9 ms·

Boeing Starliner Stuck on Space Station as More Leaks Discovered

44 points by hollasch 2y ago

gdestus 2y ago
I'm fascinated about starliner strictly from a project management perspective. This is such a comprehensive failure from top to bottom between the delays, test failures, and hand waved requirements yet there still seems to be a contingent of boosters from both leadership and the customer. Usually I'm the guy who gets called in to rescue a spiraling project and if I was in aerospace, I dont even know where I would begin here....
- jiggawatts 2y ago
  You see, there is this barrel, and it is full of pork. You work for a guy who wants that pork. He says: Go pick up some of the pork, cut a chunk off for yourself, and bring the rest to me. You do that every day. You both have a nice steady supply of pork. Some other person, who isn't you, and isn't your boss, or your boss's boss would like it if the barrel got into space. It doesn't, but that's okay because they have no power over you or your boss. Not to mention that both you and your boss both have some pork, so you're both happy whether or not the barrel goes into space. There is no problem here to solve. That's why you can't solve the problem. There isn't one. Everyone directly involved is very happy. You can't "fix" happy people.
  - 14u2c 2y ago
    Except that this was a fixed price contract. If they don't get it right the pork train does come to an end.
    - jiggawatts 2y ago
      There will always be more fixed price contracts in the future. Every time the barrel emptied in the past, a new barrel full to the brim with pork was delivered.
      - panick21_ 2y ago
        That bsd analysis. There isnt a magical contract fairy that creates infinite contracts for every company. Yes there are more fixed price contracts, but if you fuck up like Starliner you are less likely to get another one. And even if you could get it. Boeing peadership has clearly stated they are basically not really interested in that anymore. The have lost billions on fixed price contracts in space and military. Boeing has not been able to get much new from NASA. Their moon lander was basically embaracing. They are in the nee private station buissness much. One SLS gets finally mercy killed they will not be a prime contractor anymore.
        jiggawatts 2y ago
        > magical contract fairy I've never heard anyone call the federal government that.
        yencabulator 2y ago
        In a pre-SpaceX world, there pretty much was no one else they could lose the next contract to. I think a lot of Boeing still lives in a world where they have a good reputation to milk.
      - Tuna-Fish 2y ago
        This would make sense if the money was paid upfront. It wasn't. As of right now, Boeing is massively in the hole on the project. The only way they get paid if they successfully complete the development program and then fly the 6 operational flights.
    - burnished 2y ago
      That doesn't seem to actually be the case?
      - panick21_ 2y ago
        It is the case. Boeing is losing billions.
- Analemma_ 2y ago
  Boeing is too-big-to-fail in both civilian air travel and military procurement. They know they don’t have to give a shit, because the Federal government will always give them a slap on the wrist and another chance. They’ve literally forgotten how to compete deliver a working product on schedule, because for generations nobody has required them to do so.
  - spacecadet 2y ago
    It would be nice if the government did what they did with GM... Hostile take over, clean house, restart and eventually release. Maybe people have a negative impression of the GM take over, but it was the best option and "worked".
broknbottle 2y ago
Agile development at its finest. Boeing can prioritize in next spring and ship a “day 1” patch that is 100+ GB to fix the issues.
- throwway120385 2y ago
  Literally shipping a patch by rocket to the international space station.
- readthenotes1 2y ago
  What part of this program was agile development?
pedalpete 2y ago
What's the strategy for getting the astronauts back? Do they jettison the Starliner and dock a different recovery vehicle? Are those on stand-by ready to go?
- tjohns 2y ago
  Worst case, they could always use the other capsule that's docked to the ISS right now to get back. Though that would leave the current crew stranded up there until a replacement spacecraft can be sent. That takes several months. This has happened before. The Soyuz docked to the ISS in Dec 2022 was damaged by a micrometeorite strike and was deemed unsafe, leaving that crew essentially stuck up there until a new Soyuz was sent back up in Feb 2023. (The damaged Soyuz was later remotely flown back empty.)
  - paranoidrobot 2y ago
    > they could always use the other capsule This only works when you're talking about switching between the same system. Astronauts who flew up on Starliner can't just get into a Soyuz and fly home. Their space suits won't work, and they can't just borrow the other guy's - they're custom fit.
    - cameldrv 2y ago
      The space suits are custom fit, but if two astronauts are about the same height, I'd imagine you could make it fit and have it be safe if maybe uncomfortable. Worst case, you could always just not wear a space suit for the trip home. You only need the suit in the case where the capsule depressurizes but still survives reentry. To my knowledge this has only ever happened once. If they really need to leave the space station and there are available seats, this seems like a no brainer. It would be like evacuating from a tsunami in a car that didn't have seatbelts.
- paranoidrobot 2y ago
  > Are those on stand-by ready to go? Good News: There's no real risk to them remaining on ISS at this point, short of some major incident on the ISS itself which required immediate evacuation. Less good: Even if Boeing had a spare Starliner (they don't), they don't have a spare rocket to put it on. Even if Boeing had a spare fully stacked Starliner + Rocket, I'm not sure anyone (even Boeing) would trust their process to be agile enough to launch a recovery mission any time soon. So that leaves Russia's Soyuz and SpaceX's Crew Dragon. Using Soyuz would be a major political headache, aside from anything else. It'd require scrapping the next planned Soyuz mission - it may take several months to get that ready. I believe they have to (and would) have to send it up manned. Using Crew Dragon may be possible, No idea on where SpaceX is as with having refurbished/ready to go capsules on hand, but they have enough launch cadence that it may be possible. Space Suits then become a problem - they're specific to each launch vehicle, and customised for each wearer. So lead times there become an issue.
bogota 2y ago
At what point do we just completely lose faith in a company? First they screwed over the public and now our astronauts.
- akira2501 2y ago
  You should never have faith in a company. You should have faith in the regulatory process that constrains that company. If you see a spoiled child being a brat, do you blame the child?
  - redeeman 2y ago
    > You should have faith in the regulatory process that constrains that company. "Hello, im from the government and im here to help"
    - HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
      We need more government regulation of giant corps.
      - redeeman 2y ago
        i dont think we have any examples of that working out. In a utopian world it would, but then again, in such a world, is it needed? I think we need some much much stronger basic laws, like anti lying, anti fraud etc (but where crimes does NOT pay), and then POSSIBLY(not sure, havent thought that much about it) some form of mechanism to force companies to answer questions about their products/services/conduct
        Teever 2y ago
        So in your mind what was making Boeing not suck in the time before it sucked? Like there was a time when Boeing was pretty great, and now it's pretty shit. What happened? Could the loosening of oversight from the government have played a part in it?
minetest2048 2y ago
As much as I think Boeing screwed up, the title is a clickbait: > NASA is giving Boeing another four days, extending Wilmore and Williams' mission onboard the ISS from June 14 to no earlier than June 18, though it's unclear whether the leaks are to blame for the delay. No, no one have conclusively say that Starliner is stuck on ISS because of helium leak
- burnished 2y ago
  Could that be due to saving face? I poked around for more information and the best I could find was that they're going to be using at least some of the extended time to evaluate it for safety, though it was cleared for emergency evacuation (though I'm not sure what that means in space). I dunno. I do agree this is entirely clickbait. The author makes a couple implications but fails to make an argument or even really connect their observations and conclusions.
  - calciphus 2y ago
    I'm no expert, but I'd assume "cleared for emergency evacuation in space" means "if the alternative is imminent, certain death - this option is better".
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
johnea 2y ago
> Boeing has been through hell and back ? Unfortunately, several hundred boeing product users didn't get the opportunity to come back. After the numerous launch scrubs, this one way ticket to the ISS was already a distinct possiblity. Maybe boeing won't be able to bring these astronauts back either. From a wider persoective, this really highlights why human space travel should be minimized. Outside of teenage boy spaceman fantasy and various government's desire to start shooting people in space, there is very little reason.
- delichon 2y ago
  The fragility of this planet is a very large reason to learn to survive outside of our nest. The more fragile the more important.
  - exsomet 2y ago
    Not disagreeing with your point, and admittedly being a little bit pedantic, but I always laugh when people talk about the planet being in danger. The earth is going to be fine. It’s humans who are in danger.
    - bavell 2y ago
      > The earth is going to be fine. It’s humans who are in danger. Love this bit: https://youtu.be/7W33HRc1A6c?si=QQgZQ7WKAUDXsfMe https://youtu.be/7W33HRc1A6c?si=QQgZQ7WKAUDXsfMe
tim333 2y ago
I'm puzzled why they have helium leaks all over? I mean gas valves aren't really a new technology.
- cuSetanta 2y ago
  A certain leak rate is expected. Helium is a very small atom, and as such is used for leak testing of systems all the time. It is very good at finding gaps in a system. Obviously the leaks here are a lot more serious. My experience of significant leaks in spacecraft propulsion would lead me to believe that there are welding issues. It can be very difficult to weld some of the materials used in these system, adding to the fact that they are all bound to be very thin walled. Cracks in welds can be hard to find, although I would expect every weld in a system like this to be X-ray inspected, and maybe also penetrant tested. On the projects I have seen with issues like this, the main culprit has been steps in a procedure being skipped. Inspections signed off despite not being performed. I would highly doubt that this is the case here though, even with Boeings recent track record. Human spaceflight is treated different.
  - cameldrv 2y ago
    All of that granted, isn't this stuff tested on the ground? I guess vibration from the launch must have cracked the welds or something, but I'd have thought that if this were a concern that the parts would have been tested in a vibration chamber.
    - asadotzler 2y ago
      It was tested on the ground. That's where they found the first of the five leaks, but launched anyway.
      - cameldrv 2y ago
        I'll be very interested to read the report when this is all over.
    - cuSetanta 2y ago
justinclift 2y ago
Well, at least helium isn't explosive. Because with the way Boeing does things, that would be an actual problem.
me_me_me 2y ago
Every time i read one of those articles I get more and more respect for apollo team(s) That organization would be running circles around current rocket companies

44 points by hollasch 2y ago

I'm fascinated about starliner strictly from a project management perspective. This is such a comprehensive failure from top to bottom between the delays, test failures, and hand waved requirements yet there still seems to be a contingent of boosters from both leadership and the customer. Usually I'm the guy who gets called in to rescue a spiraling project and if I was in aerospace, I dont even know where I would begin here....

jiggawatts 2y ago
You see, there is this barrel, and it is full of pork. You work for a guy who wants that pork. He says: Go pick up some of the pork, cut a chunk off for yourself, and bring the rest to me. You do that every day. You both have a nice steady supply of pork. Some other person, who isn't you, and isn't your boss, or your boss's boss would like it if the barrel got into space. It doesn't, but that's okay because they have no power over you or your boss. Not to mention that both you and your boss both have some pork, so you're both happy whether or not the barrel goes into space. There is no problem here to solve. That's why you can't solve the problem. There isn't one. Everyone directly involved is very happy. You can't "fix" happy people.
- 14u2c 2y ago
  Except that this was a fixed price contract. If they don't get it right the pork train does come to an end.
  - jiggawatts 2y ago
    There will always be more fixed price contracts in the future. Every time the barrel emptied in the past, a new barrel full to the brim with pork was delivered.
    - panick21_ 2y ago
      That bsd analysis. There isnt a magical contract fairy that creates infinite contracts for every company. Yes there are more fixed price contracts, but if you fuck up like Starliner you are less likely to get another one. And even if you could get it. Boeing peadership has clearly stated they are basically not really interested in that anymore. The have lost billions on fixed price contracts in space and military. Boeing has not been able to get much new from NASA. Their moon lander was basically embaracing. They are in the nee private station buissness much. One SLS gets finally mercy killed they will not be a prime contractor anymore.
      - jiggawatts 2y ago
        > magical contract fairy I've never heard anyone call the federal government that.
      - yencabulator 2y ago
        In a pre-SpaceX world, there pretty much was no one else they could lose the next contract to. I think a lot of Boeing still lives in a world where they have a good reputation to milk.
    - Tuna-Fish 2y ago
      This would make sense if the money was paid upfront. It wasn't. As of right now, Boeing is massively in the hole on the project. The only way they get paid if they successfully complete the development program and then fly the 6 operational flights.
  - burnished 2y ago
    That doesn't seem to actually be the case?
    - panick21_ 2y ago
      It is the case. Boeing is losing billions.
Analemma_ 2y ago
Boeing is too-big-to-fail in both civilian air travel and military procurement. They know they don’t have to give a shit, because the Federal government will always give them a slap on the wrist and another chance. They’ve literally forgotten how to compete deliver a working product on schedule, because for generations nobody has required them to do so.
- spacecadet 2y ago
  It would be nice if the government did what they did with GM... Hostile take over, clean house, restart and eventually release. Maybe people have a negative impression of the GM take over, but it was the best option and "worked".

broknbottle 2y ago

Agile development at its finest. Boeing can prioritize in next spring and ship a “day 1” patch that is 100+ GB to fix the issues.

throwway120385 2y ago
Literally shipping a patch by rocket to the international space station.
readthenotes1 2y ago
What part of this program was agile development?

pedalpete 2y ago

What's the strategy for getting the astronauts back? Do they jettison the Starliner and dock a different recovery vehicle? Are those on stand-by ready to go?

tjohns 2y ago
Worst case, they could always use the other capsule that's docked to the ISS right now to get back. Though that would leave the current crew stranded up there until a replacement spacecraft can be sent. That takes several months. This has happened before. The Soyuz docked to the ISS in Dec 2022 was damaged by a micrometeorite strike and was deemed unsafe, leaving that crew essentially stuck up there until a new Soyuz was sent back up in Feb 2023. (The damaged Soyuz was later remotely flown back empty.)
- paranoidrobot 2y ago
  > they could always use the other capsule This only works when you're talking about switching between the same system. Astronauts who flew up on Starliner can't just get into a Soyuz and fly home. Their space suits won't work, and they can't just borrow the other guy's - they're custom fit.
  - cameldrv 2y ago
    The space suits are custom fit, but if two astronauts are about the same height, I'd imagine you could make it fit and have it be safe if maybe uncomfortable. Worst case, you could always just not wear a space suit for the trip home. You only need the suit in the case where the capsule depressurizes but still survives reentry. To my knowledge this has only ever happened once. If they really need to leave the space station and there are available seats, this seems like a no brainer. It would be like evacuating from a tsunami in a car that didn't have seatbelts.
paranoidrobot 2y ago
> Are those on stand-by ready to go? Good News: There's no real risk to them remaining on ISS at this point, short of some major incident on the ISS itself which required immediate evacuation. Less good: Even if Boeing had a spare Starliner (they don't), they don't have a spare rocket to put it on. Even if Boeing had a spare fully stacked Starliner + Rocket, I'm not sure anyone (even Boeing) would trust their process to be agile enough to launch a recovery mission any time soon. So that leaves Russia's Soyuz and SpaceX's Crew Dragon. Using Soyuz would be a major political headache, aside from anything else. It'd require scrapping the next planned Soyuz mission - it may take several months to get that ready. I believe they have to (and would) have to send it up manned. Using Crew Dragon may be possible, No idea on where SpaceX is as with having refurbished/ready to go capsules on hand, but they have enough launch cadence that it may be possible. Space Suits then become a problem - they're specific to each launch vehicle, and customised for each wearer. So lead times there become an issue.

bogota 2y ago

At what point do we just completely lose faith in a company? First they screwed over the public and now our astronauts.

akira2501 2y ago
You should never have faith in a company. You should have faith in the regulatory process that constrains that company. If you see a spoiled child being a brat, do you blame the child?
- redeeman 2y ago
  > You should have faith in the regulatory process that constrains that company. "Hello, im from the government and im here to help"
  - HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
    We need more government regulation of giant corps.
    - redeeman 2y ago
      i dont think we have any examples of that working out. In a utopian world it would, but then again, in such a world, is it needed? I think we need some much much stronger basic laws, like anti lying, anti fraud etc (but where crimes does NOT pay), and then POSSIBLY(not sure, havent thought that much about it) some form of mechanism to force companies to answer questions about their products/services/conduct
      - Teever 2y ago
        So in your mind what was making Boeing not suck in the time before it sucked? Like there was a time when Boeing was pretty great, and now it's pretty shit. What happened? Could the loosening of oversight from the government have played a part in it?

minetest2048 2y ago

As much as I think Boeing screwed up, the title is a clickbait: > NASA is giving Boeing another four days, extending Wilmore and Williams' mission onboard the ISS from June 14 to no earlier than June 18, though it's unclear whether the leaks are to blame for the delay. No, no one have conclusively say that Starliner is stuck on ISS because of helium leak

burnished 2y ago
Could that be due to saving face? I poked around for more information and the best I could find was that they're going to be using at least some of the extended time to evaluate it for safety, though it was cleared for emergency evacuation (though I'm not sure what that means in space). I dunno. I do agree this is entirely clickbait. The author makes a couple implications but fails to make an argument or even really connect their observations and conclusions.
- calciphus 2y ago
  I'm no expert, but I'd assume "cleared for emergency evacuation in space" means "if the alternative is imminent, certain death - this option is better".

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

johnea 2y ago

> Boeing has been through hell and back ? Unfortunately, several hundred boeing product users didn't get the opportunity to come back. After the numerous launch scrubs, this one way ticket to the ISS was already a distinct possiblity. Maybe boeing won't be able to bring these astronauts back either. From a wider persoective, this really highlights why human space travel should be minimized. Outside of teenage boy spaceman fantasy and various government's desire to start shooting people in space, there is very little reason.

delichon 2y ago
The fragility of this planet is a very large reason to learn to survive outside of our nest. The more fragile the more important.
- exsomet 2y ago
  Not disagreeing with your point, and admittedly being a little bit pedantic, but I always laugh when people talk about the planet being in danger. The earth is going to be fine. It’s humans who are in danger.
  - bavell 2y ago
    > The earth is going to be fine. It’s humans who are in danger. Love this bit: https://youtu.be/7W33HRc1A6c?si=QQgZQ7WKAUDXsfMe https://youtu.be/7W33HRc1A6c?si=QQgZQ7WKAUDXsfMe

tim333 2y ago

I'm puzzled why they have helium leaks all over? I mean gas valves aren't really a new technology.

cuSetanta 2y ago
A certain leak rate is expected. Helium is a very small atom, and as such is used for leak testing of systems all the time. It is very good at finding gaps in a system. Obviously the leaks here are a lot more serious. My experience of significant leaks in spacecraft propulsion would lead me to believe that there are welding issues. It can be very difficult to weld some of the materials used in these system, adding to the fact that they are all bound to be very thin walled. Cracks in welds can be hard to find, although I would expect every weld in a system like this to be X-ray inspected, and maybe also penetrant tested. On the projects I have seen with issues like this, the main culprit has been steps in a procedure being skipped. Inspections signed off despite not being performed. I would highly doubt that this is the case here though, even with Boeings recent track record. Human spaceflight is treated different.
- cameldrv 2y ago
  All of that granted, isn't this stuff tested on the ground? I guess vibration from the launch must have cracked the welds or something, but I'd have thought that if this were a concern that the parts would have been tested in a vibration chamber.
  - asadotzler 2y ago
    It was tested on the ground. That's where they found the first of the five leaks, but launched anyway.
    - cameldrv 2y ago
      I'll be very interested to read the report when this is all over.
  - cuSetanta 2y ago

justinclift 2y ago

Well, at least helium isn't explosive. Because with the way Boeing does things, that would be an actual problem.

me_me_me 2y ago

Every time i read one of those articles I get more and more respect for apollo team(s) That organization would be running circles around current rocket companies