Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in

Boeing again 47

Well pointed out I hadn't thought of that.

Thankfully I think the risk assessment of NASA and Boeing will not take any chances.

Wonder what they are doing up there. An extra two will mess with the food planning.
 
> Three separate, well-placed sources have confirmed to Ars that the current flight software on board Starliner cannot perform an automated undocking from the space station and entry into Earth’s atmosphere. ... Regardless, sources described the process to update the software on Starliner as "non-trivial" and "significant," and that it could take up to four weeks. This is what is driving the delay to launch Crew 9 later next month.



NASA have since delayed the return to Sept 24th, which would make sense if they need another month to allow an autonomous return.
 
It's worth watching what spaceX are generating hardware wise.

Although they seem to have a busy programme already.

Is there a spare docking port?

 
I'd say now that the Starliner is officially a failure. After years of delays, billions of dollars, and largely not successful test flights, it's hard to spin it any other way.
Link

Brad Waybright

It takes competence to recognize incompetence.
 
If I were those two astronauts, you would NOT be getting me into Starliner for the return trip anymore. Even if Boeing and NASA agreed it was "safe."
 
This mission failed in its latter part; it successfully delivered what it was supposed to. It has a problem that can be addressed and repaired, like the various previous problems space programs have encountered. Except for the amount of time and money, the Space-X development went through a large number of explosive development failures to get to the present state. Starliner appears to have greater capability than the Dragon capsule, but it may be that success of Starliner wouldn't matter anyway if the needs of NASA have changed. For example, Starliner has ISS orbit boost capability; AFAIK Dragon doesn't.

 
I'd say the mission is a complete and utter failure if the top priority is to provide a safe round trip. I think Dragon HAS been boosting the ISS, but maybe only the cargo craft. Starliner probably won't be doing that before it's 'de-orbited'.

Brad Waybright

It takes competence to recognize incompetence.
 
Articles about this say that Dragon docks on the wrong side of ISS, doesn't have the fuel capacity, needs to dispense with a critical part to expose engines that have the thrust which will be a problem. Perhaps that has all changed? It appears that the boost mission requires a very low thrust for a long time, something the Draco engines appear to not do.

The bad news today for the astronauts is they were expecting an 8 day trip and will now have an 8 month trip. I hope the cat and fish feeders were overfilled. The litterbox is going to be a big problem.

This mission wasn't a boost mission so Starliner would not be configured for it; boost was just a potential mission it might be used for in the future.
 
It seems that NASA has delayed future missions to allow Boeing time to do whatever needs to be done to return the craft to earth, or it will be jettisonned to burn up. Probably the latter is the best case scenario.

Brad Waybright

It takes competence to recognize incompetence.
 
Kinda reminds me of a 1960's TV show , where the actors are stranded on an island for 3 months instead of a " 3 hour tour".

"...when logic, and proportion, have fallen, sloppy dead..." Grace Slick
 
davefitz-
...and a contractor posing as Gilligan.

Brad Waybright

It takes competence to recognize incompetence.
 
A good engineer is often but not always able to work with and around incompetent management.
The best engineers are working somewhere else now.

--------------------
Ohm's law
Not just a good idea;
It's the LAW!
 
I was rather late yesterday due to a tech issue.

One witty pax came out with "if your going for the late flight record, I think your going to struggle up against the starliner"

As he had the look and the smell of a technician, I just said. "My fault, Oil seal gone on the bleed and I grounded it. fancy breathing sheep dip?"

He gave me a pat on the shoulder a smile and announced to the rest " right leave this crew alone we are in safe hands"

And the cc said the rest of the 130 odd pax did thanks to his comments in the back.
 
I guess I'm the Caterpillar 3500 whisperer. Our most recent incident involved a freshly rebuilt engine. it had run for about an hour off and on mostly idle speed. We hired a tech for the first loaded run but about a minute after starting the engine developed a faint ticking with a chirp sound. The tech increase speed until the sound went away. That's when I remembered z I've heard this before. I told the tech to get the valve covers off ASAP so we can see the red hot pushrods. They weren't glowing but two were smoking. As an operator, I've developed an ear. I don't always know what is wrong but I can always tell you that something is wrong.

I'm also a very aggressive troubleshooter. I'll run a 12 cylinder engine on 3 cylinders. It sounds bad, it may be bad. I don't know, I've never been trained by the OEM but I always find the problem and they don't
 
I trust my gut feelings as well tug. And they were twitching with this one.

Sometimes I can't put my finger on what's actually triggering them.

Thankfully the senior techs I work with trust them as well.

They are not always correct but I am told they mostly are and worth further investigation.

Btw the aircraft that I grounded still hasn't flown again after a night 18 hours in the hanger which is unusual.
 
Just a snippet I got in my feed

space explored said:
White Sands that showed that valve issues came down to either a teflon tape seal or poppet valve expanding or extruding, causing restricted propellent flow to the thrusters.
Click to expand...

Possible reason for thruster issue
 
Why would any modern system use tapered threads? Or, was PTFE tape improperly applied to a straight thread?
 
Why would any modern system use tapered threads?
Click to expand...
An MBA thinks it will save money? Remember. This is Boeing.
Why would any modern system use tapered threads?
Click to expand...
An MBA saved money on training? Remember. This is Boeing.

--------------------
Ohm's law
Not just a good idea;
It's the LAW!
 
In my experience it's the old timers and their "this is the way I've always done it" attitude that results on sealant being applied to non-tapered threads.

Wait until you tell one they don't need a lock washer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Alistair_Heaton
  • Question
Boeing again pt2. 12
2 3
Replies
53
Views
150
waross
waross
LittleInch
  • Locked
  • Question
Ronan Point bites again
Replies
16
Views
17
drawoh
drawoh
EnzoAus
  • Locked
  • Question
Atlas Air Boeing 747-8 cargo plane - possible uncontained engine failure 4
2
Replies
25
Views
30
3DDave
3DDave
tommj
  • Locked
  • Question
Boeing 737 MAX production hit by a new defect in part from Spirit AeroSystems 1
2 3
Replies
40
Views
41
Alistair_Heaton
Alistair_Heaton
kjoiner
  • Locked
  • Question
Near disaster on United Flight Boeing 777 leaving Hawaii -any ideas? 2
Replies
19
Views
22
Alistair_Heaton
Alistair_Heaton
Back
Top