Boeing Scrubs Launch of Starliner Crew Capsule To Space Station (cbsnews.com) 60
The launch of Boeing's Starliner crew capsule on an unpiloted test flight to the International Space Station was scrubbed Tuesday because of an undisclosed technical issue. Mission managers told the launch team to recycle for another attempt Wednesday at 12:57 p.m. ET, weather permitting. From a report: The launching atop a United Launch Alliance Atlas 5 rocket initially was planned for last Friday, but NASA ordered a delay while Russian space station engineers resolved problems with a newly arrived laboratory module. Over the weekend, the Starliner launch was reset for Tuesday. Forecasters monitoring Florida's typically stormy summer afternoon weather predicted a 60% chance of acceptable conditions then lowered the odds to 50-50. The team pressed ahead with fueling, but around 10:30 a.m., Boeing confirmed a scrub, tweeting, "We're confirming today's #Starliner Orbital Flight Test-2 launch is scrubbed. More details soon."
The Starliner flight marks a major milestone for Boeing and NASA as the agency transitions from hitching rides aboard Russian Soyuz spacecraft to fielding commercial crew ships built by Boeing and SpaceX. SpaceX, under a $2.6 billion NASA contract, launched its Crew Dragon spacecraft on a successful unpiloted test flight in 2019 and a piloted test flight last year. Since then, the California rocket builder has launched two operational flights to the space station carrying two long-duration crews to the outpost.
The Starliner flight marks a major milestone for Boeing and NASA as the agency transitions from hitching rides aboard Russian Soyuz spacecraft to fielding commercial crew ships built by Boeing and SpaceX. SpaceX, under a $2.6 billion NASA contract, launched its Crew Dragon spacecraft on a successful unpiloted test flight in 2019 and a piloted test flight last year. Since then, the California rocket builder has launched two operational flights to the space station carrying two long-duration crews to the outpost.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Space flight is the domain of congress and pork barrel manufacturers. Upstart tech companies need to start greasing the right palms if they want to continue to play.
What a crazy world its been since Eisenhower warned us of the dangers of the military-industrial complex. Remember when we had republicans like Eisenhower? Can you imagine any mainstream politician in either party (not counting "weirdos" like Bernie or the squad) speaking out against the American Military Empire?
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Shut it you loon, Trump is literally the most corrupt president ever elected. What did Trump do to reign in American imperialism? Nothing. Same as every other issue. Trump did nothing. He golfed, and tweeted, and utterly failed to lead in any capacity. Just as he's done with all his business ventures. Which is why he's failed at everything he's tried. Your hero is a con man, and not even a good one. And you are an idiot for supporting such an obviously incompetent lunatic, you sock puppet.
Re: (Score:1)
He stopped no wars. Show proof of your wild claims, sock puppet. You are delusional. You never provide any proof, just more unhinged ranting.
Trump has had more of his staff indicted and jailed than any other president before him. He is the swampiest swamp creature that ever emerged , dripping with corruption, from the dank nest that birthed him. https://news.yahoo.com/every-t... [yahoo.com]
See how I provide a source? You can't provide any credible sources for your insane claims because there are no credible sources for
Re: (Score:2)
I don't give a shit what that con man said, what did he DO? You know when he said that, he was just pissed the military wouldn't follow his orders to kill peaceful protestors, right?
We did win. We beat Trump, the worst president ever. Nice of you to admit that. Some idiots still think Trump will be "reinstated" like that's actually a thing. Trump supporters are all delusional, violent traitors. And you're a great example.
Again, Trump never stopped a single war. He did nothing to reign in military spending.
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, just stop projecting your own evil onto others. Nobody on the left is calling anyone a goddess or saying they should be in office eternally. That was you republican assholes. You were the ones worshipping Trump, calling him your God-Emperor. He was the one "joking" about being president for life.
Side note, I often suspected that JockTroll was just another one of your sock puppets. Hypothesis confirmed. That means "I'm right" for you and the rest of the mouth breathers.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Your everlasting summer and you can see it fading fast
So you grab a piece of something that you think is gonna last
Well, you wouldn't even know a diamond if you held it in your hand
The things you think are precious I can't understand.
Re: (Score:2)
They all sound the same to me. I guess JockTroll has too low of a UID to be an OMBad puppet though. But it tickles me to lump them all together, like their individuality just isn't important. Because it isn't.
Re: (Score:1)
I will admit that I think something Trump did pretty well and part of his election success in 2016 was that he was correct in the things he pointed out as problems in America. I don't like the way he framed it but he wasn't often wrong about the problems that exist.
However his perception of "why" those problems exist, what maintains them and most importantly his purported solutions to those problems were, in my opinion, ass backwards and total dogshit and sometimes so bad that you question whether he actua
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
And it needs to be a relay style surgery. They can high five as they swap places over the patient!
Re: (Score:2)
"High turnover is a good thing"
"Inexperience is a good thing"
It's hilarious, you are literally twisting yourself into fucking knots to maintain your contrarianism. My point is made, you will instinctively take the opposite position on anything reasonable said by people you have been told are wrong without any real constructive thought. So much for the "free thinkers".
As it goes "You people have worms in your brains"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I remember when we had Democrats like Jack Kennedy...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Thankfully, we still have a few Democrats who will fight for the average American. Like Bernie Sanders and the squad. And hopefully, Nina Turner will be nominated for the Ohio congressional special election today. There are still good Democrats out there, and more to come if we work for it.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Wrong. Just more republican propaganda. You can't even be arsed to explain why they aren't good, that's how low effort your trolling is. I rate your troll 1/10, do better.
Re: (Score:1)
You're easily one of the stupidest Slashdotters.
Re:An Airplane manufacturing company? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well it's a bit sad since Boeing has a long and storied history of successful space projects.
Boeing manufactured the first stage of the Saturn-V.
They designed and built the lunar rover along with GM.
Boeing Delta rockets have done over 300 launches with a 95% success rate.
Boeing is getting bashed left and right today because a company with their pedigree who has been doing space work since the 1950's should be capable of much better and as a foundational American company it's embarrassing to see them fall down the hole of greed, dumb MBA thinking and downright malfeasance when they should be the example the new companies should look to emulate. Today they seem like an example of what those companies should avoid.
Re: (Score:1)
It seems like everybody but Boeing can see that Boeing needs a turn-around. Remember when they thought Apple would fail so they brought back Jobs? It needs something like that, except that there's no single charismatic leader for them. They need, at the very least, an "everybody drop what you're doing and listen to this" day like Starbucks did that one time. And that needs to be followed up with material changes and policies that focus on the long-term healing of the company, re-instilling a sense of qu
??? An Airplane manufacturing company? (Score:4, Informative)
Man, did you miss the memo about who builds spacecraft:
- Mercury-Redstone/Atlas: Capsule: McDonnell, Redstone: Chrysler, Atlas: General Dynamics
- Gemini-Titan: Capsule: McDonnell Titan: Glenn L Martin
- Apollo-Saturn: Capsule: North American Aviation, Lunar Lander: Grumman, First Stage: Boeing, 2nd & 3rd Stages: Douglas
- Space Shuttle: Orbiter: Rockwell (later Boeing), SRBs: Thiokol
Airbus, Boeing and Lockheed are all heavily involved in the development of satellites as well as other boosters.
IBM was involved in the onboard computer systems on all the spacecraft (Apollo it was for the booster controller while MIT did the CSM and LM computers). That's about as close you get to "Modern Tech Companies" being in the domain of Space Flight.
I'm really curious as to why you think "old Airplane manufacturing companies" should not be involved in the creation of Space Craft - care to enlighten us?
Re: (Score:3)
I believe you fell into the chasm of sar.
Re: (Score:2)
While as a general rule, I avoid sarcasm in my post, I though this would had been such a low bar that anyone would catch it.
We're not in a sarcasm friendly world (Score:2)
For sarcasm to work, it needs to be out of place and that's a problem in today's world: https://theintercept.com/2021/... [theintercept.com]
Wouldn't have reached it anyway (Score:2)
It's not a trick, it's Boeing.
writing on the wall (Score:4, Insightful)
Looking more and more like they need to quit while they're behind.
Let me guess (Score:2)
undisclosed technical issue
Maybe a DAL-A [wikipedia.org] flight-critical system with no redundancy? [wikipedia.org]
Nah... It's not like Boeing to make silly design mistakes like that.
Career advice (Score:2)
If you are an engineer who loves aerospace and work at Boeing, apply to RelativitySpace or SpaceX. Note, if you are an MBA, finance, or business management type out to âoeoptimizeâ costs then stay at Boeing. Please.
Delay due to unexpected value position indicators (Score:4, Informative)
Here's the announcement: https://starlinerupdates.com/n... [starlinerupdates.com]
If things don't look perfect then you don't launch - I would hold off on excoriating Boeing or anybody else. Something looked awry and so the launch was scrubbed until everybody's satisfied things are perfect.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the reason people are throwing Boeing under the bus at this point isn't a singular launch scrub. It's more that this is the feather that's (continuing) breaking the camel's back. They've had so many failures and missed opportunities that even in a perfectly reasonable situation where you see something off and have to hold off for a day or two, it's easy to roast them.
That said, they do need a win. And soon. As it is it looks like they're slowly spinning their wheels while making no actual moveme
Re: (Score:2)
As it is it looks like they're slowly spinning their wheels while making no actual movement in any direction but down.
So it's MCAS all the way down.
Wasn't a Boeing issue this time (Score:1)
According to TFA, the issue was with the Space Station not a problem with the Boeing craft.
At least this time anyway.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Read it again. The previous delay was due to the space station issues with the new module. This delay was due to an anomaly with a valve in the Starliner propulsion system
Re:Wasn't a Boeing issue this time (Score:4, Informative)
This is not accurate. Last week's attempt was due to the space station (a thruster unexpectedly fired on the station).
More recent [go.com] news states:
The attempt (Today -- Tuesday) was scrubbed "due to unexpected valve position indications in the Starliner propulsion system," NASA noted.
So the scrub today was due to something with the spacecraft.
Re: (Score:2)
The Space station had a scheduled arrival of a large module (for the first time in many years) which requires wiring, integration, hooking up systems, etc. Even without the infamous stability control system incident that would have taken a few days.
The scheduling of a flight of anything at the same time smells as if someone did not believe that Nauka will make it to dock.
Let The Past Die... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So in order to be correct, your statement should say "American Contractor".
Re: (Score:2)
If the space industry was sane, it would just license the Soyez modules off the russians and modernize them with american electroics. Those things are super reliable, safe, battle tested.
Re: (Score:2)
Soyez capsule wouldn't be useful for anything other than transport of people. It won't land on the mood, and would still require boosters for which SpaceX has a stunning edge.
And spaceX is reusing the capsule, as well. Even if adapting the US tech to it had no cost, it's still a one-shot that would have to compete with reusable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"single use" as opposed to "reusable", not as in "only one thing it can do"
The real problem (Score:2)
They needed to wind the master clock and someone misplaced the key.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain (Score:1)