66 days and counting (https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/07/science/boeing-starliner-nasa-astronauts-return/index.html) while Boeing in complete and utter denial (https://starlinerupdates.com/starliner-return-to-earth-preps-underway/).
Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale,
A tale of a fateful trip
That started from this launching pad
Aboard this tiny ship.
The mate was a mighty space woman,
The Skipper brave and sure.
Two astronauts set sail that day
For an eight day tour,
An eight day tour.
The thrusters started acting up,
the helium seals were botched,
Because of Boeing's screwup,
Starliner was nearly fucked
Starliner was nearly fucked.
The ship limped to the docking port of this
Crowded orbital refuge,
With corporate bean counters,
Cost overruns too,
The whistleblowers,
The clueless CEO and his minions,
Here on Gilligan's Isle.
At first I thought someone was after Boeing a year or two ago. But now? WTH is going on?!
geezuz
:words:
I watched a story on youtube (I think?) that said the most *certain* day to get them home will be in February 2025.
:gonk:
Quote from: Moab on August 10, 2024, 06:18:32 PMAt first I thought someone was after Boeing a year or two ago. But now? WTH is going on?!
The Boeing Starliner took a pair of astronauts to the ISS on its first crewed test mission, but had some problems that Boeing wanted investigated before reentry because the issue could be obscured by the effects of reentry. According to Boeing, the Starliner can be used to bring the astronauts back safely, but there are concerns about their confidence on that point and media reports have been a little muddy about the actual reality of the situation between a lack of full disclosure and clickbait reporting.
They were supposed to be there for eight days. They left Earth's surface June 5. The latest news is that they may now have to remain on the space station until a SpaceX docking scheduled for February.
NASA says there's sufficient resources for them on the space station.
Quote from: Anianna on August 11, 2024, 12:03:39 AMQuote from: Moab on August 10, 2024, 06:18:32 PMAt first I thought someone was after Boeing a year or two ago. But now? WTH is going on?!
The Boeing Starliner took a pair of astronauts to the ISS on its first crewed test mission, but had some problems that Boeing wanted investigated before reentry because the issue could be obscured by the effects of reentry. According to Boeing, the Starliner can be used to bring the astronauts back safely, but there are concerns about their confidence on that point and media reports have been a little muddy about the actual reality of the situation between a lack of full disclosure and clickbait reporting.
They were supposed to be there for eight days. They left Earth's surface June 5. The latest news is that they may now have to remain on the space station until a SpaceX docking scheduled for February.
NASA says there's sufficient resources for them on the space station.
This coupled with all the airplane problems seems like a lot.
Quote from: Moab on August 11, 2024, 11:43:46 AMQuote from: Anianna on August 11, 2024, 12:03:39 AMQuote from: Moab on August 10, 2024, 06:18:32 PMAt first I thought someone was after Boeing a year or two ago. But now? WTH is going on?!
The Boeing Starliner took a pair of astronauts to the ISS on its first crewed test mission, but had some problems that Boeing wanted investigated before reentry because the issue could be obscured by the effects of reentry. According to Boeing, the Starliner can be used to bring the astronauts back safely, but there are concerns about their confidence on that point and media reports have been a little muddy about the actual reality of the situation between a lack of full disclosure and clickbait reporting.
They were supposed to be there for eight days. They left Earth's surface June 5. The latest news is that they may now have to remain on the space station until a SpaceX docking scheduled for February.
NASA says there's sufficient resources for them on the space station.
This coupled with all the airplane problems seems like a lot.
They certainly don't make them like they used to.
Maybe they should have spent more time listening to their whistleblowers before they became whistleblowers and somehow met with an unfortunate untimely death.
Boing used to be a gold standard. It's amazing how far you can fall...
Quote from: Z.O.R.G. on August 11, 2024, 04:27:09 PMBoing used to be a gold standard. It's amazing how far you can fall...
Boeing has the right name because that's the sound their stock is making right now as it falls on the NYSE.
Funny related post:
https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/1epngw8/team_building_event_at_boeing/
Quote from: Anianna on August 11, 2024, 05:10:09 PMFunny related post:
https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/1epngw8/team_building_event_at_boeing/
Ladies and gentlemen I present to you, the team behind the Boeing Starliner. :gonk:
Oh, there's more! The different commercial operations can make their own suits and it has now been determined that Boeing's intravehicular suits are not compatible with SpaceX pods. If they come back via SpaceX, they will have to do so without the added security of their space suits.
Quote from: Anianna on August 21, 2024, 11:16:27 PMOh, there's more! The different commercial operations can make their own suits and it has now been determined that Boeing's intravehicular suits are not compatible with SpaceX pods. If they come back via SpaceX, they will have to do so without the added security of their space suits.
I saw that. The article I read said the most likely scenario is extra SpaceX suits would be sent up in the next Crew Dragon mission. If I were either of the 2 Starliner astronauts, I would flat out refuse to return on Dragon without funtional space suits. "No thanks, Houston. I think I'll stay right where I am on this nice cozy spacestation until you clowns get your act together."
The article went on to say the incompatiblity of SpaceX and Boeing space suits is a consequence of NASA's commercial manned spaceflight program, where companies are given free reign to design systems according to their own specifications.
What I can't understand is why journalists so often fail to ask obvious follow up questions. Like "WTF? How can that be? Boeing and SpaceX weren't given free reign to design, say, their docking ports, right? Otherwise they wouldn't even be able to dock with the ISS. So basic things have to be standardized and for good reason. Whose bloody stupid idea was it to allow space suits from different companies to be completely incompatable with the spacecraft that NASA intends to use for the same types of missions?"
Look around you, can you find a rudimentary lathe and length of hose?
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FpPBKBOuyYPI%2Fmaxresdefault.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=9e02476193ded1a920ad4359dce7ccf226c50acfb215dd3c6a427698fb2deaa1&ipo=images)
Quote from: majorhavoc on August 22, 2024, 10:53:21 AMQuote from: Anianna on August 21, 2024, 11:16:27 PMOh, there's more! The different commercial operations can make their own suits and it has now been determined that Boeing's intravehicular suits are not compatible with SpaceX pods. If they come back via SpaceX, they will have to do so without the added security of their space suits.
I saw that. The article I read said the most likely scenario is extra SpaceX suits would be sent up in the next Crew Dragon mission. If I were either of the 2 Starliner astronauts, I would flat out refuse to return on Dragon without funtional space suits. "No thanks, Houston. I think I'll stay right where I am on this nice cozy spacestation until you clowns get your act together."
The article went on to say the incompatiblity of SpaceX and Boeing space suits is a consequence of NASA's commercial manned spaceflight program, where companies are given free reign to design systems according to their own specifications.
What I can't understand is why journalists so often fail to ask obvious follow up questions. Like "WTF? How can that be? Boeing and SpaceX weren't given free reign to design, say, their docking ports, right? Otherwise they wouldn't even be able to dock with the ISS. So basic things have to be standardized and for good reason. Whose bloody stupid idea was it to allow space suits from different companies to be completely incompatable with the spacecraft that NASA intends to use for the same types of missions?"
The suit requirements were safety focused, not compatibility focused, so I can see how they could be permitted to design their own without expectation something like this could happen (whatever happened to foresight? This isn't that wild of a possibility). However, I was wondering why SpaceX didn't just bring extra suits and the article I read didn't go into why that could or couldn't happen and I hadn't had a chance to research that more yet. I was going on the assumption that each suit had to be custom made to the wearer, otherwise this shouldn't be an issue since SpaceX is already delivering the additional supplies needed on a pretty regular basis and shouldn't have a problem delivering suits.
Then again, if the suits have to be custom to each individual, Boeing should have those measurements, should be able to share with SpaceX, and they have until February to construct the suits. This doesn't seem like it should be out of the realm of possibility or reason, though I can understand hesitating to eat the costs, but I would think Boeing could be persuaded to cover those costs, all things considered. Of course, Boeing is still insistent that their craft is safe for re-entry while also having no idea what's wrong with their thrusters. 🤪
I'm not denying there might be some valid reason why not requiring spacesuit compatibility was a good idea (although honestly, I can't fathom what that might be). But it's perfectly reasonable for the general public to wonder why, and for a journalist with even a modicum of critical thinking skills to ask about.
I personally would argue that ensuring basic spacesuit compatibility with the vehicles that might someday be used to rescue stranded astronauts
is being "safety focused". NASA has lived through the Columbia and Challenger shuttle disasters after all, to say nothing of Apollo 13, as
@MacWa77ace so humorously points out. So it's not like NASA wasn't aware that sometimes things go wrong in space. The suits themselves don't have to be identical. But it's completely reasonable that basic things like hose connections, electrical interfaces and operational parameters be aligned to set standards. This is like USB-C vs Lightning cable, except that lives are at stake.
I think this is a serious oversight. And for once I can't blame Boeing. This one's on NASA. They could have required functional capatibility to an established standard the same way they provided SpaceX and Boeing with the dimensions and locking mechanicals of ISS's docking ports.
Quote from: majorhavoc on August 22, 2024, 12:38:54 PMI'm not denying there might be some valid reason why not requiring spacesuit compatibility was a good idea (although honestly, I can't fathom what that might be). But it's perfectly reasonable for the general public to wonder why, and for a journalist with even a modicum of critical thinking skills to ask about.
I personally would argue that ensuring basic spacesuit compatibility with the vehicles that might someday be used to rescue stranded astronauts is being "safety focused". NASA has lived through the Columbia and Challenger shuttle disasters after all, to say nothing of Apollo 13, as @MacWa77ace so humorously points out. So it's not like NASA wasn't aware that sometimes things go wrong in space. The suits themselves don't have to be identical. But it's completely reasonable that basic things like hose connections, electrical interfaces and operational parameters be aligned to set standards. This is like USB-C vs Lightning cable, except that lives are at stake.
I think this is a serious oversight. And for once I can't blame Boeing. This one's on NASA. They could have required functional capatibility to an established standard the same way they provided SpaceX and Boeing with the dimensions and locking mechanicals of ISS's docking ports.
We don't have journalists anymore. They're just company spokesmen.
Quote from: Moab on August 22, 2024, 02:31:05 PMQuote from: majorhavoc on August 22, 2024, 12:38:54 PMI'm not denying there might be some valid reason why not requiring spacesuit compatibility was a good idea (although honestly, I can't fathom what that might be). But it's perfectly reasonable for the general public to wonder why, and for a journalist with even a modicum of critical thinking skills to ask about.
I personally would argue that ensuring basic spacesuit compatibility with the vehicles that might someday be used to rescue stranded astronauts is being "safety focused". NASA has lived through the Columbia and Challenger shuttle disasters after all, to say nothing of Apollo 13, as @MacWa77ace so humorously points out. So it's not like NASA wasn't aware that sometimes things go wrong in space. The suits themselves don't have to be identical. But it's completely reasonable that basic things like hose connections, electrical interfaces and operational parameters be aligned to set standards. This is like USB-C vs Lightning cable, except that lives are at stake.
I think this is a serious oversight. And for once I can't blame Boeing. This one's on NASA. They could have required functional capatibility to an established standard the same way they provided SpaceX and Boeing with the dimensions and locking mechanicals of ISS's docking ports.
We don't have journalists anymore. They're just company spokesmen.
Journalism is dead, and there's no one left to write the obituary.
Quote from: NT2C on August 22, 2024, 02:43:56 PMQuote from: Moab on August 22, 2024, 02:31:05 PMQuote from: majorhavoc on August 22, 2024, 12:38:54 PMI'm not denying there might be some valid reason why not requiring spacesuit compatibility was a good idea (although honestly, I can't fathom what that might be). But it's perfectly reasonable for the general public to wonder why, and for a journalist with even a modicum of critical thinking skills to ask about.
I personally would argue that ensuring basic spacesuit compatibility with the vehicles that might someday be used to rescue stranded astronauts is being "safety focused". NASA has lived through the Columbia and Challenger shuttle disasters after all, to say nothing of Apollo 13, as @MacWa77ace so humorously points out. So it's not like NASA wasn't aware that sometimes things go wrong in space. The suits themselves don't have to be identical. But it's completely reasonable that basic things like hose connections, electrical interfaces and operational parameters be aligned to set standards. This is like USB-C vs Lightning cable, except that lives are at stake.
I think this is a serious oversight. And for once I can't blame Boeing. This one's on NASA. They could have required functional capatibility to an established standard the same way they provided SpaceX and Boeing with the dimensions and locking mechanicals of ISS's docking ports.
We don't have journalists anymore. They're just company spokesmen.
Journalism is dead, and there's no one left to write the obituary.
Only one who could've done so was maybe Walter Cronkite, but he's been dead since 2009.
Starliner is coming back uncrewed later this week. But....
NASA astronaut Butch Wilmore reports 'strange noise' coming from Boeing's Starliner spacecraft | Space (https://www.space.com/strange-noise-boeing-starliner-spacecraft)
Now they're saying it's a "communication problem" affecting Starliner's speakers.
IF I were to engage in wild speculation:
1. It will burn up on re-entry (destroying the aliens' computer virus infecting Starliner)
2. It will land successfully, and the :greenguy: will make themselves known (2024 is the year for crazy)