-
#1380
by
TrevorMonty
on 10 Jun, 2024 19:18
-
Got a good laugh at Butch's reply to Bill Nelson's silly leading question.
Ballast Bill: "So are the guys on Dragon are they going be lusting wishing they were on Starliner?"
Butch: laughs "All the Dragon guys would want fly... trust me if they're test pilots that's where they want to be"
That is a really clever reply that can be interpreted at multiple levels. 
Not all astronauts are ex test pilots these days. Quite a few would be happy they are on current reliable ride to space.
Given how many serious issues Starliner has had it wouldn't be my first choice if going to space.
-
#1381
by
dglow
on 10 Jun, 2024 20:02
-
Got a good laugh at Butch's reply to Bill Nelson's silly leading question.
Ballast Bill: "So are the guys on Dragon are they going be lusting wishing they were on Starliner?"
Not just silly, but downright lame. Why even
frame it as a competition, Administrator Nelson? Boeing and SpaceX are both on
your team, NASA.
-
#1382
by
zubenelgenubi
on 10 Jun, 2024 21:11
-
Got a good laugh at Butch's reply to Bill Nelson's silly leading question.
Ballast Bill: "So are the guys on Dragon are they going be lusting wishing they were on Starliner?"
Not just silly, but downright lame. Why even frame it as a competition, Administrator Nelson? Boeing and SpaceX are both on your team, NASA.
Asking a pilot if he or she would rather pilot vs be a passenger? What answer would one expect?!
My interpretation:
Friendly competition is more than OK, exciting work fires the blood and the mind. 👍 👌 🔥
And, the two companies have been competing since the Commercial Crew contracts were awarded.
Remember the American flag placed aboard
ISS by the departing
STS-135 crew?
Goodness gracious, the reluctance some forum members have for any compliments or a smile to Boeing.
Quoting Lord Refa
Edited
-
#1383
by
ugordan
on 10 Jun, 2024 21:21
-
My interpretation:
Friendly competition is more than OK, it fires the mind and the blood. 👍 👌 🔥
And the two companies have been competing since the Commercial Crew contracts were awarded.
It's way past "competition" at this point.
That competition was over 4 years ago. We know who won.
This is more of a "glad you could finally join us" moment. It's sad how Boeing's management has dragged down the company that was once synonymous for quality, engineering-oriented development.
-
#1384
by
DanClemmensen
on 10 Jun, 2024 21:28
-
My interpretation:
Friendly competition is more than OK, it fires the mind and the blood. 👍 👌 🔥
And the two companies have been competing since the Commercial Crew contracts were awarded.
It's way past "competition" at this point.
That competition was over 4 years ago. We know who won.
This is more of a "glad you could finally join us" moment. It's sad how Boeing's management has dragged down the company that was once synonymous for quality, engineering-oriented development.
Yes, but one lesson to learn is that the competition really did accomplish something. One company succeeded after a three-year slip, and the other company has not yet quite succeeded after a seven-year slip. It could have gone either way. having competing vendors during development really was a good idea in retrospect. It's less clear that competition has been useful after the development stage.
-
#1385
by
Perchlorate
on 10 Jun, 2024 21:38
-
Everyone knows how this journey has played out. We've got 2 working providers now, albeit one has some tweaking to do...at least I hope the helium/thruster thing is tweakable.
"Grace" should be the order of the day, IMO. And the occasional quip doesn't erase grace.
I have always loved Boeing's military and civilian aircraft, and their contributions to space as well. It hasn't been a good decade for them. In American football, "piling on" a player who's already down is a 15-yard penalty. Let's not do that. Let's cheer them to get up and play better ball.
SpaceX has much to be proud of, or, better, satisfied about. Being gracious and not gloating adds to their stature. Let's hope Elon continues in that way.
-
#1386
by
yg1968
on 10 Jun, 2024 21:44
-
My interpretation:
Friendly competition is more than OK, it fires the mind and the blood. 👍 👌 🔥
And the two companies have been competing since the Commercial Crew contracts were awarded.
It's way past "competition" at this point.
That competition was over 4 years ago. We know who won.
This is more of a "glad you could finally join us" moment. It's sad how Boeing's management has dragged down the company that was once synonymous for quality, engineering-oriented development.
Yes, but one lesson to learn is that the competition really did accomplish something. One company succeeded after a three-year slip, and the other company has not yet quite succeeded after a seven-year slip. It could have gone either way. having competing vendors during development really was a good idea in retrospect. It's less clear that competition has been useful after the development stage.
I understand the doubts but to the extent that Starliner continues to be part of Orbital Reef and the Commercial LEO Destinations program, it could still turn out to be a success after all.
-
#1387
by
laszlo
on 10 Jun, 2024 21:56
-
CAPCOM call to crew. Landing attempt no earlier than 18 June to allow the EVA on the 13th.
Most astronauts/most situations = Brer Rabbit: Stay in space a few days longer? Please, Brer Bear, don't throw me into the briar patch!
🐰 🐻
That'd be Br'er Fox. You're welcome.
-
#1388
by
zubenelgenubi
on 10 Jun, 2024 23:14
-
Moderator:
Up-thread a bit, now that I have split/merged many recent posts to the "general" Starliner discussion thread...
Let's curb the too-free usage of accusing a discussion adversary of trolling. ⚠️
See trolling? Submit a Report to Moderator. But, we decide to edit, delete, or let posts be. 👍
Thank you.
-
#1389
by
clongton
on 11 Jun, 2024 00:20
-
I understand the doubts but to the extent that Starliner continues to be part of Orbital Reef and the Commercial LEO Destinations program, it could still turn out to be a success after all.
Except that at this point in time Starliner does not have a ride to orbit for the commercial world. The only LV that can perform that function is Vulcan, and it's not human rated. It'll be a cold day in hell before Boeing picks up THAT tab. That leaves NASA. And I don't believe it is legal for NASA to pick up the tab for a purely commercial endeavour that NASA isn't part of. Lots of legal changes would need to be made. Personally I don't believe that would happen.
-
#1390
by
mn
on 11 Jun, 2024 01:35
-
I understand the doubts but to the extent that Starliner continues to be part of Orbital Reef and the Commercial LEO Destinations program, it could still turn out to be a success after all.
Except that at this point in time Starliner does not have a ride to orbit for the commercial world. The only LV that can perform that function is Vulcan, and it's not human rated. It'll be a cold day in hell before Boeing picks up THAT tab. That leaves NASA. And I don't believe it is legal for NASA to pick up the tab for a purely commercial endeavour that NASA isn't part of. Lots of legal changes would need to be made. Personally I don't believe that would happen.
Not that hard, all it takes is an act of congress, lobby the right people and just like that a mission that just happens to require human rating Vulcan will suddenly appear as if by magic.
-
#1391
by
meekGee
on 11 Jun, 2024 02:57
-
Everyone knows how this journey has played out. We've got 2 working providers now, albeit one has some tweaking to do...at least I hope the helium/thruster thing is tweakable.
"Grace" should be the order of the day, IMO. And the occasional quip doesn't erase grace.
I have always loved Boeing's military and civilian aircraft, and their contributions to space as well. It hasn't been a good decade for them. In American football, "piling on" a player who's already down is a 15-yard penalty. Let's not do that. Let's cheer them to get up and play better ball.
SpaceX has much to be proud of, or, better, satisfied about. Being gracious and not gloating adds to their stature. Let's hope Elon continues in that way.
A better analogy - a too cocky wrestler that dissed his opponent to no end and played dirty loses by knockout.
Of course people are dumping on them.
It'll continue until Boeing demonstrates some level of change. "If" rather than "when". I fully expect them to continue to try to lobby their way forward, plus threaten to walk away and dare congress to be blamed for the loss of jobs.
America's Ride to Space indeed...
-
#1392
by
Athelstane
on 11 Jun, 2024 11:02
-
I understand the doubts but to the extent that Starliner continues to be part of Orbital Reef and the Commercial LEO Destinations program, it could still turn out to be a success after all.
Except that at this point in time Starliner does not have a ride to orbit for the commercial world. The only LV that can perform that function is Vulcan, and it's not human rated. It'll be a cold day in hell before Boeing picks up THAT tab. That leaves NASA. And I don't believe it is legal for NASA to pick up the tab for a purely commercial endeavour that NASA isn't part of. Lots of legal changes would need to be made. Personally I don't believe that would happen.
If for some reason it *is* decided to extend ISS beyond 2030, I don' t think it is at all inconceivable that Boeing could persuade Congress to provide funding to crew rate Vulcan-Centaur, so as to enable its use on the same schedule for ISS flights as it is to have under the current contract.
-
#1393
by
DanClemmensen
on 11 Jun, 2024 13:01
-
I understand the doubts but to the extent that Starliner continues to be part of Orbital Reef and the Commercial LEO Destinations program, it could still turn out to be a success after all.
Except that at this point in time Starliner does not have a ride to orbit for the commercial world. The only LV that can perform that function is Vulcan, and it's not human rated. It'll be a cold day in hell before Boeing picks up THAT tab. That leaves NASA. And I don't believe it is legal for NASA to pick up the tab for a purely commercial endeavour that NASA isn't part of. Lots of legal changes would need to be made. Personally I don't believe that would happen.
If for some reason it *is* decided to extend ISS beyond 2030, I don' t think it is at all inconceivable that Boeing could persuade Congress to provide funding to crew rate Vulcan-Centaur, so as to enable its use on the same schedule for ISS flights as it is to have under the current contract.
Boeing is still half-owner of ULA, so (to a first approximation) they would get half the profit of the Vulcan-Centaur upgrade. Congress should require a competitive bid for the next LV. Unless it was excluded from bidding, Falcon 9 would win.
-
#1394
by
dlapine
on 11 Jun, 2024 15:30
-
CAPCOM call to crew. Landing attempt no earlier than 18 June to allow the EVA on the 13th.
Most astronauts/most situations = Brer Rabbit: Stay in space a few days longer? Please, Brer Bear, don't throw me into the briar patch!
🐰 🐻
That'd be Br'er Fox. You're welcome.
While I'm sure the crew won't mind some extra time on orbit, I haven't seen information on the planned ISS work scheduled for the CFT crew- was an EVA part of the original plan?
-
#1395
by
dlapine
on 11 Jun, 2024 15:37
-
CAPCOM call to crew. Landing attempt no earlier than 18 June to allow the EVA on the 13th.
Most astronauts/most situations = Brer Rabbit: Stay in space a few days longer? Please, Brer Bear, don't throw me into the briar patch!
🐰 🐻
That'd be Br'er Fox. You're welcome.
While I'm sure the crew won't mind some extra time on orbit, I haven't seen information on the planned ISS work scheduled for the CFT crew- was an EVA part of the original plan?
Nevermind, it's a planned EVA by other ISS crew, with the CFT crew schedule information over in the other thread
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=60593.msg2599451#msg2599451
-
#1396
by
woods170
on 11 Jun, 2024 15:42
-
CAPCOM call to crew. Landing attempt no earlier than 18 June to allow the EVA on the 13th.
Most astronauts/most situations = Brer Rabbit: Stay in space a few days longer? Please, Brer Bear, don't throw me into the briar patch!
🐰 🐻
That'd be Br'er Fox. You're welcome.
Historical evidence suggests that you are correct.
Edit: the attached image is a scan of a 1957 Dutch translation of the original 1950s Disney comic.
-
#1397
by
deltaV
on 11 Jun, 2024 16:00
-
Boeing is still half-owner of ULA, so (to a first approximation) they would get half the profit of the Vulcan-Centaur upgrade. Congress should require a competitive bid for the next LV. Unless it was excluded from bidding, Falcon 9 would win.
SpaceX is trying to replace Falcon with Starship. SpaceX may decide that launching Starliner with Falcon in the 2030s would interfere with their Falcon retirement plans and raise the price to Boeing a lot to make up for it. This may let Vulcan, Terran R, Neutron, MLV, New Glenn, or Starship win the contract to launch Starliner post-Atlas.
-
#1398
by
jstrotha0975
on 11 Jun, 2024 16:08
-
New Glenn could launch Starliner.
-
#1399
by
spacenut
on 11 Jun, 2024 16:24
-
Is Starliner going to be safe enough for the two astronauts to come home? Helium, I assume, pressurizes the hypergolic fuel. Not enough pressure, thrusters won't operate properly.
