141–150 of 228 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have a very similar system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Pad_Abort_Test
You know, that looks scary to be in the capsule for, but far less scary than the Saturn V's Apollo Pad Abort Test, where the rocket was ON TOP of the capsule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launch_escape_system#/media/Fi...
> Because Starliner was funded by NASA through a fixed-price contract, as part of the Commercial Crew program, Boeing is responsible for any cost overruns and financial losses due to delays. Given Boeing’s history here this feels like the right kind of contract for this sort of work. Ensures all incentives are aligned
The issue is that incentives absolutely aren't aligned. The moment Boeing thinks it has achieved a certain part of the contract but NASA does not you have a huge problem on your hand where one side will try to get work done for free and the other has absolutely zero interest as they are not getting paid.
If cost overruns are too great Boeing might also (depending on the contract) choose to withdraw, as the continuing development cost will be greater than any penalties from the contract.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't it the Russian modules that keep leaking atmosphere? Maybe its time to jettison them? I honestly have no idea what the Russian modules are or what purposes are are served by them. However, that does bring to mind something I never thought about. There is talk of privatizing ISS since NASA doesn't want to continue funding it. How do you privatize something made by multiple nations? Or is that precisely why the p…
One of the purposes of ISS, and other space programs (Apollo-Soyuz for example) was showcasing how nations can work together, and bringing hope for peace during the cold war. May sound naive, but that's the reason why nobody should be jettisoned off the space station - even if there are embargoes on the ground.
The PRC is banned from the ISS, due to NASA being legally forbidden from dealing with them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Atlas V is also a ULA rather than a Boeing rocket. I'd be much more eager to trust my life to a ULA space vehicle than a Boeing one.
> trust my life to a ULA space vehicle than a Boeing one So it gets 50% of your trust, then? > The company, which is a joint venture between Lockheed Martin Space and Boeing Defense, Space & Security, was formed in December 2006.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have a very similar system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Pad_Abort_Test
You know, that looks scary to be in the capsule for, but far less scary than the Saturn V's Apollo Pad Abort Test, where the rocket was ON TOP of the capsule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launch_escape_system#/media/Fi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure its startup SpaceX that has massive amount of money from other programs that the can smash into Dragon. Its not like the were not also working on 5 other development projects at the time. It Eric Berger, not "Ars". And he absolutly did report on all the SpaceX delays. After the testing explosion he even said SpaceX might be behind. Stop spreading your conspircy threory nonsense.
[flagged]
The Crew-1 delay was three years ago. Why would he mention it in this article?
> spins a lack of a confirmed updated launch date less than three weeks after discovery of issues into a delay that will approach 2025
Reasonable, given how it's gone so far. They've yet another parachute issue, and accidentally used "hundreds of feet" of flammable tape.
> "perhaps even after Crew-9", which is hilarious given that even Crew-8 doesn't have a launch date other than towards the middle of next year, and Crew-7 is currently facing new delays
Crew-9 in 2024 is hardly an unreasonable assumption. Crew-8 is scheduled NET February 2024, not "middle of next year". Crew-7 is facing a two day delay, because of another launch. https://www.space.com/spacex-crew-7-astronaut-launch-delay-a...
Pretending that's relevant in assessing Starliner's multi-year delays is nutty.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure its startup SpaceX that has massive amount of money from other programs that the can smash into Dragon. Its not like the were not also working on 5 other development projects at the time. It Eric Berger, not "Ars". And he absolutly did report on all the SpaceX delays. After the testing explosion he even said SpaceX might be behind. Stop spreading your conspircy threory nonsense.
[flagged]
> less than three weeks after discovery of issues
It has been much longer then 3 weeks.
> which is hilarious
Eric Berger has a very good track record when talking about delays. He usually has information from inside the industry. I'm gone go with they guy that has predicted correctly over and over and over again the last 10 years.
I don't really care if you think it's 'hilarious'.
Dragon is on regular cadence, short term delays of one doesn't necessarily even mean that the launches after that will be delayed to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
NASA replacement stations are totally underfunded by congress, non are close. Don't expect a solution from that anyime soon.
If Starship delivers even half of what they're promising, we'll have a bunch of commercial space stations up even without NASA support. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_commercial_space_stati...
Non of those companies will invest billions on their own. All of those companies investment is predicated on NASA support.
Do you really believe Northrop Grumman will invest billions of its own money?
The Startups are to small an inexperienced.
And Bezos has already said they will not do this unless they get NASA investment.
To just link to a bunch 'commercial' stations is missing the point. These concept exists because NASA has announced they will fund multiple 'commercial' station. But unfortunately Congress has not given NASA the budget for these.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Elon also said the Falcon 9 would work, said it would be re-usable, said the Falcon 9 heavy would work, said the Model S would be good, said the Model 3 would be great, said the Model Y would be the most popular car in the world, etc. etc. Obviously he's not hitting 100%, but you can't deny his companies are achieving immensely more than anyone ever thought possible. If I could take Elon's ratio of "I said it would w…
sane person here, I would only take Elon's claim that something would work seriously if it relied mostly on newtonian mechanics to verify. which model S being good, falcon 9 working etc, that is all it takes. basic physics napkin math. anything with nuance (self driving) or human emotions in play (twitter), and he is the same as any boomer uncle complaining about kids these days
Exactly, it's not rocket science. Oh, wait, it actually is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think saying that SpaceX is somehow "containing" the nutty stuff in a way that Twitter is not isn't all that accurate. SpaceX does tons of nutty stuff, some of it turns out to be good, and that's how they have their 10+ year technology lead on most of the world. In the early days this was stuff like using shears to roughly trim an engine bell in the field. Nowadays it's stuff like attempting to catch rockets with g…
There's a vast spectrum of nuttiness available. I don't think you see SpaceX successful without the Gwynne Shotwell sort of characters involved; I think Twitter lacks such a role.
IIRC when FH had turned out to be harder than expected and not really all that useful due to F9's increased performance, Elon had wanted to cancel it, but Gwynne insisted that it stay because they had already sold it to customers and dropping projects like that would be bad for business.