
NASA pays the salaries of the NASA personnel that interact with Boeing, among other costs to the taxpayer.
Yes, this exactly! Thank you for reminding folks that while Boeing is eating the costs from their side, they are not reimbursing NASA for all the time spent by the growing cadre of NASA personnel who have been roped in all these years helping Boeing try to figure out how to build a proper space capsule.
these people would be employed regardless, they just would be doing other jobs.
How is this better?
Or are you suggesting that those other jobs are also a waste of time?
I think Jim is saying the cost to NASA for employing those people are the same regardless of whether they are working on Starliner or something else.
Yes, but if they were not working on starliner then presumably they'd be doing something else, which is of value, which is now not getting done.
Or else you're saying that starliner is only requiring the service of NASA employees which otherwise do nothing?
-
#1310
by
clongton
on 31 May, 2024 19:56
-
There is still this huge missunderstanding about the starliner "contract".
Its milestone based. NASA hasn't been paying buckets of money to boeing the last couple years. There is no "cancel it to save money". Boeing gets paid when they successfully do a crew test, then they get paid once they enter service.
Its not costing nasa money to let boeing keep trying.
NASA pays the salaries of the NASA personnel that interact with Boeing, among other costs to the taxpayer.
Yes, this exactly! Thank you for reminding folks that while Boeing is eating the costs from their side, they are not reimbursing NASA for all the time spent by the growing cadre of NASA personnel who have been roped in all these years helping Boeing try to figure out how to build a proper space capsule.
these people would be employed regardless, they just would be doing other jobs.
How is this better?
Or are you suggesting that those other jobs are also a waste of time?
I think Jim is saying the cost to NASA for employing those people are the same regardless of whether they are working on Starliner or something else.
Yes, but if they were not working on starliner then presumably they'd be doing something else, which is of value, which is now not getting done.
Or else you're saying that starliner is only requiring the service of NASA employees which otherwise do nothing?
It's all about the workforce - the standing army. Jim is correct. No matter what they are assigned to they get paid. If they stand in the corner and twiddle their thumbs, they get the same pay as problem solving at Boeing. It's a government job. Once you are in you are a permanent fixture. Productivity is not required. Show up and get paid. Welcome to government jobs. These people are civil servants and have a job for life without regard for what they do or do not do.
-
#1311
by
Vettedrmr
on 31 May, 2024 20:42
-
Or else you're saying that starliner is only requiring the service of NASA employees which otherwise do nothing?
This is called "maintaining your edge". You don't run a tech company (or NASA, in this case) by cutting your technical experts loose as soon as their project finishes up and there's a gap before the next one comes on line. How much have people lamented the loss of knowledgeable personnel because of bean counters?
So, while you may not think of Starliner as being beneficial directly, at the very least it's kept NASA personnel sharp in problem solving.
-
#1312
by
meekGee
on 31 May, 2024 20:50
-
Or else you're saying that starliner is only requiring the service of NASA employees which otherwise do nothing?
This is called "maintaining your edge". You don't run a tech company (or NASA, in this case) by cutting your technical experts loose as soon as their project finishes up and there's a gap before the next one comes on line. How much have people lamented the loss of knowledgeable personnel because of bean counters?
So, while you may not think of Starliner as being beneficial directly, at the very least it's kept NASA personnel sharp in problem solving.
When you don't use an edge it gets dull.
If you can say with confidence that these people would otherwise not be doing anything of value, then you're way past "maintaining an edge".
And besides these are support people, not the R&D team, which is at Boeing.
So it's one of two:
1) Multiple years of Starliner delays caused other NASA work not to be performed
2) NASA's team supporting Starliner would have sat idle for these years, meaning the cost of the delays is born by NASA.
Either way, free it ain't.
-
#1313
by
Eric Hedman
on 01 Jun, 2024 05:06
-
Or else you're saying that starliner is only requiring the service of NASA employees which otherwise do nothing?
This is called "maintaining your edge". You don't run a tech company (or NASA, in this case) by cutting your technical experts loose as soon as their project finishes up and there's a gap before the next one comes on line. How much have people lamented the loss of knowledgeable personnel because of bean counters?
So, while you may not think of Starliner as being beneficial directly, at the very least it's kept NASA personnel sharp in problem solving.
When you don't use an edge it gets dull.
If you can say with confidence that these people would otherwise not be doing anything of value, then you're way past "maintaining an edge".
And besides these are support people, not the R&D team, which is at Boeing.
So it's one of two:
1) Multiple years of Starliner delays caused other NASA work not to be performed
2) NASA's team supporting Starliner would have sat idle for these years, meaning the cost of the delays is born by NASA.
Either way, free it ain't.
I agree. A simple rule of thumb in life is that nothing is free. It's always being paid for some way or another.
-
#1314
by
Vettedrmr
on 01 Jun, 2024 11:28
-
Either way, free it ain't.
Oh, no doubt. It's the cost of doing high tech engineering work. We're like mechanical machines: one of the worst things you can do to either is let them sit idle for long periods of time. But nothing's free.
-
#1315
by
meekGee
on 01 Jun, 2024 14:02
-
Either way, free it ain't.
Oh, no doubt. It's the cost of doing high tech engineering work. We're like mechanical machines: one of the worst things you can do to either is let them sit idle for long periods of time. But nothing's free.
In principle, of course your engineers can't be fully utilized all of the time, and in order to avoid losing knowledge, an organization needs to keep them around.
But that logic has been perverted (at both NASA and contractors) to justify keeping a huge standing army that even a far-thinking CEO would not have kept under any normal circumstances.
The aerospace sector stagnated (in retrospect that's an obvious fact) and that is just one symptom of this stagnation.
-
#1316
by
Jim
on 01 Jun, 2024 16:19
-
It's all about the workforce - the standing army. Jim is correct. No matter what they are assigned to they get paid. If they stand in the corner and twiddle their thumbs, they get the same pay as problem solving at Boeing. It's a government job. Once you are in you are a permanent fixture. Productivity is not required. Show up and get paid. Welcome to government jobs. These people are civil servants and have a job for life without regard for what they do or do not do.
Not saying that at all. They would be doing other projects. Like the Launch Services Program, the NASA Commercial Crew program is matrixes. Few people are dedicated to strictly Starliner
-
#1317
by
dglow
on 01 Jun, 2024 16:41
-
Question: how quickly are they able to safe Altas?
The crew access arm moved back into place quite soon after the hold, and its proximity to the capsule would seem to inhibit a pad abort once it's it place. Help me understand the considerations here - thank you.
-
#1318
by
Comga
on 01 Jun, 2024 16:46
-
It's all about the workforce - the standing army. Jim is correct. No matter what they are assigned to they get paid. If they stand in the corner and twiddle their thumbs, they get the same pay as problem solving at Boeing. It's a government job. Once you are in you are a permanent fixture. Productivity is not required. Show up and get paid. Welcome to government jobs. These people are civil servants and have a job for life without regard for what they do or do not do.
Not saying that at all. They would be doing other projects. Like the Launch Services Program, the NASA Commercial Crew program is matrixes. Few people are dedicated to strictly Starliner
It seems like everyone is "in violent agreement".
The yearly employee cost to NASA is constant, but some important tasks elsewhere in the "NASA Commercial Crew Program" are being pushed off and will have to be done and paid for later. There are either permanent cumulative delays to CCP or there will have to be a "plus up" to make up for lost time. That all the extra Starliner support can substitute for routine training seems to be a very remote possibility.
-
#1319
by
litton4
on 01 Jun, 2024 17:15
-
Question: how quickly are they able to safe Altas?
The crew access arm moved back into place quite soon after the hold, and its proximity to the capsule would seem to inhibit a pad abort once it's it place. Help me understand the considerations here - thank you.
On the stream they said it takes about an hour.
I think I heard them safeing the escape system, so no, they can't perform a pad abort from that point.
They keep the vehicle stable until the crew is out, so they minimise the chance of anything happening during that process.
The opposite of what SpaceX do, which is fuel/drain the vehicle with the crew inside, but with the escape system armed.