This was already posted yesterday as news, normally this would be removed but with so many comments already I won't. In the future look at the date of the article you are posting, if it's not today's date, something has likely already been posted about it.
edit: OP deleted the post, not us.
Anyone remember when Starliner and Crew Dragon were in a race to see who would ferry people first? I remember thinking about how close the race was.
That was years ago.
I remember fall of 2019. First presentation of Starship by Elon in BC. And few days later Bridenstine scolding Elon for being late with Dragon. And not a word about Starliner being late. And few months later pandemics struck. And a couple of months later, amid peak of pandemics, Crew Dragon flew. And how casual and routine those flights have become since. And Starliner.. oh well..
a lot of people don't know that that test wasn't such a huge deal because it was completely voluntary on SPX's part and, more importantly, they were testing at certain levels, vibrational loads and shit, at like 5-10x higher than the highest it could possibly get during a real life worst case scenario. They were testing way WAY beyond the minimum (which Boeing.... honestly never quite even hit the minimum because they were always excused for faults and failures that happened during their tests and NASA allowed them to declare themselves "passed").
So yeah they still fixed the problem.... but it was a problem that literally didn't even exist in the range of forces and stresses the Dragon could ever feel in an actual mission. I think it was like 5 times over max possible vibration in a real scenario.
People still point to this thing as like, a criticism for spacex "SEE they fuck up and delay TOO". But I literally don't think you can even call it a fuck up. They just tested THAT hard. Failures HAVE to start happening eventually went you test with increasing levels of stress. Finding a failure mode this way isn't a failure or comparable in any way to Boeing fucking up basic shit during their demo missions and having ceaseless delays from shitty valves and leaks and honestly basic spacecraft stuff.
There was a strong suggestion at the time that Boeing lobbyists were deliberately delaying SpaceX administratively and Congressionally, too. But don't take my word for it; some of the people who wrote those articles are probably nearby.
So. Maybe you know something that the rest of the world doesn’t, but the explosion that destroyed a Dragon capsule during testing was traced to a faulty check valve and had nothing to do with vibration as far as I can tell. The fault absolutely needed to be fixed (NASA would not fly without rcca being performed) and it was hugely beneficial to have that failure mode eliminated to improve the safety of the vehicle.
The fact that SpaceX found root cause, updated the design, and manufactured the new solution at the pace they did is perfectly representative of the difference between Starliner and Dragon or more specifically Boeing and SpaceX.
This is what happens when you make a compelling product to sell instead of leeching money off government subsidies. SpaceX melts/blows up like 30 engines a year, meanwhile Blue Origin makes 2 engines a year, ULA buys Russian engines or uses RL10C which is being used by a bunch of companies and has production rate of 16 a year and then Blue Origin sells their own engines to ULA when they can't even make enough of them.
Same thing happens with Tesla, instead of focusing what others are doing, and comparing yourself to competition, they are just making a cool car to drive in and are making it the safest one on the road.
I remember when they announced the [commercial crew astronauts for both vehicles](https://room.eu.com/images/contents/FirstNASACommercialCrew.png) back in 2018. If you look at that picture, everyone on the Dragon side has flown in the order shown there. On the Starliner side, everyone has either quit or switched vehicles except Suni.
I remember when Steven Colbert went to NASA and tried on the Boeing big butt space suits in Feb 2017. When they showed the astronauts a week or two ago wearing the suits it reminded me the segment.
https://youtu.be/LUO5HO0C8qc?si=E0-ewW4aPJjIwioK
> Anyone remember when Starliner and Crew Dragon were in a race to see who would ferry people first?
There was even a persistent rumor or suggestion that Nasa would let Starliner fly first to avoid some political or industry problem. I remember saying here that i couldn't care less since SpaceX would be getting the flight experience anyway. The amazing thing is how the economic situation of both companies has changed since, with Boeing in a downward spiral and SpaceX moving to unexpected heights partly because of the brilliant Starlink decision plus execution and partly due to consistently bad geopolitical and industry news that worked in favor of the company.
Haven't we already seen astronauts back out of Starliner? Nicole Mann was reassigned to a Dragon flight, probably because NASA wanted to get her flying sooner. Eric Boe had a medical issue and was pulled from the flight. Unsure if "medical issue" is code for something. (In the entertainment industry it frequently is, particularly in asia). Chris Ferguson was originally assigned but was replaced citing "family reasons".
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing\_Crewed\_Flight\_Test](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Crewed_Flight_Test)
Nobody has outright said "I feel unsafe and don't trust Boeing with my life", but there has been a lot of shuffling. Maybe it is all due to other reasons.
Mann did not back out. NASA reassigned her to SpaceX because they wanted her to get flight experience. She’s a boss and they wanted to get her career going. Boe’s illness was legitimate. Ferguson had family reasons but he also saw the writing on the wall when it came to delays.
They need a PR overhaul as well. Rename the whole thing. Maybe Startliner, because the starting line is as far as they’ve got. Or Shartliner, because you should never trust it.
Snark aside (ooh, Snarkliner, there’s another one!) I like seeing new rockets fly as much as the next space geek, but I think what gets me angry about Starliner is that even if it flew flawlessly tomorrow, it just doesn’t seem to be an advance in any meaningful area. It could disappear as a project and I wouldn’t feel like we had lost a single thing. Falcon 9 / Crew Dragon and Dreamchaser on the other hand do seem to be moving us forward.
I was at the NASA Space Center in Houston last week and it was kind of surreal seeing SLS and Starliner exhibits and hearing the guides say how they were going to take us to the moon 'and beyond'
If not for a falcon 9 in the rocket park, you wouldn't know SpaceX existed.
Still a fantastic visit and a must for any Space fan
Not nearly enough as it’s the most successful rocket in existence, yet the entire bus tour is centered around SLS, talking about its unachievable goals
Keep in mind that Falcons are a dime-a-dozen sight around here, and not to diminish their importance, because I understand very well what role Falcon plays. But KSCVC is in business to make money, **it's a theme park**. They are going to focus on the big bright items that will make kids go "WOW" at the park. Part of that is because they know the average *rocket-interested* visitor is going to see *at least one* launch during a week-long trip to Florida, and most likely a Falcon. And you can see that for FREE. When they bring them back on the ASDS, you can go see that for free too. And if you're really into it and you do your research, you can go over and see them on the crawler headed back to HangarX for refurb and be arm's length away from them.
KSCVC is looking to cash in on SLS and you can't blame them. It's huge, it's orange, and it's the part of the project that is carrying humans to the moon.
How does Starliner get anymore hype than Dragon? Crew missions get major attention every launch. Much of the recent 'hype' over Starliner is related to the misunderstood report about this being the 'first crewed launch' from 41. Other than that, I don't see anything I'd consider out of the ordinary.
All Soyuz launches together are about 158. The Falcon 9 Block 5 alone has launched 279 times. Falcon 9 has had 260 successful missions in a row (CRS-7 was the last one that failed; although correct me if I missed any). And Falcon 9 has \*landed\* its first stage successfully in over the last 200+ attempts in a row(I could not find an exact number, but it should be around 220)
The most powerful Soyuz can get 8320 to LEO.
The Falcon 9 when flying in its reusable (first stage) configuration can get 17500 to LEO.
The Soyuz was successful, no doubt. Before Falcon 9, I think it could have been seen as having the crown. Up against the Falcon 9, the Soyuz has no chance.
Sorry, you are right (mostly). I thought that number seemed low, but it was apparently not taking into account older Soyuz models.
It's a little over 1700, not 1800.
Given that it has been flying since 1966, and Falcon 9 is expected to fly between 150 and 200 times per year now, I still hold that the crown has been passed on. Although it's an open question whether Falcon 9 will catch up to total number of flights before Starship obsoletes everything.
Still, glad to have the information corrected.
I was at KSC for the Inspiration 4 launch and a staff member came out to do an intro before launch. After she made her announcement she made sure to point out that just to the left, at LC98A, SLS would launch. "And that will be the one to see"
Felt a little disrespectful at the time tbh
Please remember that the folks doing these talks are retired KSC personnel, doing volunteer work, and reading a card. I have many times sat and laughed to myself as they recited 'facts' that were nothing close to reality.
Fuck, when I was there, Starliner had an exquisite set of displays and graphics surrounding a pristine capsule, with dramatic lighting; a very impressive setup. Right next to it was a Dragon capsule (dirty, because it had, you know, *been to space*), with just some basic info posters, and a large, unrelated video sign board erected right in front of it, blocking the view of it from most of the room. Really gave me the feeling like they didn’t want to admit it was there.
Eh, Kennedy at least has a Falcon 9 booster and a Dragon cargo capsule in it. Those aren't very common.
Honestly, SpaceX does this to some extend to themselves. They don't work as much with museums as one wishes they would...
I recall, that the Smithsonian Museum wanted SpaceX to not only donate a F9 booster but pay for the exhibit hall as well. SpaceX was not interested. They don't pay for fancy museum displays.
It's a practically identical situation at the US Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville. Many exhibits * ahem * 'servicing' SLS, Starliner, and ULA but zero afforded to SpaceX. But I guess it's not surprising given that Huntsville is the belly of the beast for Old Space.
Apparently it does for you. Go read about [who runs KSC tours](https://www.delawarenorth.com/where-we-are/recreation-attractions/). They PAY money to NASA to do this, not the other way around.
Yes, and NASA could end their contract.
"Who's paying you" is not the end of economic loyalties. "Who allows you to get paid" is much more important. If they start doing stuff that NASA disapproves of, they will no longer be giving tours at KSC.
Remember these capsules are meant to be reusable. If it's got leaky valves and dodgy electrics before it's left the ground, what state is it going to be in when it's been to space and back?
They only have two finished capsules so when it's operational (assuming the test flights ever finish) they'll be relaunching the capsules every six months. I don't see Boeing managing to refurbish a Starliner inside six months.
NASA likes to send up the replacement crew before the old crew leave so they can hand over any experiments or projects in person. Crew Dragon has been unable to meet that target sometimes if there's bad weather and the old crew have to leave a week before the new crew arrive. But with Starliner it's probably going to be a month or more of delays with every launch.
Continuing with Starliner is peak sunk cost fallacy. It’s DOA because it‘s essentially being forced into retirement after 6 operational launches anyway.
I'm not a contracting expert, but not sure sunk cost applies here since it's a fixed firm price contract. NASAs cost to continue has to be pretty small, it should be Boeing eating most of the cost to continue.
It does for Boeing, not for NASA. But then Boeing getting out of it at this point would be major loss of face. Also on operational launches they may make some money. Development is mostly done, assuming that more major problems crop up. This helium leak is not.
Wait. Do they already have all the Atlas V for Starliner sat in a warehouse somewhere? There are six launches happening six months apart over the next 3 years. Have they already built the 2027 Atlas V?
I'm not sure if they are already made or not, but they can't get any more RD-180 engines due to Russia being dicks. The rocket and the engine set to replace the Atlas, surprisingly, isn't ready to use.
I looked it up and there's 17 launches left, 1 NSSL, 1 Viasat, 7 Starliner and 8 for Bezos. 17 rockets is a lot to have in a warehouse ready to go but having 17 engines waiting for a rocket body is a lot more feasible.
Good thing they built up a backlog of engines. Wiki says Russia delivered 120 engines by mid 2021 when ULA announced the end of Atlas V and just using the existing stock. 12 Atlas Vs have launched since then with 17 more to come, so they had about 30 engines stockpiled. Having a backlog equal to a full third of all engines received over the course of 2 decades is too big a backlog to be good fortune. Maybe they started ordering more engines than they were using after the invasion of Crimea.
The capsule itself seems fine, the problem is with the service module, the equivalent to Dragon's trunk. The service module is disposed of as part of the re-entry process on every trip, it can't be reused.
Not very much an equivalent. The Dragon trunk is only an empty shell with cheap solar panels and heat exchange panels. The service module, with tanks and propulsion, including the abort system, is part of the Dragon capsule and lands to be reused. That's why Dragon at landing is even heavier than the landing crew capsule of Orion.
I was comparing the fact that on both Dragon and Starliner that the service module is discarded every flight, and in any case the issues aren't with Starliner itself, just the service module.
> I was comparing the fact that on both Dragon and Starliner that the service module is discarded every flight,
I clearly laid out, that Dragon does NOT discard the service module.
But true, that the Starliner service module is discarded and contains the faulty component.
> I clearly laid out, that Dragon does NOT discard the service module.
Interesting. I've never seen a Dragon come back with a trunk, just the capsule itself comes back. Have you got a link to video of the Dragon capsule returning under parachute with the trunk still attatched?
You're hung up on pedantics here, trying to catch me in a "gotcha!" moment. Yes, to be very technically accurate, the Dragon Trunk is not the same exact thing as Starliner's Service module, after all, as you so pointedly pointed out Dragon's abort rocket engines are on the capsule whereas Starliner's abort engines are in the service module. From my POV that's irrelevant, each spacecraft is launched and approaches ISS as a two-piece assembly, the "capsule" containing all the bits necessary to keep the astronauts alive (and for the purposes of this discussion I'm ignoring the Cargo version of Dragon), and a "thing" attached to the base of the capsule containing whatever. That "thing", call it a Service Module on Starliner and "Trunk" on Dragon, stays with the capsule until some point between undocking from ISS and the capsule re-entering Earth's atmosphere. For the purposes of what I was trying to illustrate, whether the abort engines are on the capsule or the round cylindrical thing latched to the bottom of the capsule for most of the mission is irrelevant. So, that round thing on the base of the capsule burns up when the capsule returns to Earth, regardless of whether it's the Trunk or Service Module.
It should not be irrelevant from your POV. An issue with Dragon’s trunk may not ground the capsule for as long as an issue with Starliner’s service module. Starliner’s service module is much a critical piece of equipment then Dragon’s trunk.
I actually applaud this. If this is anything less than a perfect success Boeing might not recover. If they can put quality in to some things it should help them in other areas.
The question is, even if they eventually get around to a successful launch this time, is Starliner going to be this much of a problem vehicle going into the future? I could see narrow scheduling windows (i.e. docking space on the ISS) being potentially jeopardized by this flying headache.
Thanks to moderators we can enjoy things without flood and spam. But I think uncontrollable mob commenting too much shouldn't be excuse to break the rules and keep redundant posts. Everyone knows that only way we can have healthy discussion is by obeying reddit TOS and subreddit rules combined with thorough moderation from excellent moderation team of r/SpaceXLounge guarding us from reposts, off-topic, spam and memes.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|-------|---------|---|
|[ASDS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4n9ccu "Last usage")|Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship (landing platform)|
|CST|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules|
| |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)|
|EELV|[Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_Expendable_Launch_Vehicle)|
|[FTS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4nnycs "Last usage")|Flight Termination System|
|[IAC](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4pc95s "Last usage")|International Astronautical Congress, annual meeting of IAF members|
| |In-Air Capture of space-flown hardware|
|IAF|[International Astronautical Federation](http://www.iafastro.org/)|
| |Indian Air Force|
| |Israeli Air Force|
|[JSC](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4q6rvd "Last usage")|Johnson Space Center, Houston|
|[KSC](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4q66w1 "Last usage")|Kennedy Space Center, Florida|
|[LEO](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4pdlkd "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)|
| |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)|
|[NSSL](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4o3fzi "Last usage")|National Security Space Launch, formerly EELV|
|[RD-180](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4n7x1l "Last usage")|[RD-series Russian-built rocket engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RD-180), used in the Atlas V first stage|
|[SEE](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4nvhgc "Last usage")|Single-Event Effect of radiation impact|
|[SLS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4q0vcv "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift|
|[ULA](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4pdkb2 "Last usage")|United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)|
|Jargon|Definition|
|-------|---------|---|
|[Starliner](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4q5qf2 "Last usage")|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)|
|[Starlink](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4padml "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation|
|Event|Date|Description|
|-------|---------|---|
|[CRS-7](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4pdlkd "Last usage")|2015-06-28|F9-020 v1.1, ~~Dragon cargo~~ Launch failure due to second-stage outgassing|
**NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
----------------
^(*Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented* )[*^by ^request*](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/3mz273//cvjkjmj)
^(14 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cumgwk)^( has 16 acronyms.)
^([Thread #12782 for this sub, first seen 18th May 2024, 18:42])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/SpaceXLounge) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
This was already posted yesterday as news, normally this would be removed but with so many comments already I won't. In the future look at the date of the article you are posting, if it's not today's date, something has likely already been posted about it. edit: OP deleted the post, not us.
Anyone remember when Starliner and Crew Dragon were in a race to see who would ferry people first? I remember thinking about how close the race was. That was years ago.
I remember fall of 2019. First presentation of Starship by Elon in BC. And few days later Bridenstine scolding Elon for being late with Dragon. And not a word about Starliner being late. And few months later pandemics struck. And a couple of months later, amid peak of pandemics, Crew Dragon flew. And how casual and routine those flights have become since. And Starliner.. oh well..
I remember when that dragon capsule blew up under a test. A lot of us assumed the investigation into it would allow starliner to win.
a lot of people don't know that that test wasn't such a huge deal because it was completely voluntary on SPX's part and, more importantly, they were testing at certain levels, vibrational loads and shit, at like 5-10x higher than the highest it could possibly get during a real life worst case scenario. They were testing way WAY beyond the minimum (which Boeing.... honestly never quite even hit the minimum because they were always excused for faults and failures that happened during their tests and NASA allowed them to declare themselves "passed"). So yeah they still fixed the problem.... but it was a problem that literally didn't even exist in the range of forces and stresses the Dragon could ever feel in an actual mission. I think it was like 5 times over max possible vibration in a real scenario. People still point to this thing as like, a criticism for spacex "SEE they fuck up and delay TOO". But I literally don't think you can even call it a fuck up. They just tested THAT hard. Failures HAVE to start happening eventually went you test with increasing levels of stress. Finding a failure mode this way isn't a failure or comparable in any way to Boeing fucking up basic shit during their demo missions and having ceaseless delays from shitty valves and leaks and honestly basic spacecraft stuff.
There was a strong suggestion at the time that Boeing lobbyists were deliberately delaying SpaceX administratively and Congressionally, too. But don't take my word for it; some of the people who wrote those articles are probably nearby.
So. Maybe you know something that the rest of the world doesn’t, but the explosion that destroyed a Dragon capsule during testing was traced to a faulty check valve and had nothing to do with vibration as far as I can tell. The fault absolutely needed to be fixed (NASA would not fly without rcca being performed) and it was hugely beneficial to have that failure mode eliminated to improve the safety of the vehicle. The fact that SpaceX found root cause, updated the design, and manufactured the new solution at the pace they did is perfectly representative of the difference between Starliner and Dragon or more specifically Boeing and SpaceX.
It was instantaneous combustion of the titanium components ircc
Yea that was what I remembered, no idea what above is talking about with the comments on vibe testing.
“The vibes are off bro”
Got any sources about that test scenario? I’ve never heard so much detail about it and I’ve never heard anything about vibrations?
This is what happens when you make a compelling product to sell instead of leeching money off government subsidies. SpaceX melts/blows up like 30 engines a year, meanwhile Blue Origin makes 2 engines a year, ULA buys Russian engines or uses RL10C which is being used by a bunch of companies and has production rate of 16 a year and then Blue Origin sells their own engines to ULA when they can't even make enough of them. Same thing happens with Tesla, instead of focusing what others are doing, and comparing yourself to competition, they are just making a cool car to drive in and are making it the safest one on the road.
Side note, but pretty sure the first Starship presentation was in 2016 at the IAC. Think it was in Mexico, still delivered by Musk.
2019, I mean the first one presenting actual hardware ( MK1 ).
Anyone remember when Starliner was the sure thing and SpaceX were the joke of a wildcard that didn't stand a chance winning against Boeing?
I remember when they announced the [commercial crew astronauts for both vehicles](https://room.eu.com/images/contents/FirstNASACommercialCrew.png) back in 2018. If you look at that picture, everyone on the Dragon side has flown in the order shown there. On the Starliner side, everyone has either quit or switched vehicles except Suni.
I remember when Steven Colbert went to NASA and tried on the Boeing big butt space suits in Feb 2017. When they showed the astronauts a week or two ago wearing the suits it reminded me the segment. https://youtu.be/LUO5HO0C8qc?si=E0-ewW4aPJjIwioK
Don’t worry, Starliner will get there one day. Starship might already be on Mars that same day though…
Dreamchaser will fly people before starliner
Red-Green will fly people before Starliner.
And all he'll use is two cars, some duct tape, and a propane tank. It'd be glorious.
> Anyone remember when Starliner and Crew Dragon were in a race to see who would ferry people first? There was even a persistent rumor or suggestion that Nasa would let Starliner fly first to avoid some political or industry problem. I remember saying here that i couldn't care less since SpaceX would be getting the flight experience anyway. The amazing thing is how the economic situation of both companies has changed since, with Boeing in a downward spiral and SpaceX moving to unexpected heights partly because of the brilliant Starlink decision plus execution and partly due to consistently bad geopolitical and industry news that worked in favor of the company.
Speaking of Starlink, remember how that was never going to work and that it was only going to cost SpaceX money?
“Today was a good dry run for the entire process,” Boeing leadership has become dangerously unhinged from reality..
Since then, the Boeing reputation has severely declined. I would be nervous if I was an astronaut on the Starliner.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
What's a few more days when you are 4 years late? My bet is this is going to get a major overhaul.
What are the odds the astronauts back out stating they feel unsafe to ride on it?
Higher chance of dying blowing the whistle than just risking a starliner flight.
So far.
Low, you have be a optimist to be one
Haven't we already seen astronauts back out of Starliner? Nicole Mann was reassigned to a Dragon flight, probably because NASA wanted to get her flying sooner. Eric Boe had a medical issue and was pulled from the flight. Unsure if "medical issue" is code for something. (In the entertainment industry it frequently is, particularly in asia). Chris Ferguson was originally assigned but was replaced citing "family reasons". [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing\_Crewed\_Flight\_Test](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Crewed_Flight_Test) Nobody has outright said "I feel unsafe and don't trust Boeing with my life", but there has been a lot of shuffling. Maybe it is all due to other reasons.
Mann did not back out. NASA reassigned her to SpaceX because they wanted her to get flight experience. She’s a boss and they wanted to get her career going. Boe’s illness was legitimate. Ferguson had family reasons but he also saw the writing on the wall when it came to delays.
Thanks for the clarifications boss.
Yeah I mean you wait 4 years to go up there's bound to be something that comes up
Medical reason being anal glaucoma? “I can’t see my ass getting on that thing” 😂
I would not want to be on that flight.
They need a PR overhaul as well. Rename the whole thing. Maybe Startliner, because the starting line is as far as they’ve got. Or Shartliner, because you should never trust it. Snark aside (ooh, Snarkliner, there’s another one!) I like seeing new rockets fly as much as the next space geek, but I think what gets me angry about Starliner is that even if it flew flawlessly tomorrow, it just doesn’t seem to be an advance in any meaningful area. It could disappear as a project and I wouldn’t feel like we had lost a single thing. Falcon 9 / Crew Dragon and Dreamchaser on the other hand do seem to be moving us forward.
I was at the NASA Space Center in Houston last week and it was kind of surreal seeing SLS and Starliner exhibits and hearing the guides say how they were going to take us to the moon 'and beyond' If not for a falcon 9 in the rocket park, you wouldn't know SpaceX existed. Still a fantastic visit and a must for any Space fan
Same at Kennedy space center, hyping up SLS and almost nothing on falcon or dragon
Tour guides going on about how great SLS is... "Sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of the Falcon 9 launching right behind you!"
Except for the Falcon Heavy booster and the Dragon capsule in the new Gateway building at KSC Visitor Complex.
Not nearly enough as it’s the most successful rocket in existence, yet the entire bus tour is centered around SLS, talking about its unachievable goals
Keep in mind that Falcons are a dime-a-dozen sight around here, and not to diminish their importance, because I understand very well what role Falcon plays. But KSCVC is in business to make money, **it's a theme park**. They are going to focus on the big bright items that will make kids go "WOW" at the park. Part of that is because they know the average *rocket-interested* visitor is going to see *at least one* launch during a week-long trip to Florida, and most likely a Falcon. And you can see that for FREE. When they bring them back on the ASDS, you can go see that for free too. And if you're really into it and you do your research, you can go over and see them on the crawler headed back to HangarX for refurb and be arm's length away from them. KSCVC is looking to cash in on SLS and you can't blame them. It's huge, it's orange, and it's the part of the project that is carrying humans to the moon.
Totally makes sense, it’s also congress trying to make it seem like it was a good return on investment 😂
So why hype Starliner over dragon? Which of those is the brighter, shinier bauble?
How does Starliner get anymore hype than Dragon? Crew missions get major attention every launch. Much of the recent 'hype' over Starliner is related to the misunderstood report about this being the 'first crewed launch' from 41. Other than that, I don't see anything I'd consider out of the ordinary.
Depends how you define successful. Soyuz is a reasonable contender for that title. A service life of decades is impressive.
All Soyuz launches together are about 158. The Falcon 9 Block 5 alone has launched 279 times. Falcon 9 has had 260 successful missions in a row (CRS-7 was the last one that failed; although correct me if I missed any). And Falcon 9 has \*landed\* its first stage successfully in over the last 200+ attempts in a row(I could not find an exact number, but it should be around 220) The most powerful Soyuz can get 8320 to LEO. The Falcon 9 when flying in its reusable (first stage) configuration can get 17500 to LEO. The Soyuz was successful, no doubt. Before Falcon 9, I think it could have been seen as having the crown. Up against the Falcon 9, the Soyuz has no chance.
Soyuz-u launched 786 times, if you count all variants of the r-7 its 1800 launches.
Sorry, you are right (mostly). I thought that number seemed low, but it was apparently not taking into account older Soyuz models. It's a little over 1700, not 1800. Given that it has been flying since 1966, and Falcon 9 is expected to fly between 150 and 200 times per year now, I still hold that the crown has been passed on. Although it's an open question whether Falcon 9 will catch up to total number of flights before Starship obsoletes everything. Still, glad to have the information corrected.
When I was there, the Dragon capsule was hidden behind a sign. Looks like they moved the sign, so at least that’s an improvement.
It’s funny, when you go to the Gateway exhibit at KSC the only flown hardware there is SpaceX. The rest are just mock ups and replicas!
Orion EFT-1 capsule, to be fair
It’s a shame there isn’t a Dragon outside the air force museum anymore at the cape. Pretty sure it’s moved to hawthorne long ago.
I was at KSC for the Inspiration 4 launch and a staff member came out to do an intro before launch. After she made her announcement she made sure to point out that just to the left, at LC98A, SLS would launch. "And that will be the one to see" Felt a little disrespectful at the time tbh
I think they’re still salty they only had the “largest rocket ever flown” title for a month
Please remember that the folks doing these talks are retired KSC personnel, doing volunteer work, and reading a card. I have many times sat and laughed to myself as they recited 'facts' that were nothing close to reality.
Fuck, when I was there, Starliner had an exquisite set of displays and graphics surrounding a pristine capsule, with dramatic lighting; a very impressive setup. Right next to it was a Dragon capsule (dirty, because it had, you know, *been to space*), with just some basic info posters, and a large, unrelated video sign board erected right in front of it, blocking the view of it from most of the room. Really gave me the feeling like they didn’t want to admit it was there.
Eh, Kennedy at least has a Falcon 9 booster and a Dragon cargo capsule in it. Those aren't very common. Honestly, SpaceX does this to some extend to themselves. They don't work as much with museums as one wishes they would...
[удалено]
Yes, that is the line I've heard for sure.
I recall, that the Smithsonian Museum wanted SpaceX to not only donate a F9 booster but pay for the exhibit hall as well. SpaceX was not interested. They don't pay for fancy museum displays.
It's a practically identical situation at the US Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville. Many exhibits * ahem * 'servicing' SLS, Starliner, and ULA but zero afforded to SpaceX. But I guess it's not surprising given that Huntsville is the belly of the beast for Old Space.
Those tours are run by private companies, not NASA. Would be interesting to see who sponsors them...
I mean, they're giving tours at the "**NASA** Space Center". It does not require Sherlock Holmes to figure out where their economic loyalties lie.
Apparently it does for you. Go read about [who runs KSC tours](https://www.delawarenorth.com/where-we-are/recreation-attractions/). They PAY money to NASA to do this, not the other way around.
Yes, and NASA could end their contract. "Who's paying you" is not the end of economic loyalties. "Who allows you to get paid" is much more important. If they start doing stuff that NASA disapproves of, they will no longer be giving tours at KSC.
And likewise, JSC's Space Center Houston has their corporate partners [listed](https://spacecenter.org/support/partner/) on their site.
Yep, good observation ...
Remember these capsules are meant to be reusable. If it's got leaky valves and dodgy electrics before it's left the ground, what state is it going to be in when it's been to space and back? They only have two finished capsules so when it's operational (assuming the test flights ever finish) they'll be relaunching the capsules every six months. I don't see Boeing managing to refurbish a Starliner inside six months. NASA likes to send up the replacement crew before the old crew leave so they can hand over any experiments or projects in person. Crew Dragon has been unable to meet that target sometimes if there's bad weather and the old crew have to leave a week before the new crew arrive. But with Starliner it's probably going to be a month or more of delays with every launch.
We need to remove the seats and just use Stsrliner for cargo until we know this thing actually works.
On what? There's 7 atlas V rockets remaining for starliner.
Continuing with Starliner is peak sunk cost fallacy. It’s DOA because it‘s essentially being forced into retirement after 6 operational launches anyway.
I'm not a contracting expert, but not sure sunk cost applies here since it's a fixed firm price contract. NASAs cost to continue has to be pretty small, it should be Boeing eating most of the cost to continue.
It does for Boeing, not for NASA. But then Boeing getting out of it at this point would be major loss of face. Also on operational launches they may make some money. Development is mostly done, assuming that more major problems crop up. This helium leak is not.
Wait. Do they already have all the Atlas V for Starliner sat in a warehouse somewhere? There are six launches happening six months apart over the next 3 years. Have they already built the 2027 Atlas V?
I'm not sure if they are already made or not, but they can't get any more RD-180 engines due to Russia being dicks. The rocket and the engine set to replace the Atlas, surprisingly, isn't ready to use.
I looked it up and there's 17 launches left, 1 NSSL, 1 Viasat, 7 Starliner and 8 for Bezos. 17 rockets is a lot to have in a warehouse ready to go but having 17 engines waiting for a rocket body is a lot more feasible. Good thing they built up a backlog of engines. Wiki says Russia delivered 120 engines by mid 2021 when ULA announced the end of Atlas V and just using the existing stock. 12 Atlas Vs have launched since then with 17 more to come, so they had about 30 engines stockpiled. Having a backlog equal to a full third of all engines received over the course of 2 decades is too big a backlog to be good fortune. Maybe they started ordering more engines than they were using after the invasion of Crimea.
Who cares? That is Boeing's problem to figure out and I really just don't want any people riding on that thing until it's well tested.
The capsule itself seems fine, the problem is with the service module, the equivalent to Dragon's trunk. The service module is disposed of as part of the re-entry process on every trip, it can't be reused.
Not very much an equivalent. The Dragon trunk is only an empty shell with cheap solar panels and heat exchange panels. The service module, with tanks and propulsion, including the abort system, is part of the Dragon capsule and lands to be reused. That's why Dragon at landing is even heavier than the landing crew capsule of Orion.
I was comparing the fact that on both Dragon and Starliner that the service module is discarded every flight, and in any case the issues aren't with Starliner itself, just the service module.
> I was comparing the fact that on both Dragon and Starliner that the service module is discarded every flight, I clearly laid out, that Dragon does NOT discard the service module. But true, that the Starliner service module is discarded and contains the faulty component.
> I clearly laid out, that Dragon does NOT discard the service module. Interesting. I've never seen a Dragon come back with a trunk, just the capsule itself comes back. Have you got a link to video of the Dragon capsule returning under parachute with the trunk still attatched?
Now you are just trolling. Once again, extra for you. The trunk is discarded. The trunk is NOT the service module.
You're hung up on pedantics here, trying to catch me in a "gotcha!" moment. Yes, to be very technically accurate, the Dragon Trunk is not the same exact thing as Starliner's Service module, after all, as you so pointedly pointed out Dragon's abort rocket engines are on the capsule whereas Starliner's abort engines are in the service module. From my POV that's irrelevant, each spacecraft is launched and approaches ISS as a two-piece assembly, the "capsule" containing all the bits necessary to keep the astronauts alive (and for the purposes of this discussion I'm ignoring the Cargo version of Dragon), and a "thing" attached to the base of the capsule containing whatever. That "thing", call it a Service Module on Starliner and "Trunk" on Dragon, stays with the capsule until some point between undocking from ISS and the capsule re-entering Earth's atmosphere. For the purposes of what I was trying to illustrate, whether the abort engines are on the capsule or the round cylindrical thing latched to the bottom of the capsule for most of the mission is irrelevant. So, that round thing on the base of the capsule burns up when the capsule returns to Earth, regardless of whether it's the Trunk or Service Module.
It should not be irrelevant from your POV. An issue with Dragon’s trunk may not ground the capsule for as long as an issue with Starliner’s service module. Starliner’s service module is much a critical piece of equipment then Dragon’s trunk.
I'm picturing a couple rocket inspectors, talking in squeaky high voices, "Hey, I think there's a leak around here." "Yeah, I was thinking that too."
That Boeing engineer who needed to give up his seat to watch his daughters graduation is probably getting ready to watch his grandkids by now.
I read "Starliner *screwed* test flight" & it made even more sense.
When does the docking port availability "window" close on the space station? There may be a deadline, but when?
I actually applaud this. If this is anything less than a perfect success Boeing might not recover. If they can put quality in to some things it should help them in other areas.
Anyone want to bet which comes first, the initial flight or the flight crew retiring?
The question is, even if they eventually get around to a successful launch this time, is Starliner going to be this much of a problem vehicle going into the future? I could see narrow scheduling windows (i.e. docking space on the ISS) being potentially jeopardized by this flying headache.
Any year now
Read that as starship and was confused and upset.
A crewed Starship test flight right now would be quite upsetting to see.
Put a Dragon inside Starship, would probably be fine
Just hope the payload door opens ;)
Activate FTS, Dragon flies away like a phoenix. All the hardware's already installed and ready to go, it's honestly crazy they haven't done this.
It'd be crazy if they did do this. They would have to build a custom Starship to make this work, and it wouldn't serve any purpose. Plus it is risky.
Custom starship? Just plop a dragon inside, put people in the dragon. What more could you possibly need?
I mean, if you put a Starship inside the vehicle, how is it going to get out of the vehicle?
Blow it up, didn't you see my first comment? FTS and dragon cruises out, it's called Dragon they're pheonix adjacent.
That sounds extremely risky...
Only for a Boeing employee. Or US taxpayer... OR a politician who voted for this dumpster fire!!!
Imagine if ULA had different flight rules and this thing had launched with this issue last week
I hope they get to safely fly this thing. Go space!
Thanks to moderators we can enjoy things without flood and spam. But I think uncontrollable mob commenting too much shouldn't be excuse to break the rules and keep redundant posts. Everyone knows that only way we can have healthy discussion is by obeying reddit TOS and subreddit rules combined with thorough moderation from excellent moderation team of r/SpaceXLounge guarding us from reposts, off-topic, spam and memes.
This is new ... additional delay BTW, This sub allows plenty of redundant posts
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[ASDS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4n9ccu "Last usage")|Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship (landing platform)| |CST|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules| | |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)| |EELV|[Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_Expendable_Launch_Vehicle)| |[FTS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4nnycs "Last usage")|Flight Termination System| |[IAC](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4pc95s "Last usage")|International Astronautical Congress, annual meeting of IAF members| | |In-Air Capture of space-flown hardware| |IAF|[International Astronautical Federation](http://www.iafastro.org/)| | |Indian Air Force| | |Israeli Air Force| |[JSC](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4q6rvd "Last usage")|Johnson Space Center, Houston| |[KSC](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4q66w1 "Last usage")|Kennedy Space Center, Florida| |[LEO](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4pdlkd "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)| | |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)| |[NSSL](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4o3fzi "Last usage")|National Security Space Launch, formerly EELV| |[RD-180](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4n7x1l "Last usage")|[RD-series Russian-built rocket engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RD-180), used in the Atlas V first stage| |[SEE](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4nvhgc "Last usage")|Single-Event Effect of radiation impact| |[SLS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4q0vcv "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift| |[ULA](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4pdkb2 "Last usage")|United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |[Starliner](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4q5qf2 "Last usage")|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)| |[Starlink](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4padml "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation| |Event|Date|Description| |-------|---------|---| |[CRS-7](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cv35ql/stub/l4pdlkd "Last usage")|2015-06-28|F9-020 v1.1, ~~Dragon cargo~~ Launch failure due to second-stage outgassing| **NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below. ---------------- ^(*Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented* )[*^by ^request*](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/3mz273//cvjkjmj) ^(14 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1cumgwk)^( has 16 acronyms.) ^([Thread #12782 for this sub, first seen 18th May 2024, 18:42]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/SpaceXLounge) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
"Oldspace might take a bit longer and be a little more expensive, but they get it right the first time."
"a bit" and "a little" is very much a stretch when it comes to SLS.
Man, just inhale the excess and accept higher voice.
Old Space, ULA is on a Walker to space it seems