-
#980
by
hoku
on 08 Aug, 2023 14:06
-
https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/08/starliner-undergoing-three-independent-investigations-as-flight-slips-to-2024/
Starliner undergoing three independent investigations as flight slips to 2024
"The design changes were, I would say, minimal."
ERIC BERGER - 8/7/2023, 10:07 PM
A Boeing official said Monday that the company has delayed a crewed flight test of its Starliner spacecraft until at least March 2024.
The manager for the company's Commercial Crew Program, Mark Nappi, said the spacecraft should be ready for flight by early March, or seven months from now. However, Nappi said that date is conditional on availability of an Atlas V rocket, provided by United Launch Alliance, and an opening in NASA's visiting vehicles schedule.
Quote: "Boeing's modifications by contrast are fairly simple," Stich said. "We felt like we only needed one test..."
Let's hope/pray a solid engineering analysis underlies NASA's "feelings".
(I can imagine being in the spot light, and answering reporters can be stressful, and that it might be difficult to find the right words)
-
#981
by
deadman1204
on 08 Aug, 2023 14:21
-
I'm not sure if completing all six flights will make Starliner profitable, but even if the end result is a net loss, getting as many payments from NASA as possible will reduce the losses they have had so far.
This is true only if each operational flight is profitable. It probably is, but we don't know that for sure. Boeing initially costed them out in 2014 (updated in 2018) and bid a fixed price based on a set of assumptions that included such things as an initial launch in or before 2020 and a continuing availability of Atlas V or Vulcan at some specific projected cost per launch. I speculate that these costs may have risen.
Interestingly enough, it’s been delayed so long that inflation may have eaten away any potential profit at the agreed price it was sold at.
I'm pretty sure they accounted for inflation when looking at the costs of the lifetime of the program.
-
#982
by
abaddon
on 08 Aug, 2023 17:07
-
I'm not sure if completing all six flights will make Starliner profitable, but even if the end result is a net loss, getting as many payments from NASA as possible will reduce the losses they have had so far.
This is true only if each operational flight is profitable. It probably is, but we don't know that for sure. Boeing initially costed them out in 2014 (updated in 2018) and bid a fixed price based on a set of assumptions that included such things as an initial launch in or before 2020 and a continuing availability of Atlas V or Vulcan at some specific projected cost per launch. I speculate that these costs may have risen.
Interestingly enough, it’s been delayed so long that inflation may have eaten away any potential profit at the agreed price it was sold at.
I'm pretty sure they accounted for inflation when looking at the costs of the lifetime of the program.
When payments are delayed, the amount of money you get becomes relatively lower due to inflation. As the lifetime of the program becomes increasingly back-loaded, the effects increase. Were payments not delayed, Boeing could invest or use the payment monies to counteract inflation but instead they just get the same amount deflated later. So any accounting for inflation is going to be rendered inaccurate by this back-loading of the payments that is happening in practice due to all of these delays. How significant that is, I have no idea, but it seems likely to be at least somewhat negatively impactful on the bottom line.
-
#983
by
DanClemmensen
on 08 Aug, 2023 17:08
-
I'm not sure if completing all six flights will make Starliner profitable, but even if the end result is a net loss, getting as many payments from NASA as possible will reduce the losses they have had so far.
This is true only if each operational flight is profitable. It probably is, but we don't know that for sure. Boeing initially costed them out in 2014 (updated in 2018) and bid a fixed price based on a set of assumptions that included such things as an initial launch in or before 2020 and a continuing availability of Atlas V or Vulcan at some specific projected cost per launch. I speculate that these costs may have risen.
Interestingly enough, it’s been delayed so long that inflation may have eaten away any potential profit at the agreed price it was sold at.
I'm pretty sure they accounted for inflation when looking at the costs of the lifetime of the program.
Sure. In 2014, they accounted for inflation for missions starting in 2018 and ending in 2023. Flights will now start in 2025(?) and end in 2030.
Separate issue: I'm not sure how to determine the incremental price to be charged to NASA for each operational mission,but since this stared as IDIQ, that incremental price must have been listed somewhere. We do have NASA's cost-per-seat figure of $90 Million, which would be $360 Million/mission:
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/11/nasa-report-finds-boeing-seat-prices-are-60-higher-than-spacex/This does appear to be the incremental price without the amortized development costs, but I'm not sure.
At $360/mission and 1 mission/yr, that $360 million will need to cover the entire yearly cost for the mission and for maintaining the infrastructure for both Starliner and Atlas V once all non-Starliner Atlas V missions are complete, probably by 2025 at the latest.
-
#984
by
abaddon
on 08 Aug, 2023 17:10
-
At $360/mission and 1 mission/yr, that $360 million will need to cover the entire yearly cost for the mission and for maintaining the infrastructure for both Starliner and Atlas V once all non-Starliner Atlas V missions are complete, probably by 2025 at the latest.
I doubt Boeing is directly on the hook for Atlas V infrastructure maintenance costs. There may be penalties built into the contract that can help claw back some of that for ULA. Without insight into the contract, it is impossible to say for sure.
-
#985
by
DanClemmensen
on 08 Aug, 2023 17:22
-
At $360/mission and 1 mission/yr, that $360 million will need to cover the entire yearly cost for the mission and for maintaining the infrastructure for both Starliner and Atlas V once all non-Starliner Atlas V missions are complete, probably by 2025 at the latest.
I doubt Boeing is directly on the hook for Atlas V infrastructure maintenance costs. There may be penalties built into the contract that can help claw back some of that for ULA. Without insight into the contract, it is impossible to say for sure.
If ULA operates Atlas V at a loss, then the loss rolls up to the ULA's owners. Boeing owns half of ULA. For purposes of this thread, I was trying to figure out if (Boeing+ULA) would be better off financially just terminating Starliner after the CFT.
In my opinion, NASA would be better off, because NASA is expending money and effort to support the Starliner side of CCP.
-
#986
by
clongton
on 08 Aug, 2023 18:39
-
(I can imagine being in the spot light, and answering reporters can be stressful, and that it might be difficult to find the right words)
If officials would simply get into the habit of telling the truth - the whole, unembelished truth, then handling reporter's questions wouldn't be stressful at all. As a bonus, the officials wouldn't have to try to remember what they had said before so they wouldn't contradict themselves. The truth will always be the truth. It's so simple to do but instead everybody seems to be willing to answer questions with spin instead of truth, designed to paint a specific kind of picture instead of just informing the public. Trying to maintain the narrative is what makes it stressful. Telling the truth instead is easy, and there's no stress.
-
#987
by
mn
on 08 Aug, 2023 19:04
-
(I can imagine being in the spot light, and answering reporters can be stressful, and that it might be difficult to find the right words)
If officials would simply get into the habit of telling the truth - the whole, unembelished truth, then handling reporter's questions wouldn't be stressful at all. As a bonus, the officials wouldn't have to try to remember what they had said before so they wouldn't contradict themselves. The truth will always be the truth. It's so simple to do but instead everybody seems to be willing to answer questions with spin instead of truth, designed to paint a specific kind of picture instead of just informing the public. Trying to maintain the narrative is what makes it stressful. Telling the truth instead is easy, and there's no stress.
Try doing that when the truth is bad news and you are on the hook for it...
There's a reason lying was invented.
-
#988
by
mn
on 08 Aug, 2023 19:11
-
I agree that the quote sounds like it was done before the first flight, but that begs the question of why they didn't immediately check whether Starliner has the same issue?
Was that question covered by anyone?
Edit: (this is just throwing out a guess): Perhaps NASA did reach out to Boeing immediately and they pushed back and it took this long for Boeing to agree to make changes?
Edit 2: Shouldn't this be in the Starliner thread?
-
#989
by
clongton
on 08 Aug, 2023 19:40
-
(I can imagine being in the spot light, and answering reporters can be stressful, and that it might be difficult to find the right words)
If officials would simply get into the habit of telling the truth - the whole, unembelished truth, then handling reporter's questions wouldn't be stressful at all. As a bonus, the officials wouldn't have to try to remember what they had said before so they wouldn't contradict themselves. The truth will always be the truth. It's so simple to do but instead everybody seems to be willing to answer questions with spin instead of truth, designed to paint a specific kind of picture instead of just informing the public. Trying to maintain the narrative is what makes it stressful. Telling the truth instead is easy, and there's no stress.
Try doing that when the truth is bad news and you are on the hook for it...
There's a reason lying was invented.
ESPECIALLY in that situation, the very best option is to tell the truth.
Period!Lying is always, always the worst possible thing you can do - always.
I don't care how bad the news is, how devestating, or how uncomfortable it may be, it is always, always easier to deal with a terrible truth than to deal with or try to fix what is actually a lie.
I hate lies and I will shun anyone who lies to me.
-
#990
by
mn
on 08 Aug, 2023 20:08
-
(I can imagine being in the spot light, and answering reporters can be stressful, and that it might be difficult to find the right words)
If officials would simply get into the habit of telling the truth - the whole, unembelished truth, then handling reporter's questions wouldn't be stressful at all. As a bonus, the officials wouldn't have to try to remember what they had said before so they wouldn't contradict themselves. The truth will always be the truth. It's so simple to do but instead everybody seems to be willing to answer questions with spin instead of truth, designed to paint a specific kind of picture instead of just informing the public. Trying to maintain the narrative is what makes it stressful. Telling the truth instead is easy, and there's no stress.
Try doing that when the truth is bad news and you are on the hook for it...
There's a reason lying was invented.
ESPECIALLY in that situation, the very best option is to tell the truth. Period!
Lying is always, always the worst possible thing you can do - always.
I don't care how bad the news is, how devestating, or how uncomfortable it may be, it is always, always easier to deal with a terrible truth than to deal with or try to fix what is actually a lie.
I hate lies and I will shun anyone who lies to me.
You don't need to convince me. I agree with you. My grandmother would always say 'The truth is the best lie'.
I am just explaining why the reality is so often not like that.
-
#991
by
whitelancer64
on 08 Aug, 2023 21:04
-
I agree that the quote sounds like it was done before the first flight, but that begs the question of why they didn't immediately check whether Starliner has the same issue?
Was that question covered by anyone?
Edit: (this is just throwing out a guess): Perhaps NASA did reach out to Boeing immediately and they pushed back and it took this long for Boeing to agree to make changes?
Edit 2: Shouldn't this be in the Starliner thread?
Based on everything we've been hearing, Boeing has only recently found out that P-213 tape is an issue.
IF SpaceX realized the tape was an issue 3 years ago, then someone somewhere along the line seriously dropped the ball by not communicating that to NASA and Boeing until now.
It makes much more sense that SpaceX remediated the use of the tape in the Dragon capsules after Boeing found it to be a problem.
-
#992
by
xyv
on 09 Aug, 2023 01:42
-
There is really no such thing as "the whole, unembelished truth". Much of any of these situations are "...we know this, we don't know that and there are a bunch of things that have degrees of probablility..." The world at large is not comfortable with the reality of making decisions with incomplete information. And infomration is nearlly allways incomplete. Engineers and managers live in a noisy analog world with missing data and trying to use human filtering of that information. Most of us have reconciled ourselve to that reality. Never lie but the whole truth? Really no such thing.
-
#993
by
D_Dom
on 09 Aug, 2023 13:39
-
Truth exists.
Perception is unique to our lived experience.
Richard Feynman said something like
As a Scientist we should avoid lying to ourselves.
-
#994
by
matthewkantar
on 09 Aug, 2023 13:54
-
Truth exists.
Perception is unique to our lived experience.
Richard Feynman said something like
As a Scientist we should avoid lying to ourselves.
Dorthy, we’re not in CST-100 land anymore.
-
#995
by
gtae07
on 09 Aug, 2023 17:30
-
There is really no such thing as "the whole, unembelished truth". Much of any of these situations are "...we know this, we don't know that and there are a bunch of things that have degrees of probablility..." The world at large is not comfortable with the reality of making decisions with incomplete information. And infomration is nearlly allways incomplete. Engineers and managers live in a noisy analog world with missing data and trying to use human filtering of that information. Most of us have reconciled ourselve to that reality. Never lie but the whole truth? Really no such thing.
Real engineering isn't an academic problem with cleanly-defined problems and nice neat closed-form solutions. The more you try to pin an engineer down on a "simple" yes or no answer, the more qualifications and conditionals you're going to get, and lots of "laypeople" (for lack of a better term) view that as trying to lie or be deceptive.
You might also find that "we feel that..." is a colloquial reporter-friendly term for "we conducted an extensive analysis and though we don't have a clear answer, our best engineering judgment says..." which itself could be shorthand for dozens of pages of a technical report. All too often you can't "just simply" explain something because doing so would involve the audience having deep technical expertise themselves.
I find myself doing this a fair bit at work, trying to explain complex technical subjects to non-technical customers. I get called a liar pretty often, even when I present the raw data to them right off their aircraft.
-
#996
by
Kiwi53
on 12 Aug, 2023 21:12
-
Boeing confident in achieving six flights to the ISS despite Starliner delay
...
Mark Nappi, vice president and program manager of the CST-100 Starliner at Boeing, asserted there is 'no reason to change our plans with the six flights, plus CST fits well into the window that we have, and there are additional flights that are available outside of those six with other customers, so I think we are still committed like we have been in the past'.”
(emphasis
added)
Based on such an equivocating endorsement from someone not in the C-suite at Boeing Corp,I'd be
very worried if I was working on the project.
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2023/08/starliner-update/
-
#997
by
woods170
on 13 Aug, 2023 15:53
-
I agree that the quote sounds like it was done before the first flight, but that begs the question of why they didn't immediately check whether Starliner has the same issue?
Was that question covered by anyone?
Edit: (this is just throwing out a guess): Perhaps NASA did reach out to Boeing immediately and they pushed back and it took this long for Boeing to agree to make changes?
Edit 2: Shouldn't this be in the Starliner thread?
Based on everything we've been hearing, Boeing has only recently found out that P-213 tape is an issue.
IF SpaceX realized the tape was an issue 3 years ago, then someone somewhere along the line seriously dropped the ball by not communicating that to NASA and Boeing until now.
It makes much more sense that SpaceX remediated the use of the tape in the Dragon capsules after Boeing found it to be a problem.
The quote in question:
Steve Stich: SpaceX did have some of the tape they were using before the first crewed flight (a couple of places under the floor), that was removed.
I asked one of my contacts at SpaceX and it turns out that the tape was replaced in 2019 and NASA was aware of the change due to them being embedded in the SpaceX team.
Some time ago a NASA source spilled some beans on a social media platform (can't remember which). According to that person SpaceX welcomed NASA engineers into their team and they actively worked together, with SpaceX trying to learn as much as possible. The same source also mentioned that Boeing, on the other hand, dismissed the idea of embedding NASA engineers and expertise in the Starliner team. They seemingly also didn't bother to take NASA's advice.
Perhaps that's how the issue with the tape was overlooked by Boeing. They didn't bother to listen to NASA.
-
#998
by
GWR64
on 13 Aug, 2023 17:37
-
-
#999
by
ccdengr
on 13 Aug, 2023 19:37
-
...SpaceX welcomed NASA engineers into their team and they actively worked together, with SpaceX trying to learn as much as possible. The same source also mentioned that Boeing, on the other hand, dismissed the idea of embedding NASA engineers and expertise in the Starliner team. They seemingly also didn't bother to take NASA's advice.
In my experience, some "NASA engineers" are knowledgeable and helpful, and some -- aren't. I can totally understand a desire to not have outsiders "embedded" into a team.
That said, I still haven't heard a complete and believable story about how an inappropriate tape got used and who figured that out and when. I'd think that a detailed NASA review and approval of the materials list would have happened very early in the program, so either Boeing used an unapproved material or it was never discovered that what they did use wasn't approved.