-
#900
by
deadman1204
on 26 Jul, 2023 19:26
-
Will Boeing recoup these losses if they fly the missions, reach the milestones, etc?
They get paid for accomplishing the milestones, so the profit from those will go towards recouping losses, but nothing more.
Indeed, however quiting imposes more losses than is apparent at first glance.
It affects how they are rated for future gov bids. So taking these losses can still make more financial sense than bailing on the project.
-
#901
by
Vahe231991
on 26 Jul, 2023 19:40
-
Will Boeing recoup these losses if they fly the missions, reach the milestones, etc?
Even if all the crewed Starliner missions are flown, Boeing should end the Starliner program and recoup some of the lost Starliner-related revenues for investment in development of Exploration Upper Stage, since the EUS that will power the upper stage of all SLS rockets slated for missions beginning with Artemis 4 will be ready by the time the Starliner-6 mission is carried out.
-
#902
by
abaddon
on 26 Jul, 2023 19:57
-
Will Boeing recoup these losses if they fly the missions, reach the milestones, etc?
They get paid for accomplishing the milestones, so the profit from those will go towards recouping losses, but nothing more.
Indeed, however quiting imposes more losses than is apparent at first glance.
It affects how they are rated for future gov bids. So taking these losses can still make more financial sense than bailing on the project.
I don't think anyone thinks they're seriously considering bailing on the contract. The repercussions of that would be significant. I think at this point they're just trying to get certified so they can fly out their minimum contracted flights and claw back as much red as they can.
-
#903
by
John_Marshall
on 26 Jul, 2023 20:42
-
Am I remembering correctly from previous discussion that Boeing's contract is now officially for six crew rotation flights, rather than (I think it was) two rotation flights and a possible extension?
-
#904
by
Vettedrmr
on 26 Jul, 2023 20:45
-
In my feeble brain it's been contracted for 6 flights for quite a while.
-
#905
by
AS_501
on 26 Jul, 2023 21:01
-
Are they looking at post-ISS stations, such as the free-flying Axiom, do make up for lost time and revenue?
-
#906
by
DanClemmensen
on 26 Jul, 2023 21:11
-
Am I remembering correctly from previous discussion that Boeing's contract is now officially for six crew rotation flights, rather than (I think it was) two rotation flights and a possible extension?
Yes. The original 2014 fixed-price contract was for $4.2 B if NASA bought all six flights, but NASA was only committed to 2 flights plus 4 optional. Boeing told NASA in 2018 that they were not assured of enough money to justify continuing with the program, so NASA agreed to pay an additional $284 million and commit to all six flights. I do not know what Boeing had to commit to to get that extra money.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_Commercial_Crew_Program
-
#907
by
DanClemmensen
on 26 Jul, 2023 21:18
-
Are they looking at post-ISS stations, such as the free-flying Axiom, do make up for lost time and revenue?
In 2021 they were part of the Orbital Reef announcement, as one of the spacecraft to carry crew. I'm not sure if this is still a plan. To fly more than the CFT and six committed CCP missions, they will need to crew-qualify on a new LV, since there will be no further Atlas Vs after the seven that ULA has reserved for Starliner.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_Reef
-
#908
by
Zed_Noir
on 26 Jul, 2023 21:29
-
Will Boeing recoup these losses if they fly the missions, reach the milestones, etc?
Even if all the crewed Starliner missions are flown, Boeing should end the Starliner program and recoup some of the lost Starliner-related revenues for investment in development of Exploration Upper Stage, since the EUS that will power the upper stage of all SLS rockets slated for missions beginning with Artemis 4 will be ready by the time the Starliner-6 mission is carried out.
According to a Eric Berger tweet Boeing has already suffer at least $1.1B in losses with Starliner program. Which will very likely to increase with time as new issues pop up.
Have doubts that the SLS will have more than a very few missions after Artemis IV. Since the only payloads manifested for the later SLS are the Orions and maybe various components of the Lunar Gateway. Also the EUS will unlikely to meet the schedule goal with Boeing as the contractor, IMO.
-
#909
by
TrevorMonty
on 26 Jul, 2023 21:48
-
Will Boeing recoup these losses if they fly the missions, reach the milestones, etc?
They get paid for accomplishing the milestones, so the profit from those will go towards recouping losses, but nothing more.
Indeed, however quiting imposes more losses than is apparent at first glance.
It affects how they are rated for future gov bids. So taking these losses can still make more financial sense than bailing on the project.
I don't think anyone thinks they're seriously considering bailing on the contract. The repercussions of that would be significant. I think at this point they're just trying to get certified so they can fly out their minimum contracted flights and claw back as much red as they can.
Creditability has already been damaged by developments problems on Starliner and walking away from XS1 program. NASA and DARPA will take these things into account next time Boeing bid on a contract. They won Starliner contract on ability to deliver (design & reputation) not pricing.
-
#910
by
Coastal Ron
on 26 Jul, 2023 22:02
-
Will Boeing recoup these losses if they fly the missions, reach the milestones, etc?
Even if all the crewed Starliner missions are flown, Boeing should end the Starliner program and recoup some of the lost Starliner-related revenues for investment in development of Exploration Upper Stage, since the EUS that will power the upper stage of all SLS rockets slated for missions beginning with Artemis 4 will be ready by the time the Starliner-6 mission is carried out.
Why would Boeing invest any money in the SLS EUS? Boeing doesn't own the SLS, it is just a contractor.
Boeing does own the Starliner, and has committed its own funds to that program, but that was because Boeing management thought there was a chance to make a profit overall on the program, either with just NASA contracts or also with private services contracts.
For the SLS program, that is pure profit for Boeing, since they have been working under a Cost Plus contract, so they recoup everything the spend on the program AND they get a guaranteed profit. PLUS they sometimes get so called "award fees", even when they miss dates they had forecasted. So why would they invest their own money in the SLS contract?
-
#911
by
Kiwi53
on 26 Jul, 2023 22:16
-
Does this announcement of a $252 million loss on the CST-100 program in Q1 mean that Boeing's current standing costs on CST-100 are about $250M/quarter, or are there aspects of retrospectivity or recognition of forward costs in this?
Based on the idea that this just represents current costs, that would mean that Boeing is going to continue writing off about a quarter of a billion dollars each quarter until they get paid the next tranche by NASA for a successful flight.
With speculation that this flight won't be until early 2024, that commits Boeing to at least another half a billion dollars of shareholder money just flushed away.
How long before the accountants cries of "Enough! Stop throwing good money after bad!!" get louder than the marketing folks "We can't quit now, just think of the reputational damage"?
-
#912
by
John_Marshall
on 26 Jul, 2023 22:38
-
Yes. The original 2014 fixed-price contract was for $4.2 B if NASA bought all six flights, but NASA was only committed to 2 flights plus 4 optional. Boeing told NASA in 2018 that they were not assured of enough money to justify continuing with the program, so NASA agreed to pay an additional $284 million and commit to all six flights. I do not know what Boeing had to commit to to get that extra money.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_Commercial_Crew_Program
Thanks!
-
#913
by
Asteroza
on 27 Jul, 2023 00:30
-
Jeebus, approaching $1.6 billion in losses really does increase the risk Starliner will end after CCrew, leaving Crew Dragon and possibly a future crewed Dreamchaser as the only western crew delivery vehicles reasonably available. This has knockon implications for all the commercial space station outfits, plus we have yet to see anything regarding Blue Origin's capsule.
-
#914
by
Zed_Noir
on 27 Jul, 2023 02:11
-
Jeebus, approaching $1.6 billion in losses really does increase the risk Starliner will end after CCrew, leaving Crew Dragon and possibly a future crewed Dreamchaser as the only western crew delivery vehicles reasonably available. This has knockon implications for all the commercial space station outfits, plus we have yet to see anything regarding Blue Origin's capsule.
If any additional major issue pops up with the Starliner in the future. Boeing will likely walk away, IMO.
The Crewed Dreamchaser on top of a launcher without being enclosed in a fairing will likely take longer than what Sierra Space expected.
Blue Origin's capsule should progress at the same glacial pace as the rest of their projects.
Of course there is the large shiny vehicle in the wings. Plus the ISRO Gaganyaan capsule.
-
#915
by
deltaV
on 27 Jul, 2023 02:22
-
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1684242109199527941
SpaceX provided its knowledge of crewed parachute systems to Boeing and we are happy to be helpful in any other ways.
Designing parachutes for orbital, crewed spacecraft is much harder than it may seem. Was a major challenge for SpaceX.
It's weird that SpaceX would help a competitor. I wonder why this happened. Maybe NASA told SpaceX to do that? Maybe they feel that the real competitor is other countries so it's OK to help a domestic competitor? Do they feel that a stronger Boeing would be helpful to their Mars plans?
Edit: on second thought this has more to do with SpaceX than Boeing so I think I'll repost in a SpaceX thread.
Edit 2: any suggestions on a specific SpaceX thread for this? Maybe "General Falcon and Dragon discussion (Thread 15)" (
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=46338.0)?
-
#916
by
Zed_Noir
on 27 Jul, 2023 02:28
-
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1684242109199527941
SpaceX provided its knowledge of crewed parachute systems to Boeing and we are happy to be helpful in any other ways.
Designing parachutes for orbital, crewed spacecraft is much harder than it may seem. Was a major challenge for SpaceX.
It's weird that SpaceX would help a competitor. I wonder why this happened. Maybe NASA told SpaceX to do that? Maybe they feel that the real competitor is other countries so it's OK to help a domestic competitor? Do they feel that a stronger Boeing would be helpful to their Mars plans?
The optics looks bad. If SpaceX withheld their parachute knowledge from the global industry which could prevent a loss of crew.
-
#917
by
Stan-1967
on 27 Jul, 2023 03:18
-
....
With speculation that this flight won't be until early 2024, that commits Boeing to at least another half a billion dollars of shareholder money just flushed away.
How long before the accountants cries of "Enough! Stop throwing good money after bad!!" get louder than the marketing folks "We can't quit now, just think of the reputational damage"?
The word from many folks on the inside of Boeing suggest the cries of the accountants, and the primacy they hold over actually engineering things, is at the core of problem with Boeing. Shareholders should be frakked off at the value destruction that has resulted in.
-
#918
by
DigitalMan
on 27 Jul, 2023 03:24
-
snip...
It's weird that SpaceX would help a competitor. I wonder why this happened. Maybe NASA told SpaceX to do that? Maybe they feel that the real competitor is other countries so it's OK to help a domestic competitor? Do they feel that a stronger Boeing would be helpful to their Mars plans?
The optics looks bad. If SpaceX withheld their parachute knowledge from the global industry which could prevent a loss of crew.
It has nothing to do with optics or NASA forcing SpaceX to do this. It might be informative if you went back to look at the Crew Dragon videos (I forget which one) after certification I think. Elon offered to do this back then, the NASA official present was quite shocked when he said that.
-
#919
by
whitelancer64
on 27 Jul, 2023 03:36
-
snip...
It's weird that SpaceX would help a competitor. I wonder why this happened. Maybe NASA told SpaceX to do that? Maybe they feel that the real competitor is other countries so it's OK to help a domestic competitor? Do they feel that a stronger Boeing would be helpful to their Mars plans?
The optics looks bad. If SpaceX withheld their parachute knowledge from the global industry which could prevent a loss of crew.
It has nothing to do with optics or NASA forcing SpaceX to do this. It might be informative if you went back to look at the Crew Dragon videos (I forget which one) after certification I think. Elon offered to do this back then, the NASA official present was quite shocked when he said that.
Also, the knowledge transfer is simpler than you'd think. Both SpaceX and Boeing use the same supplier for parachutes, Airborne Systems, so it would be really easy to transfer any specific information to the team working on Boeing's parachutes with SpaceX's okay.
