Boeing's Starliner Launch Pushed Back To April 2023 61
The first crewed launch of Boeing's Starliner has been delayed again, this time being pushed back to April 2023 from an earlier planned launch date of February. The Register reports: The change came with little announcement from NASA, which tweeted out the new date as a scheduling update without any additional details. In an accompanying blog post, NASA said the change was being made to eliminate conflicts between "visiting spacecraft traffic at the space station," but the agency didn't elaborate much beyond that.
Starliner has been a drag on Boeing since the company unveiled the capsule in 2010. According to Boeing's Q3 2022 filing, Starliner has lost the company $883 million since 2019. That was the year Starliner made its first attempt at an uncrewed launch and docking with the International Space Station, which failed due to a pair of software errors that left it unable to dock and saw it returned to Earth early under less-than-ideal circumstances. Attempts at a second launch in 2021 also failed when 13 of the Calamity Capsule's propulsion system valves failed pre-flight checks. Starliner only made it to the ISS for the first time this past May, but even that launch wasn't without issues as two of the craft's 12 thrusters failed once in orbit.
Starliner has been a drag on Boeing since the company unveiled the capsule in 2010. According to Boeing's Q3 2022 filing, Starliner has lost the company $883 million since 2019. That was the year Starliner made its first attempt at an uncrewed launch and docking with the International Space Station, which failed due to a pair of software errors that left it unable to dock and saw it returned to Earth early under less-than-ideal circumstances. Attempts at a second launch in 2021 also failed when 13 of the Calamity Capsule's propulsion system valves failed pre-flight checks. Starliner only made it to the ISS for the first time this past May, but even that launch wasn't without issues as two of the craft's 12 thrusters failed once in orbit.
So? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
How far behind schedule now?
14 dragons, last time I counted.
Old Space cannot change itself (Score:5, Informative)
Natural selection must take its course.
Time to let Old Space die.
Fly SLS once and pull the plug. Putting Vaginas on the Moon will have to give way to putting Man (sic) on Mars.
Re: Old Space cannot change itself (Score:1, Flamebait)
Boeing really has to get its act together. MCAS, Air Force One, SLS (sort of) and now this... Not looking good. Though demonrats will probably argue that they're too big to fail and offer a bailout so they can continue doing so indefinitely, because jobs.
Re: Old Space cannot change itself (Score:4, Interesting)
And yet, IG Metall covers every auto manufacturer in Germany. Somehow, despite this terrible burden, Germany produces twice as many cars as the US, of much better quality and the workers get paid about twice as much.
It's almost like having the workers enjoying their jobs, caring about the company which cares about them, brings massive productivity and profits for capital and worker.
The US companies see their worker as an enemy that must be repressed until they are grateful for their sullen servitude. Once it is clear that company cares nothing for the worker then that attitude is returned in spades. If a worker loves the job then they work their backside off for its success. If they don't care about the job beyond the minimum wage pay packet, then that is reflected in the work performance. If the worker hates the company that treats them like dog shit then they actively work against it from inside.
Is there anybody left at Boeing that "loves" the company?
Re: (Score:1)
Cool story, bruh. But when I want to see what happens at a unionized company in the US, I look to the history in the US, not in other countries where the unions might be reasonable.
There are reasons that US unions need their exemptions from identity theft [freedomworks.org], minimum wage [americanactionforum.org] anti-stalking [reuters.com], racketeering [wikipedia.org] and other [investors.com] laws.
Re: Old Space cannot change itself (Score:4, Insightful)
None of that, and I mean none of it, counters the points the OP made nor does it say anything particular about unions particular at Boeing (and the first two are sources so obviously astroturfed and biased as to be worthless).
I would say the US should shift to a system of sectoral bargaining more like many EU countries do but I get the feeling your solution is to just throw more workers to whatever whims of the owner class demands of them because the labor market is magic and pixie dust.
Re: Old Space cannot change itself (Score:2)
Oh hell no. The median pay for what I do is about half of what I get paid. No fucking way you're dragging my pay down to the lowest common denominator of the sector.
Re: Old Space cannot change itself (Score:2)
No. If the underperformers want to all band together, then they can band together. Just keep me out of it.
Re: Old Space cannot change itself (Score:1)
The labor market is not magic and neither are a small number of self-appointed "advocates" for the working man who pass around the collection plate with the force of the (union shop) state behind them.
The closest thing that does come to magic in this world is freedom: I don't like my job, so I get another one.
Natural friction (like the pain in the ass of finding another job) prevents this from turning into a free-for-all and unnatural impediments (like entangling health insurance and retirement accounts wit
Re: (Score:2)
Why is the pain-in-the-ass aspect of moving jobs "natural" and those other things unnatural (i do agree those things are bad), these are all human constructs, natural has got zero to do with it. If we want to make it easier to move jobs we can with policies and regulations, nature isn't stopping that.
At the core of the idea that unions or labor regulations are encumberances is that the owners of capital shall not be inconvenienced. In your world of naturals and unnaturals we also have to accept the "natur
Re: Old Space cannot change itself (Score:1)
And yet in the suburbs I can be just as gainfully employed as in the city without having to smell my neighbor's farts.
Similarly, I can be perfectly productive being employed by a small or medium size company or even self employed, and not have to work for one of three MegaCorps in a particular market, if I choose my profession wisely.
Also you misunderstood my meaning about natural friction. No matter what the welfare state does for you, a new job must be explicitly sought out, paperwork must be filed, a new
Re: Old Space cannot change itself (Score:2)
The suburbs by definition are areas outside cities, they only come about to expand housing for the cities they surround. If you find a job in the suburbs it only exists because of that city. If they weren't they wouldn't be suburbs, they'd just be towns or rural areas.
All those aspects of finding a job could be affected by policies and in many countries they are. We even had a federal jobs program in the 30s, all those things are societal constructs. We created them, we can change them.
Re: Old Space cannot change itself (Score:1)
For every great monument to the awesome power pf government built in the 30s, there are quite a few cases of digging ditches today to fill up tomorrow.
The most egregious example was the "arts" subsidies.
Re: (Score:2)
The arts subsidies are only "bad" by subjective view. If one sees value in arts then it was pretty successfull spawning like almost 400,000 pieces of art all very refelctive of American society and much of it still on display still today and kept thousands of people employed in these fields, just a matter of if you find value in that and only if you don't consider the thousands of structures still in use today as a result of programs not "art"
Re: (Score:2)
Oddly enough, when I Google it, I get about 8.8 million cars built in the USA annually, and 3.3 million for Germany.
Maybe I'm just dumb, but 3.3 million looks to be lower than 8.8 million...
Re: (Score:2)
Wake me when the UAW becomes IG Metall.
Re: Old Space cannot change itself (Score:5, Insightful)
Bcause we all know the issues with those projects was the fault of the union employees and manufacturing engineers on the factory floors, certainly can't put any blame on the C-class and executives for the long term corporate rot, why else would they be making those huge salaries and bonuses?!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/17/business/boeing-bailout-trump/index.html
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You might remember some big economic hazard that started in March 2020. I certainly do. Democrats [heraldnet.com] also wanted Boeing to take that bailout. Boeing ultimately refused [washingtonpost.com] the bailout money because it came with strings attached.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Boeing is not accustomed to taking government money with strings attached, normally the Pentagram just gives them a big pile of money to do something and then when they do it wrong they get another pile of money to put a patch on it. Accountability? Benchmarks? Are you kidding?
Re: (Score:2)
Boeing's problems come down to the fact that they don't actually have to get their act together. Defense hawks in both parties will ensure whatever is required to keep Boeing going gets down, no matter what it costs the tax paying public.
Sadly given the state of the world right now - they might not be wrong either. Its not so difficult to imagine a need for a next-gen bomber, new ICBM system, or SDI system on a time table to last week.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Sexism and jealous hatred scares me. It should scare you.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's a note on my tiny violin:
Goodbye.
Re:Product of outsourcing... (Score:4, Insightful)
20s-90s American company with mostly American engineers (some British, some German, some Australian, but mostly American)... 2000's the Indians got involved (from India, not native Americans) and like everything else they touch, all hell broke loose.
OK, I've seen some negative impacts of Indian outsourcing, and Indian workplace culture, so I'm willing to cut you some slack. But also huge talent, and India has also had remarkable success in space on a shoestring budget, including a Mars orbiter. So you are going to need some citations on that to avoid accusations of racism, or at least jingoism.
Re: (Score:3)
There are a lot of very clever, well-educated people in India, and it is a democracy.
Using Indians to produce stuff for your company is a great idea, if you manage it well.
It is not *an entire nation's* fault if you manage that badly.
FFS.
Re: Product of outsourcing... (Score:2)
Re:Product of outsourcing... (Score:5, Informative)
Boeing's problems started when they merged with McDonnell Douglas. They had almost everything to do with the change in corporate culture brought by the executives from MD. The ex-Boeing people I've talked to never mentioned Indian engineers as part of the problem, only executives chasing short term profits rather than sustainable business and technical objectives.
Re: (Score:2)
Living in the Seattle area, and having met and hung out with some former Boeing Engineers, they all have pretty much echoed your statements.
Re: Product of outsourcing... (Score:2)
Re: Product of outsourcing... (Score:2)
Corporate bailout? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Using The Register as a source of news is stupid.
Sloshdat does it a lot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
How is calling Starliner the Calamity Capsule friendly to Boeing?
Re: (Score:2)
It's Just a Big Government (Score:2)
Boondoggle
"work or activity that is wasteful or pointless but gives the appearance of having value"
Arg.. (Score:2)
Boeing, you never cease to disappoint. Its not bad enough that you charged almost double what SpaceX did for the same service while claiming that you were the "safe bet" in achieving the desired safety/schedule requirements. But even if this date holds you'll be almost 3 years behind the supposed "long shot" provider and only there after a series of major launch pad and ON ORBIT safety issues were averted.
My question is... (Score:2)
Where are they going to find astronauts that will actually be willing to get into this thing?
I sure as hell wouldn't. Everything Boeing touches these days seems to be a fiasco.
Re: (Score:2)
There are already several crews of astronauts assigned to the Starliner missiona and they've been training for this purpose. They are probably very disappointed at the delays but once everything finally checks out they'll have no problem climbing on board.
Re: (Score:2)
Three Starliner astronauts were reassigned to Dragon, and they're on the Crew-5 mission in orbit right now. It won't be surprising if more get reassigned over time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Starliner was designed to fly on four rockets: Atlas V, Delta IV, Vulcan, and Falcon 9. The Deltas are all spoken for and no Starliner will ever fly on one. Seven Atlas V's have been allocated to Starliner. Vulcan will need some number of successful launches before a crewed Starliner can fly on it and none are yet scheduled, but it could happen. Starliner will likely only ever fly on a Falcon 9 if something catastrophic happens to the Vulcan program, but it looks like SpaceX is going to launch a good chunk
Re: (Score:2)
The astronauts who qualify on ability all fly on Spacex.
Re: (Score:2)
John Glenn is alleged to have said, “Well, how do you think it feels when your life depends on 150,000 parts borrowed from the lowest bidder?” Except in this case, the less reliable space ship seems to be the one built by the highest bidder.
In the meantime... (Score:2)
I read that SpaceX is now producing one new Raptor engine per day. [arstechnica.com]
I get it that the world needs an alternative to SpaceX and they shouldn't be allowed to have a monopoly. But can't the competition step up their game a bit or are they just that incapable?
Nobody cares. (Score:2)
Boeing crap (Score:1)
Here;s the real question (Score:2)
Remember: Boeing is new at this. (Score:2)
Project Mercury used a Redstone rocket [product of Chrysler (yeah the car company)] and then an Atlas rocket [product of Convair], paired with the Mercury capsule [product of McDonnell Aircraft Corp]
Project Gemini used a Titan II rocket [product of Martin] with a Gemini capsule [product of McDonnell Aircraft Corp]
Project Apollo used a Saturn IB [product of Chrysler and Douglas] or Saturn V rocket [product of Douglas, North American Aviation, and Boeing (only the SI-C stage)] and the CSM [product of North A