I didn't know that Soyuz flights are scheduled to stop in 2019. I'm not optimistic at all about all that. Manned missions are a whole new level, a level where a single failure could mean the end the road either for SpaceX or Boeing's space department. If I were to put my tinfoil hat on, I would even suggest that Russia managed to deal the end of the Soyuz contracts for when USA is ready to launch their own manned flights, but not reliably so, therefore increasing the probability of them having an accident and looking weak.
Internally, NASA believes Boeing ahead of SpaceX in commercial crew
71–80 of 85 posts
Re: Internally, NASA believes Boeing ahead of SpaceX in commercial crew
#72Forgive my ignorance on the subject but how can Boeing be ahead if they don't have any rockets?
SpaceX has no human-rated launch vehicle either as of now. But this article is about the spacecraft, SpaceX's Dragon 2 and Boeing's Starliner, not the launch vehicles. The Starliner is to be compatible with multiple launchers, including human-rated variants of Atlas V, Delta IV and Falcon 9.
Re: Internally, NASA believes Boeing ahead of SpaceX in commercial crew
#73Forgive my ignorance on the subject but how can Boeing be ahead if they don't have any rockets?
This article is about a NASA-funded project that is supposed to end with Boeing (and SpaceX) having both a man-rated rocket and a man-rated capsule, so that american access to space is assured.
Re: Internally, NASA believes Boeing ahead of SpaceX in commercial crew
#74[deleted]
Re: Internally, NASA believes Boeing ahead of SpaceX in commercial crew
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
I won't pretend to have studied this at any depth, but my possibly overconfident intuition is that it can be either an outright conspiracy or an unspoken understanding of not stepping on each others toes. It doesn't matter much; you don't have to be a genius CEO to see what is in both companies interest, conspiracy or not. The more companies are added to the mix, the less stable the truce becomes, and somewhere aroun…
You see this in Germany vs the US when it comes to grocery store. In DE there are vastly more grocery stores and more grocery store companies. Prices are crazy low. In the US, there is very little overlap, with mega-stores carving out a multiple square mile section of the town.
FWIW, grocery chains in the US have low single digit margins. I don’t think they’re gouging anybody. Also, prices at my local grocery store are frequently lower than at Costco (a warehouse-style store).
Re: Internally, NASA believes Boeing ahead of SpaceX in commercial crew
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Welcome to the world of government contracting where success depends much more on your ability to work the system then your ability to deliver anything.
>> the world of government contracting After watching the documentary on the joint strike fighter competition I just think of Boeing as a lobbying organization that happens to make planes.
In their defense aerospace is a sector where governments and state-linked mega-corps are probably the largest customer base, especially for high-end gear.
Re: Internally, NASA believes Boeing ahead of SpaceX in commercial crew
#77This headline is another example of biased news pushing a narrative.
In which direction?
Re: Internally, NASA believes Boeing ahead of SpaceX in commercial crew
#78This headline is another example of biased news pushing a narrative.
Not disagreeing with you, just genuinely curious: how is this headline biased? Do you mean that the margins are thinner than one might expect by reading it?
The margins are meaningless at this point.
Re: Internally, NASA believes Boeing ahead of SpaceX in commercial crew
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
That may be useful for stuff you can afford to lose, but during the same period how many spacecraft have Boeing lost. When a mission takes a decade to plan a build, you go with the launch vehicle most likely to get you to destination successfully. Fail rates matter immensely. You don't want a launch vehicle iterating on your launch.
Whether or not NASA (and by extension Boeing) can afford to lose a mission isn't dependent on how much it costs but on public relations and legislation. Money has diminishing returns when it comes to mission success rates. A common ballpark example I've heard from JPL PMs: you can spend $500 million on one launch with a 95% chance of putting one satellite in orbit - or - you could spend $250 million per launch on two…
[deleted]
Re: Internally, NASA believes Boeing ahead of SpaceX in commercial crew
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
This article isn't about SLS (or BFR). It's about commercial crew, Boeing's CST-100 capsule vs. SpaceX's crewed Dragon. Boeing may well be ahead because unlike SpaceX they consider themselves having one job, and one job only.
And without a reliable rocket to get them up there, those crew capsules are useless.
They have reliable rockets. The CST-100 can launch on any of the Atlas V, Delta IV, or Falcon 9 rockets. All of which are in commercial use.
I think maybe you're confusing with the Orion capsule?