• Australis13@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    96
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    The crew should come back on the Dragon and Boeing be required to solve the problems and carry out another test flight. It is unacceptable that Boeing wants to bring the astronauts back without understanding some of the failures on the Starliner.

    • YourAvgMortal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m sure they understand the problems, and they understand that solving them would eat into their profits

    • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Another test flight will be a bit of a problem. There are no spare Atlas V rockets. They will either have to convince Amazon to give up one of theirs or they will have to launch one of the missions on Vulcan Centaur, which is not currently crew rated.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 months ago

        or they will have to launch one of the missions on Vulcan Centaur, which is not currently crew rated.

        That’s okay; the next Starliner test flight clearly shouldn’t be crew rated either!

    • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      This is exactly it for me. A problem is one thing, a problem can be addressed. But a problem whose core cause is not understood can’t be quantified or addressed.

      So you have a thruster pack that’s overheating and they don’t even know why, you have helium that’s leaking and they don’t even know why, so I ask why is it even a question what to do?

      I am among other things a private pilot, I fly little propeller airplanes around for fun. Lots of private pilots do stupid stuff, and some get killed as a result. I’m talking for example pilots who want to get back to their home airport, so they fly over five airports that all sell fuel without landing but then run out of gas and crash half a mile from their home airport. So there is a saying, before you do anything risky, consider how stupid you will look in the NTSB report if it doesn’t work out. And the pilot who intentionally flew below fuel minimums looks pretty damn stupid, destroyed a $100,000 airplane and lost his life so he could save 20 bucks on cheaper gas.

      Point is, the same principle applies to all of the recent space disasters. Challenger was obviously not the right decision to launch. Columbia obviously a serious risk that was ignored. And that brings us to Starliner, we have serious fundamental problems that could definitely lead to a loss of ship and crew situation and we don’t even understand what is causing those problems. Now imagine Starliner fails. How stupid will that decision look? Probably even dumber than Columbia or Challenger, because unlike those two disasters we know ahead of time that something is very wrong.

  • Got_Bent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Shitty Boeing aside, how are they eating up there? I don’t know anything about space station food logistics, but if a planned week has turned into ten weeks, surely there must be a resource strain.

    Edit: Google search says they can regularly send up unmanned supply ships.

  • HejMedDig@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    In this particular situation, if Boeing says it’s safe, I would be inclined to trust them, because if they make the return happen, and it fails, Boeing is done fore. As a crew member though, I would pass for sure and wait for a Dragon

    • riodoro1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      ·
      3 months ago

      How many people died because boeing made shitty planes and didn’t train their crew properly?

      Is boeing done for?

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      They already couldn’t afford this situation, and look where they are.

      What’s an improbable “acceptable risk” to them may not be good enough for NASA, especially if they don’t really understand what’s wrong.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      They could feel like there’s nothing more to lose if it doesn’t make it back but they might be able to claw their way back if it succeeds. “They” being the individuals making the recommendation, not the individuals more concerned about the company overall. If Boeing decides the spaceflight industry isn’t worth the risks, a downsize or complete closing of that part of the company could cost the jobs of those who are the experts in this situation.

      So it might not be a case of “we think it’s safe to return”. It might be “returning safely is the only scenario where we aren’t fucked, so let’s roll the dice”.

    • jaxxed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      I am not sure that businesses like Boeing make risk decisions like that. You would think that they would only take a risk that they know they can win, but many times they take a risk and hope that the dice land their way. This would be lives at risk, with calculations assessed by people with very poor records with such assessments.

  • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    3 months ago

    The question facing NASA’s leadership today? Should the two astronauts return to Earth from the International Space Station in Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft, with its history of thruster failures and helium leaks, or should they come home on a SpaceX Dragon capsule?

    • ivanafterall ☑️@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      3 months ago

      The question facing NASA’s leadership today? Should the two astronauts return to Earth…

      “Alright, just hear me out…” -Boeing

    • 0x0@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 months ago

      The lives of two government employees are in the balance, and taxpayers paid Boeing for most of the Starliner spacecraft’s development costs.

      Money money money…

  • 0x0@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Three Starliner mission managers had key roles on Columbia’s ill-fated final flight.

    I was gonna take issue with that statement until i read this. Causality does seem more probable.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Unfortunately they’ve been moving backwards across the time zones, resulting in them owing NASA money

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    38
    ·
    3 months ago

    Ok Huston, we’re listening!

    Huston: okay you two probably gonna die. But we got two options for you. You wanna boing boing boing your way down here? Or do you wanna have space sex bring, I mean make you come? Everyone dies, we just don’t know when or where. Ok most hospice palliative care old people know where, but not when.