-
#800
by
SoftwareDude
on 03 Jun, 2023 02:25
-
Ars Technica article.
Although Reiley said in 2009 the company was making a "substantial investment" in the development of Starliner, then known as CST-100, multiple sources told Ars that was not the case. Instead, Boeing for a long time "nickel-and-dimed" the time engineers spent working on Starliner. This was partly due to congressional underfunding of the commercial crew program but also because Boeing did not want to put skin in the game.
Emphasis mine.
From Here:
https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/06/to-keep-starliner-flying-boeing-must-make-some-hard-choices/
-
#801
by
SoftwareDude
on 03 Jun, 2023 02:42
-
The Starliner and T-7 fall under the purview of Boeing defense and space or BDS. So at least at a high-level, they are managed by at least the same team of corporate decision makers.
That's just the business unit; the common management between the different divisions at that level has zero technical knowledge, and pitifully little program contract knowledge. If they're smart they minimize the mouth movement; if they're stupid they drop into the category of "DO IT FOR LESS" and "PULL YOUR SCHEDULE TO THE LEFT".
Glassdoor's top con of working at Boeing :
"Poor management and very bureaucratic." (in 640 reviews)
To be fair employees #1 pro for working at Boeing is benefits and #2 pro is work-life balance.
https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Boeing-Reviews-E102.htm
Just asking hypothetically, supposed the said management that has zero technical knowledge and little program contract knowledge is not smart enough to get out of the way. Asking for a friend 
(Yeah I know that never happens in real life, so just asking hypothetically).
-
#802
by
SoftwareDude
on 03 Jun, 2023 02:51
-
So, from what I am hearing, the specification called for tapes at specific points where there could be rubbing between the wiring harness and parts of the spacecraft, like where the harness passes through a hole, but Boeing got frisky with the tape and taped up all the wiring thus creating a fire hazard. Is that the problem?
-
#803
by
clongton
on 03 Jun, 2023 10:13
-
As far as I can tell, the "potential fire hazard" with the tape is that the acrylic adhesive layer can fray when it rubs against a hard surface, exposing the wire inside to whatever the adhesive layer was rubbing against. If that "something" is a grounded, conductive substance, then the wiring could be shorted at that point. At the very least such a short circuit could cause the system it is connected to, to malfunction, which may or may not be bad, and in a worst case scenario cause an electrical fire. Memories of the Apollo-1 fire come to mind, caused by a short circuit, that burned 3 NASA astronauts to death in their seats inside their spacecraft.
So yes, this is a very serious issue, no matter how hard Boeing tries to spin it. How long will it take to fix? I've no idea. Unlike the parachute harness problem, this is not going to be an easy fix. It depends on whether or not it's easier/less expensive to rewire the entire spacecraft or to try to identify just the spots where a potential short may be located and just fix those. Did they get them all? Unknown. It's a crap shoot. In my mind, the right thing to do is to totally eliminate the potential hazard by completely rewiring the entire spacecraft. Will Boeing do that? Personally, I doubt it. They've already demonstrated their hesitancy to self fund anything further after already shelling out almost $900 million of shareholder money after the first test flight debacle, and NASA is unlikely to pay Boeing to fix its own screwup. It might, but I doubt it. It would be different if there was a good market for man-rated spacecraft but there just isn't. HSF does not provide, for the foreseeable future, a compelling reason to self invest hundreds of millions of dollars without a real potential for a good return on investment, especially for a company that must answer to shareholders for spending their money without making a good return. The market just does not provide that good an incentive. Boeing is now faced with some very, very hard choices, none of them good for Boeing. Starliner itself might be in jeopardy. Lets hope not. Without Boeing entering the Commercial Crew bidding back at the beginning, Commercial Crew might never have gotten enough traction in Congress. So for at least that reason alone, everyone should want to see Boeing ultimately succeed and for Starliner to safely enter the Commercial Crew rotation. Fingers crossed.
-
#804
by
Vettedrmr
on 03 Jun, 2023 12:53
-
Commercial Crew might never have gotten enough traction in Congress. So for at least that reason alone, everyone should want to see Boeing ultimately succeed and for Starliner to safely enter the Commercial Crew rotation. Fingers crossed.
Couldn't have said it better.
-
#805
by
edzieba
on 03 Jun, 2023 13:17
-
As far as I can tell, the "potential fire hazard" with the tape is that the acrylic adhesive layer can fray when it rubs against a hard surface, exposing the wire inside to whatever the adhesive layer was rubbing against. If that "something" is a grounded, conductive substance, then the wiring could be shorted at that point.
The adhesive layer is only present under the glass fibre to hold the protective glass fibre in place. For the adhesive to be have been mechanically disrupted, it would mean that the glass fibre wrap has already been disrupted and exposed the insulator, and in such an event the particular adhesive used is the least of your concern.
-
#806
by
ZachS09
on 03 Jun, 2023 13:20
-
Yet there’s a minority that says Starliner should be cancelled and that it’s “an oldies piece of junk”.
At least that’s how I paraphrased it. Can’t remember the exact Twitter replies.
-
#807
by
JEF_300
on 03 Jun, 2023 13:44
-
Also, between all the delays and problems, we sometimes forget that Starliner has some genuinely innovative features. The bolted together pressure vessel is a massive advantage, that I suspect we will see a lot of next-gen spacecraft moving to over the next few years. And having a US crew vehicle that can land on land, in the US, is going to provide the station program with operational opportunities that never existed before.
-
#808
by
Rebel44
on 03 Jun, 2023 20:23
-
As far as I can tell, the "potential fire hazard" with the tape is that the acrylic adhesive layer can fray when it rubs against a hard surface, exposing the wire inside to whatever the adhesive layer was rubbing against. If that "something" is a grounded, conductive substance, then the wiring could be shorted at that point. At the very least such a short circuit could cause the system it is connected to, to malfunction, which may or may not be bad, and in a worst case scenario cause an electrical fire. Memories of the Apollo-1 fire come to mind, caused by a short circuit, that burned 3 NASA astronauts to death in their seats inside their spacecraft.
So yes, this is a very serious issue, no matter how hard Boeing tries to spin it. How long will it take to fix? I've no idea. Unlike the parachute harness problem, this is not going to be an easy fix. It depends on whether or not it's easier/less expensive to rewire the entire spacecraft or to try to identify just the spots where a potential short may be located and just fix those. Did they get them all? Unknown. It's a crap shoot. In my mind, the right thing to do is to totally eliminate the potential hazard by completely rewiring the entire spacecraft. Will Boeing do that? Personally, I doubt it. They've already demonstrated their hesitancy to self fund anything further after already shelling out almost $900 million of shareholder money after the first test flight debacle, and NASA is unlikely to pay Boeing to fix its own screwup. It might, but I doubt it. It would be different if there was a good market for man-rated spacecraft but there just isn't. HSF does not provide, for the foreseeable future, a compelling reason to self invest hundreds of millions of dollars without a real potential for a good return on investment, especially for a company that must answer to shareholders for spending their money without making a good return. The market just does not provide that good an incentive. Boeing is now faced with some very, very hard choices, none of them good for Boeing. Starliner itself might be in jeopardy. Lets hope not. Without Boeing entering the Commercial Crew bidding back at the beginning, Commercial Crew might never have gotten enough traction in Congress. So for at least that reason alone, everyone should want to see Boeing ultimately succeed and for Starliner to safely enter the Commercial Crew rotation. Fingers crossed.
I think Boeing is one more problem/incident (that would cause further expenses and delay - which in turn would cost Starliner at least one of those 6 missions) from canceling the Starliner.
-
#809
by
TrevorMonty
on 03 Jun, 2023 22:20
-
As far as I can tell, the "potential fire hazard" with the tape is that the acrylic adhesive layer can fray when it rubs against a hard surface, exposing the wire inside to whatever the adhesive layer was rubbing against. If that "something" is a grounded, conductive substance, then the wiring could be shorted at that point.
The adhesive layer is only present under the glass fibre to hold the protective glass fibre in place. For the adhesive to be have been mechanically disrupted, it would mean that the glass fibre wrap has already been disrupted and exposed the insulator, and in such an event the particular adhesive used is the least of your concern.
Why wasn't pickup years ago?.
-
#810
by
king1999
on 03 Jun, 2023 23:16
-
Commercial Crew might never have gotten enough traction in Congress. So for at least that reason alone, everyone should want to see Boeing ultimately succeed and for Starliner to safely enter the Commercial Crew rotation. Fingers crossed.
Couldn't have said it better.
Totally agreed. If you ignore Boeing and think the whole crew program was sole sourced from SpaceX, the total cost ~$7B including 6 flights was very reasonable, probably cheaper than a cost-plus program. NASA had estimated that the Falcon 9 rocket alone would cost them $3B under cost-plus model.
-
#811
by
ulm_atms
on 03 Jun, 2023 23:47
-
Commercial Crew might never have gotten enough traction in Congress. So for at least that reason alone, everyone should want to see Boeing ultimately succeed and for Starliner to safely enter the Commercial Crew rotation. Fingers crossed.
You know, I don't know a single person wanting Boeing to fail with Starliner. I do know lots of people that are tired of Boeing failing with Starliner however.
Actually, I feel the opposite. Boeing tried "politically" TO kill Commercial Crew by lobbying to be sole source in the first place. So I just can't go with your reason. CC succeeded due to the government administration at the time wanting and fighting for it. There was A LOT of push back from the usual people in Congress from certain states.
-
#812
by
king1999
on 04 Jun, 2023 00:57
-
You know, I don't know a single person wanting Boeing to fail with Starliner. I do know lots of people that are tired of Boeing failing with Starliner however.
Actually, I feel the opposite. Boeing tried "politically" TO kill Commercial Crew by lobbying to be sole source in the first place. So I just can't go with your reason. CC succeeded due to the government administration at the time wanting and fighting for it. There was A LOT of push back from the usual people in Congress from certain states.
I think it was a complicated situation, not black and white. NASA and Boeing both had their own calculations. NASA wanted to bring Boeing on board to earn Congress' funding. Boeing, I suspect, wanted to get in first and then somehow make it into a cost-plus program, either through lobbying to become sole-source or SpaceX's failure. Obviously, Boeing's calculation didn't pan out well.
-
#813
by
JAFO
on 04 Jun, 2023 02:03
-
Maybe it's my old memory, but I recall the day of the announcement people saying it was SpaceX and SNC, but then Boeing pushed back hard and got SNC eliminated, leading the SNC filing their protest that was not upheld.
-
#814
by
king1999
on 04 Jun, 2023 02:37
-
Maybe it's my old memory, but I recall the day of the announcement people saying it was SpaceX and SNC, but then Boeing pushed back hard and got SNC eliminated, leading the SNC filing their protest that was not upheld.
I recall it was just a poll on NSF. Many people thought SNC would win due to dissimilarity. From the selection document released later, Boeing was the leading one.
-
#815
by
GWR64
on 04 Jun, 2023 08:54
-
As far as I can tell, the "potential fire hazard" with the tape is that the acrylic adhesive layer can fray when it rubs against a hard surface, exposing the wire inside to whatever the adhesive layer was rubbing against. If that "something" is a grounded, conductive substance, then the wiring could be shorted at that point. At the very least such a short circuit could cause the system it is connected to, to malfunction, which may or may not be bad, and in a worst case scenario cause an electrical fire. Memories of the Apollo-1 fire come to mind, caused by a short circuit, that burned 3 NASA astronauts to death in their seats inside their spacecraft.
So yes, this is a very serious issue, no matter how hard Boeing tries to spin it. How long will it take to fix? I've no idea. Unlike the parachute harness problem, this is not going to be an easy fix. It depends on whether or not it's easier/less expensive to rewire the entire spacecraft or to try to identify just the spots where a potential short may be located and just fix those. Did they get them all? Unknown. It's a crap shoot. In my mind, the right thing to do is to totally eliminate the potential hazard by completely rewiring the entire spacecraft. Will Boeing do that? Personally, I doubt it. They've already demonstrated their hesitancy to self fund anything further after already shelling out almost $900 million of shareholder money after the first test flight debacle, and NASA is unlikely to pay Boeing to fix its own screwup. It might, but I doubt it. It would be different if there was a good market for man-rated spacecraft but there just isn't. HSF does not provide, for the foreseeable future, a compelling reason to self invest hundreds of millions of dollars without a real potential for a good return on investment, especially for a company that must answer to shareholders for spending their money without making a good return. The market just does not provide that good an incentive. Boeing is now faced with some very, very hard choices, none of them good for Boeing. Starliner itself might be in jeopardy. Lets hope not. Without Boeing entering the Commercial Crew bidding back at the beginning, Commercial Crew might never have gotten enough traction in Congress. So for at least that reason alone, everyone should want to see Boeing ultimately succeed and for Starliner to safely enter the Commercial Crew rotation. Fingers crossed.
Fire hazard from tape on Starliner wiring harnesses? The layman is surprised.
Cable harnesses are everywhere where people are transported.
The loads are maybe less than on Starliner, but cars, buses, trains, planes, etc. are used for a very long time and often.
Boeing builds passenger planes that fly for decades and make many takeoffs and landings. Each time with maybe 500 humans on board.
-
#816
by
clongton
on 04 Jun, 2023 13:45
-
Fire hazard from tape on Starliner wiring harnesses? The layman is surprised.
Cable harnesses are everywhere where people are transported.
The loads are maybe less than on Starliner, but cars, buses, trains, planes, etc. are used for a very long time and often.
Boeing builds passenger planes that fly for decades and make many takeoffs and landings. Each time with maybe 500 humans on board.
Yes. The potential has been officially identified and verified. Starliner has had to stand down again because of it, for an unknown length of time to fix, but likely not short term. Powered rocket flight is nowhere near as smooth a ride as cars, buses, trains, planes, etc. There is a lot of severe shake, rattle and rolling and vibrations going on. If wiring harnesses are going thru a hole in the structure they can be damaged by the edges of the hole, potentially fraying the insulation and causing an electrical short. Electrical shorts cause fires. A shorted circuit is what caused the fire on Apollo 1, burning up the capsule and killing the 3 astronauts aboard.
-
#817
by
Steve G
on 04 Jun, 2023 13:50
-
There has been a lot of chat within the space media concerning Boeing's future with Starliner.
https://twitter.com/RCScience/status/1665028065548972032/photo/1Some suggesting that NASA cancels Starliner, to Boeing cancelling Starliner.
Though I am sure Boeing intends to stick with Starliner as it would be worse PR to shut it down and further damage their reputation and endanger future government contracts rather than the bad publicity more delays would cause. NASA still needs a redundant backup in case Dragon suffers a setback, so, what would be the feasibility of Boeing putting Starliner up for sale to a third party to cut losses? Of course, this would require transferring (or transitioning) technology, key staff and production facilities, not easy, but a third party that needs a crew vehicle without having the expense of developing one from scratch? (LM, BO, Rocket Lab, etc) Far fetched agreed but better than cancelling the whole thing. Looking for thoughts.
-
#818
by
Jim
on 04 Jun, 2023 14:00
-
, so, what would be the feasibility of Boeing putting Starliner up for sale to a third party to cut losses?
None.
-
#819
by
Steve G
on 04 Jun, 2023 14:23
-
Why?
(Yeah I know that never happens in real life, so just asking hypothetically).