posted 08-24-2024 12:48 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Axman:
The live news update was probably delayed because Boeing declined to have a representative.

---

Further, there was never a plan for Boeing to take part in this briefing. There will be upcoming briefings with Boeing representatives. That said, Boeing did issue a statement:

Boeing continues to focus, first and foremost, on the safety of the crew and spacecraft. We are executing the mission as determined by NASA, and we are preparing the spacecraft for a safe and successful uncrewed return.

posted 08-24-2024 12:59 PM               

The crew was never at risk. They are safe aboard the International Space Station and have always had an alternate way home.

If the thruster issues can be addressed by software and/or hardware changes, it would seem wasteful to throw out an otherwise perfectly good spacecraft.

posted 08-24-2024 01:44 PM               

I have seen some speculation in the press that because we are in an election season, decisions may have been made with regard to this announced today. It absolutely has nothing to do with it, and as long as I'm around here, it's not going to.

posted 08-24-2024 10:46 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by issman1:
I wonder if there was any pressure from the ruling U.S. Democrats, who would want to avoid any possibility of a loss of crew scenario before the Presidential Election.

---

posted 08-25-2024 09:40 AM               

1. The price. Much higher than SpaceX Dragon, and so far much less reliable. Boeing shareholders are not likely to bear the pain much beyond a couple of more years without any sign of return on future investment, either privately (which currently are mere pipe-dreams) or through NASA's contract.
   NASA, being publicly funded, are unlikely to stomach such highly inflated costs when a much cheaper and more reliable system is in operation.

2. The timeline. This is intimately connected to point one. Boeing, according to their contract (which NASA has paid out in full) are required to perform six crew flights to orbit. NASA has so far only provided the go-ahead for three. And those three alone are cutting the time margins down to the bone. (and will incur payment penalties to boot as per problem 1).

3. The software. Problems arose on test flight one which were resolved on test flight two by removing (the redundant) crew configured capabilities for that flight. The crew test-flight has shown no further problems, but the automated separation sequence has been suppressed for this flight. Therefore, and NASA and Boeing are aware of this, no Starliner flight has yet flown with a successful endowed complement of both crew and automated software capabilities enabled.

4. Helium leaks. The crew test flight was launched with known problems of helium leakage. The issue was underplayed as of minor concern prior to launch, and has been admitted since as of moderate concern. Future flights will need this concern to be properly addressed.

5. Doghouse heating problems. These problems arose on the second test flight but the causes were not fully recognised until ground tests in the last couple of months were undertaken due to the thruster problems on the subsequent crew test delayed the crew return. A major problem that Boeing engineers will have (and therefore a problem NASA will have) is that the doghouse units will be separated from the crew compartment and burn up on reentry and will not be available for post-flight examination.

posted 08-25-2024 10:01 AM               

Boeing has not been paid in full for their six flight contract. To quote the OIG, "NASA pays a fixed price using milestone payments for key events such as flight readiness reviews, launches and successful missions. For each mission, NASA pays up to 75 percent of total mission costs prior to each launch."

It also should be noted that Boeing paid for the second orbital flight test itself and was under no obligation by NASA to fly the mission. It was Boeing that wanted the extra test flight.

Your third point is negated by NASA's decision to land Starliner without its crew. The vehicle launched with its automated undocking software disabled, but will land using it.

Per NASA and Boeing, the helium leaks have been traced back to their root cause, the problem is understood and a path forward has already been identified and is in work.

posted 08-25-2024 01:47 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by MartinAir:
The Apollo 17 launch date was deliberately chosen after the election.

---

posted 08-25-2024 10:11 PM               

I'm certain that having former astronauts among the NASA hierarchy helped to steer this decision in the safest possible direction. These are the same folks who understand deeply that they could have been onboard those shuttles while the "managers" on the ground decided their fates.

posted 08-26-2024 10:38 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Headshot:
This is well before the election.

---

posted 08-26-2024 11:08 AM               

...Nixon emphatically stated that Apollos 16 and 17 would not go ahead, but he eventually conceded: "If we go, no shots before the election." He was finally persuaded that there was a "politically safe" gap between Apollo 16 and the election; and provided Apollo 17 did not fly until after the election, he agreed that both missions could proceed.

posted 08-30-2024 04:18 PM               

Given that the FAA is halting Falcon 9 launches until further notice, which obviously would included the Crew 9 Dragon launch, this lack of an emergency escape vehicle looks to be even more prolonged.

posted 08-30-2024 05:03 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
The 45 days was a milestone to reassess and continue as warranted.

---

I stress that this is not getting at you: that's what we were all being told by NASA and Boeing.

You hit the nail on the head on 6th August when you stated that Boeing "...should never have promoted the mission as an 8-day stay at the space station when they knew it could go longer." Likewise, if they knew that the batteries were rated for 210 days, they should never have reported a 45-day "limit." Why mention 45 days at all if the mission was going to last 8 days and the batteries were good (subject, of course, to actual performance in orbit) for 210 days?

But there's the point: if NASA and/or Boeing had reorted that 45 days would be a "milestone" for reassessing the batteries, that would have implied a mission duration exceeding 45 days, otherwise why set a 45-day "milestone"?

posted 08-30-2024 05:19 PM               

The mission ops team was never held to the eight-day timeline, other than it being their initial work schedule until events merited it being changed. As such, the 45-day periods for certifying battery life did not (internally) contradict any plans for the mission.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SkyMan1958:
That seems a risk to me.

---

When Starliner undocks, the Crew-8 Dragon will become the CFT crew's escape vehicle. The crew has set up foam-lined pallets that will serve as the CFT crew's "seats" for the ride home, should an emergency evacuation occur.

posted 08-31-2024 10:29 AM               

Relative to additional capability beyond the four seats we have in Dragon, SpaceX had some of those concepts early on relative to additional astronauts.

Right now, the seats have to rotate during entry, so it would be really difficult on the cargo pallet to install more seats. And of course, then we would have to modify the ecosystem to handle flow to those suits for cooling, and then also for air.

So, we have talked about it a little bit over the years, but we really don't have the time to implement such a system.

posted 08-31-2024 10:45 AM               

And will the enabling/uploading be tested prior to use?

posted 08-31-2024 11:43 AM               

Following NASA's decision on Aug. 24 to return the Starliner spacecraft uncrewed, mission managers and flight controllers updated elements of the Starliner systems with specific information for this mission that will allow the spacecraft to execute the return. The uncrewed Starliner spacecraft will perform a fully autonomous return with flight controllers at Starliner Mission Control in Houston and at Boeing Mission Control Center in Florida.

posted 08-31-2024 02:55 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
...addressed the number of seats on Dragon

---

posted 08-31-2024 03:27 PM               

If an emergency evacuation is required before Crew-9 arrives but after Starliner departs, Williams and Wilmore will use the foam-lined pallets aboard the Crew-8 Dragon and one will wear the available SpaceX suit. The other will go without.

posted 09-01-2024 07:31 PM            

In the James McDivitt interview with JSC he said one time they were messing with the interior lighting on a test article, and the tech stationed outside said that the engines were firing, there wasn't any fuel in them, but some relay or solenoid was clicking away. They spent a lot of time worried about uncommanded firing of the pyrotechnics.

And then there's this — an engineer talking about the problems they had getting thrusters to work right. Getting too hot, and teflon seals expanding and choking off oxidizer flow. Sounds familiar, no?

We were having difficulty with the high temperature soak back after long runs. We decided it would be a good thing to strengthen the Teflon valve seat. In order to do that, we put fiberglass into the Teflon valve seat, and it really stayed together, except when the engine heat soaked back; the Teflon grew and grew and grew, and the oxidizer didn't get through the oxidizer side, if it got too hot.

posted 09-04-2024 12:07 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
The other will go without.

---

We do have one [spare SpaceX] suit on orbit right now that fits Suni. She's tried that suit on, and it fits well.

The way the [Crew-8] Dragon is configured for an emergency, Butch and Suni riding on the cargo pallet in temporary seats, that's an unsuited configuration. There are no spacesuits that work there ... and so in a temporary situation, we would not have suits for Butch or Suni on Dragon.