-
#600
by
abaddon
on 04 Nov, 2022 18:56
-
Read between the lines. They're not ready for CFT. They hope to be ready NET April.
The visiting vehicle thing is just a fig leaf.
-
#601
by
whitelancer64
on 04 Nov, 2022 19:30
-
Read between the lines. They're not ready for CFT. They hope to be ready NET April.
The visiting vehicle thing is just a fig leaf.
Translation: you've never paid any attention to how the ISS visiting vehicle schedule shifts around over time. It slides around substantially all the time, almost always to the right. There's always a lot going on the ISS.
-
#602
by
erioladastra
on 10 Nov, 2022 19:37
-
Read between the lines. They're not ready for CFT. They hope to be ready NET April.
The visiting vehicle thing is just a fig leaf.
Translation: you've never paid any attention to how the ISS visiting vehicle schedule shifts around over time. It slides around substantially all the time, almost always to the right. There's always a lot going on the ISS.
No, he is correct. This has been known inside NASA for some time. Paperwork (really safety paperwork) clearly has shown no earlier than spring for some time. If Boeing was really ready ISS would definitely jump through hoops to make it work but they know it is not worth the effort at this time.
-
#603
by
Vahe231991
on 18 Nov, 2022 21:19
-
Given that scheduling conflicts arising from upcoming Crew Dragon are forcing additional postponements of the first two manned flights of the Starliner, is there a slight possibility that no more production orders for the CST-100 Starliner will be placed even if Boeing fulfills the current Starliner production contract? If a decision is made not to order anymore Starliner spacecraft, then the finances of Boeing's Defense, Space & Security division for space-related activities could be freed up to concentrate on manufacture some components for the Vulcan rocket but also additional SLS core stages.
-
#604
by
DanClemmensen
on 18 Nov, 2022 22:05
-
Given that scheduling conflicts arising from upcoming Crew Dragon are forcing additional postponements of the first two manned flights of the Starliner, is there a slight possibility that no more production orders for the CST-100 Starliner will be placed even if Boeing fulfills the current Starliner production contract? If a decision is made not to order anymore Starliner spacecraft, then the finances of Boeing's Defense, Space & Security division for space-related activities could be freed up to concentrate on manufacture some components for the Vulcan rocket but also additional SLS core stages.
Each of the two existing Starliner capsules is good for ten flights: a total of twenty. Each has flown once. Starliner has a total of seven flights on the manifest: CFT plus Starliner-1 through Starliner-6, with a projected cadence of one flight per year. There is no indication that Starliner will ever have any other customers, so there is no need for any additional capsules. They will however need a new service module for each flight since the service module is expended. I do not know how many service modules have been built.
Starliner is crew-certified to fly on the retiring Atlas V, and exactly seven of the remaining Atlas Vs are reserved for the seven Starliner missions. There is no evidence that Boeing plans to certify Starliner on another launcher. This would be needed before Boeing could fly any additional missions.
-
#605
by
Vahe231991
on 19 Nov, 2022 14:32
-
Given that scheduling conflicts arising from upcoming Crew Dragon are forcing additional postponements of the first two manned flights of the Starliner, is there a slight possibility that no more production orders for the CST-100 Starliner will be placed even if Boeing fulfills the current Starliner production contract? If a decision is made not to order anymore Starliner spacecraft, then the finances of Boeing's Defense, Space & Security division for space-related activities could be freed up to concentrate on manufacture some components for the Vulcan rocket but also additional SLS core stages.
Each of the two existing Starliner capsules is good for ten flights: a total of twenty. Each has flown once. Starliner has a total of seven flights on the manifest: CFT plus Starliner-1 through Starliner-6, with a projected cadence of one flight per year. There is no indication that Starliner will ever have any other customers, so there is no need for any additional capsules. They will however need a new service module for each flight since the service module is expended. I do not know how many service modules have been built.
Starliner is crew-certified to fly on the retiring Atlas V, and exactly seven of the remaining Atlas Vs are reserved for the seven Starliner missions. There is no evidence that Boeing plans to certify Starliner on another launcher. This would be needed before Boeing could fly any additional missions.
You make a good point regarding how the service life of the Starliner will be affected by the available number of Atlas Vs reserved for the CST-100 and scheduled dates for select Dragon 2 missions. If, as you say, either of the two existing Starliner capsules is good for ten flights, this would require Boeing lobbying NASA for another contract for additional Starliner flights besides the currently planned Starliner-1 to Starliner-6 flights, since the
Calypso (Spacecraft 3) and the Starliner vehicle called Spacecraft 3 each have conducted just one flight so far.
-
#606
by
Coastal Ron
on 19 Nov, 2022 15:12
-
If a decision is made not to order anymore Starliner spacecraft, then the finances of Boeing's Defense, Space & Security division for space-related activities could be freed up to concentrate on manufacture some components for the Vulcan rocket but also additional SLS core stages.
Two things:
1. Boeing, the company, had revenues of $62B last year. If it wants to invest in a program, especially "small" programs like the Starliner and Vulcan, it has plenty of resources to do that.
2. Boeing is one of the contractors on the SLS program, but does not own the SLS. So why would Boeing want to risk their own money for something they don't own?
Overall the Commercial Crew program has been a challenge for Boeing, and any financial issues they have are the direct result of missteps by Boeing. They were awarded the amount of money they asked for in the contract, and they wanted to be perceived as the front runner. They may not make money on this program, but they signed legal contracts committing to performing the tasks they signed up to.
And if they don't make money on the Starliner program, it won't be the first time they lost money on something, and it won't bankrupt them either...
-
#607
by
DanClemmensen
on 19 Nov, 2022 16:09
-
Given that scheduling conflicts arising from upcoming Crew Dragon are forcing additional postponements of the first two manned flights of the Starliner, is there a slight possibility that no more production orders for the CST-100 Starliner will be placed even if Boeing fulfills the current Starliner production contract? If a decision is made not to order anymore Starliner spacecraft, then the finances of Boeing's Defense, Space & Security division for space-related activities could be freed up to concentrate on manufacture some components for the Vulcan rocket but also additional SLS core stages.
Each of the two existing Starliner capsules is good for ten flights: a total of twenty. Each has flown once. Starliner has a total of seven flights on the manifest: CFT plus Starliner-1 through Starliner-6, with a projected cadence of one flight per year. There is no indication that Starliner will ever have any other customers, so there is no need for any additional capsules. They will however need a new service module for each flight since the service module is expended. I do not know how many service modules have been built.
Starliner is crew-certified to fly on the retiring Atlas V, and exactly seven of the remaining Atlas Vs are reserved for the seven Starliner missions. There is no evidence that Boeing plans to certify Starliner on another launcher. This would be needed before Boeing could fly any additional missions.
You make a good point regarding how the service life of the Starliner will be affected by the available number of Atlas Vs reserved for the CST-100 and scheduled dates for select Dragon 2 missions. If, as you say, either of the two existing Starliner capsules is good for ten flights, this would require Boeing lobbying NASA for another contract for additional Starliner flights besides the currently planned Starliner-1 to Starliner-6 flights, since the Calypso (Spacecraft 3) and the Starliner vehicle called Spacecraft 3 each have conducted just one flight so far.
There are not enough projected CCP flights to ISS for NASA to want any more Starliner flights, so additional flights would need a different destination and possibly a different customer. At the one-a-year cadence, the last Starliner flight to ISS will be in 2029. Much more important: someone would need to get Starliner certified on a different launcher. NASA has already contracted with SpaceX for a total of fourteen CCP flights to ISS, of which five have flown, leaving nine. That's one a year from 2024-2029, plus two in 2023 and one in 2030, which is probably end-of-life for ISS. But SpaceX just announced two major extensions to Crew dragon's available flights, so if NASA needs more Crew Dragon flights they will be able to purchase them, and Crew Dragon flights cost a lot less than Starliner flights.
-
#608
by
clongton
on 20 Nov, 2022 13:30
-
Given that scheduling conflicts arising from upcoming Crew Dragon are forcing additional postponements of the first two manned flights of the Starliner,<snip>
I understand your point but you worded this as if Starliner's flight delays are caused by Dragon's operational flights, which isn't true. If Boeing had done their job properly in the first place then Starliner would be operational by now with at least one operational flight under it's belt and already be solidly penned into the flight schedule. NASA needed a dependable way to send crew to the ISS. Dragon/Falcon proved to be dependable while Starliner/Atlas did not (no fault to Atlas), all because of Boeing's screwups. Starliner's problems lie squarely at the feet of Boeing alone, which, in my opinion, should count itself lucky that NASA didn't just replace them with a manned Dreamchaser. Sierra Space would happily have stepped in and stood in the gap.
-
#609
by
MattMason
on 20 Nov, 2022 15:07
-
Given that scheduling conflicts arising from upcoming Crew Dragon are forcing additional postponements of the first two manned flights of the Starliner,<snip>
I understand your point but you worded this as if Starliner's flight delays are caused by Dragon's operational flights, which isn't true. If Boeing had done their job properly in the first place then Starliner would be operational by now with at least one operational flight under it's belt and already be solidly penned into the flight schedule. NASA needed a dependable way to send crew to the ISS. Dragon/Falcon proved to be dependable while Starliner/Atlas did not (no fault to Atlas), all because of Boeing's screwups. Starliner's problems lie squarely at the feet of Boeing alone, which, in my opinion, should count itself lucky that NASA didn't just replace them with a manned Dreamchaser. Sierra Space would happily have stepped in and stood in the gap.
I see Sierra Space stepping in very quickly with future commercial space station ferries with the revival of Dream Chaser cargo and crew. While that company seems to be leaning to Blue Origin as a launch vehicle, I suspect Sierra won't care who flies a DC, as long as they do fly. Boeing, as a co-owner of ULA, will be admittedly biased to the Vulcan, which may or may not fit into affordable commercial LEO launch opportunities. As I think others have noted, having only two operational Starliners doesn't seem to fit well to ISS crew ferries, much less post-ISS work (which is off-topic, I know).
I'm pleased of Crew Dragon's versatility and reliability, but I've found it strange how Boeing never aligned itself to match this for Starliner. Lack of foresight?
-
#610
by
Vahe231991
on 20 Nov, 2022 16:01
-
Given that scheduling conflicts arising from upcoming Crew Dragon are forcing additional postponements of the first two manned flights of the Starliner,<snip>
I understand your point but you worded this as if Starliner's flight delays are caused by Dragon's operational flights, which isn't true. If Boeing had done their job properly in the first place then Starliner would be operational by now with at least one operational flight under it's belt and already be solidly penned into the flight schedule. NASA needed a dependable way to send crew to the ISS. Dragon/Falcon proved to be dependable while Starliner/Atlas did not (no fault to Atlas), all because of Boeing's screwups. Starliner's problems lie squarely at the feet of Boeing alone, which, in my opinion, should count itself lucky that NASA didn't just replace them with a manned Dreamchaser. Sierra Space would happily have stepped in and stood in the gap.
I see Sierra Space stepping in very quickly with future commercial space station ferries with the revival of Dream Chaser cargo and crew. While that company seems to be leaning to Blue Origin as a launch vehicle, I suspect Sierra won't care who flies a DC, as long as they do fly. Boeing, as a co-owner of ULA, will be admittedly biased to the Vulcan, which may or may not fit into affordable commercial LEO launch opportunities. As I think others have noted, having only two operational Starliners doesn't seem to fit well to ISS crew ferries, much less post-ISS work (which is off-topic, I know).
I'm pleased of Crew Dragon's versatility and reliability, but I've found it strange how Boeing never aligned itself to match this for Starliner. Lack of foresight?
Although NASA announced the crew for the CFT flight, the fact that a number of in-flight anomalies which appeared during the OFT-2 even before the Starliner spacecraft used in the OFT-2 flight made it to the ISS have prompted NASA to decide to further delay the CFT by a few months are a bit of a disappointment for the crew assigned to the CFT mission who have been looking forward to flying in the Starliner. If the OFT mission had not been cut short due to software problems and made it to the ISS, then Boeing might have had smoother sailing with the Starliner program.
-
#611
by
DanClemmensen
on 20 Nov, 2022 16:35
-
Given that scheduling conflicts arising from upcoming Crew Dragon are forcing additional postponements of the first two manned flights of the Starliner, is there a slight possibility that no more production orders for the CST-100 Starliner will be placed even if Boeing fulfills the current Starliner production contract? If a decision is made not to order anymore Starliner spacecraft, then the finances of Boeing's Defense, Space & Security division for space-related activities could be freed up to concentrate on manufacture some components for the Vulcan rocket but also additional SLS core stages.
Each of the two existing Starliner capsules is good for ten flights: a total of twenty. Each has flown once. Starliner has a total of seven flights on the manifest: CFT plus Starliner-1 through Starliner-6, with a projected cadence of one flight per year. There is no indication that Starliner will ever have any other customers, so there is no need for any additional capsules. They will however need a new service module for each flight since the service module is expended. I do not know how many service modules have been built.
Starliner is crew-certified to fly on the retiring Atlas V, and exactly seven of the remaining Atlas Vs are reserved for the seven Starliner missions. There is no evidence that Boeing plans to certify Starliner on another launcher. This would be needed before Boeing could fly any additional missions.
You make a good point regarding how the service life of the Starliner will be affected by the available number of Atlas Vs reserved for the CST-100 and scheduled dates for select Dragon 2 missions. If, as you say, either of the two existing Starliner capsules is good for ten flights, this would require Boeing lobbying NASA for another contract for additional Starliner flights besides the currently planned Starliner-1 to Starliner-6 flights, since the Calypso (Spacecraft 3) and the Starliner vehicle called Spacecraft 3 each have conducted just one flight so far.
The other problem for Boeing: With only two capsules, they cannot really do non-CCP flights. They are contracted for one CCP flight per year, which means the mission capsule is in orbit for six months. But we are told that the refurbishment time is a bit longer than six months, so a single capsule could not do CCP missions with a 12-month cadence. With two capsules they have a comfortable schedule of 13 or 14 months total time for mission+refurbishment, per capsule, to meet a requirement of one mission every 24 months, per capsule. It's hard to see how they can fly a non-CCP mission with the second capsule any time before 2030 without tweaking something.
-
#612
by
abaddon
on 20 Nov, 2022 20:21
-
I see Sierra Space stepping in very quickly […]
What on Earth makes you think Sierra Space can “step in very quickly”? Their sluggish (to be charitable) performance on cargo DreamChaser to date doesn’t inspire confidence.
-
#613
by
LaunchedIn68
on 21 Nov, 2022 17:35
-
I see Sierra Space stepping in very quickly […]
What on Earth makes you think Sierra Space can “step in very quickly”? Their sluggish (to be charitable) performance on cargo DreamChaser to date doesn’t inspire confidence.
You're joking right?
-
#614
by
rpapo
on 22 Nov, 2022 21:43
-
I see Sierra Space stepping in very quickly […]
What on Earth makes you think Sierra Space can “step in very quickly”? Their sluggish (to be charitable) performance on cargo DreamChaser to date doesn’t inspire confidence.
You're joking right?
Sierra Space has been inching along for twelve years on this project. Since around the time the first Falcon 9s launched.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream_ChaserBut isn't this off topic for this thread?
-
#615
by
whitelancer64
on 22 Nov, 2022 22:05
-
I see Sierra Space stepping in very quickly […]
What on Earth makes you think Sierra Space can “step in very quickly”? Their sluggish (to be charitable) performance on cargo DreamChaser to date doesn’t inspire confidence.
You're joking right?
Dream Chaser was awarded one of the CRS-2 contracts in January 2016. It looks to be doing its demo flight sometime in 2023 -- a speed demon, it surely is...
-
#616
by
yg1968
on 22 Nov, 2022 23:29
-
I see Sierra Space stepping in very quickly […]
What on Earth makes you think Sierra Space can “step in very quickly”? Their sluggish (to be charitable) performance on cargo DreamChaser to date doesn’t inspire confidence.
You're joking right?
Dream Chaser was awarded one of the CRS-2 contracts in January 2016. It looks to be doing its demo flight sometime in 2023 -- a speed demon, it surely is...
Yes but Dream Chaser is "immensely complex and high risk". No wait, wrong company...
-
#617
by
Vahe231991
on 25 Nov, 2022 14:46
-
I see Sierra Space stepping in very quickly […]
What on Earth makes you think Sierra Space can “step in very quickly”? Their sluggish (to be charitable) performance on cargo DreamChaser to date doesn’t inspire confidence.
You're joking right?
Dream Chaser was awarded one of the CRS-2 contracts in January 2016. It looks to be doing its demo flight sometime in 2023 -- a speed demon, it surely is...
It's quite silly to call the Dream Chaser a speed demon because the planned launch date/time frame for the first orbital flight has been delayed a number of times due technical and financial reasons (e.g. the COVID outbreak probably played a special role in causing construction of the airframe of the first orbital Dream Chaser vehicle to be temporarily paused).
-
#618
by
Comga
on 25 Nov, 2022 16:19
-
I see Sierra Space stepping in very quickly […]
What on Earth makes you think Sierra Space can “step in very quickly”? Their sluggish (to be charitable) performance on cargo DreamChaser to date doesn’t inspire confidence.
You're joking right?
Dream Chaser was awarded one of the CRS-2 contracts in January 2016. It looks to be doing its demo flight sometime in 2023 -- a speed demon, it surely is...
It's quite silly to call the Dream Chaser a speed demon because the planned launch date/time frame for the first orbital flight has been delayed a number of times due technical and financial reasons (e.g. the COVID outbreak probably played a special role in causing construction of the airframe of the first orbital Dream Chaser vehicle to be temporarily paused).
Winking emoji needed?
Poe’s Law, Vahe.
My impression is the post is unidentified sarcasm.
Some of your very optimistic posts, including some in this very thread, seemed to be sarcasm, until you convinced me they were sincere.
PS. But now I have contributed to this off-topic discussion. Let’s get back to Starliner and look for evidence that Boeing can get ready in time for a spring launch of CFT.
Or make this on-topic with a poll on which vehicle gets to the ISS first, CFT or DreamChaser.
Heck. We used to think there was a race between Starliner and Crew Dragon!
-
#619
by
ZachS09
on 25 Nov, 2022 19:03
-
There’s no race anymore. Everyone plus Boeing is going at their own pace.
