Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday July 04 2022, @07:39AM   Printer-friendly
from the sailing-away-on-a-liner dept.

Yes, Boeing's Starliner spacecraft really could fly astronauts this year:

Five weeks have passed since Boeing's Starliner spacecraft returned from a largely successful test flight to the International Space Station, and the company continues to review data from the mission alongside engineers from NASA.

So far, there have been no showstoppers. In fact, sources say, the relatively clean performance of Starliner has increased the possibility that the vehicle could make its first crewed flight this year in December.

This mission, called the Crew Flight Test, will likely carry two astronauts to the space station. If successful, it would clear the way for long-duration, operational missions to the space station in 2023 and give NASA a much-coveted second means of getting astronauts into space.

Two weeks ago, NASA publicly announced that veteran astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams would serve as the prime crew for this test flight. NASA also said a short-duration mission with two astronaut test pilots is sufficient to meet all of the test objectives for the flight test. However, the agency added, this mission could be extended or shortened based on the staffing needs of the station. For example, NASA said it might even add an astronaut and extend the mission if the need arose.

Based on NASA's internal schedules, however, it appears the agency may opt for a shorter six-day trip. On a revised schedule this week, the Starliner test flight showed a December 8 launch date, with a subsequent docking at the space station from December 9 to December 14.

This date is far from written in stone. It is subject to adjustment for a variety of reasons, including the ongoing review of data from Starliner's first test flight in May, as well as docking port availability on the space station. However, that such a date is now appearing on the schedule indicates a reasonable possibility that Starliner will make a second flight this year.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 04 2022, @08:52AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 04 2022, @08:52AM (#1257983)

    Carbonized astronauts, posthumously awarded the Medal of Freedom.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 05 2022, @09:06PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 05 2022, @09:06PM (#1258375)

      As sketchy as Starliner is, Artemis II will be so much worse.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 04 2022, @11:06AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 04 2022, @11:06AM (#1257998)

    Don't forget to keep your life insurance paid up. As the old saying goes: "Boeing... when you've absolutely, positively, got to get there or die trying".

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 05 2022, @09:12PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 05 2022, @09:12PM (#1258377)

      Because the alternative is Scarebus. (Misses the old, pre-MD-merger Boeing)

  • (Score: 2) by crafoo on Monday July 04 2022, @01:31PM (1 child)

    by crafoo (6639) on Monday July 04 2022, @01:31PM (#1258010)

    LMAO

    • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday July 04 2022, @09:38PM

      by Immerman (3985) on Monday July 04 2022, @09:38PM (#1258094)

      Come now, they COULD.

      Just like they could have last year. Or the year before that... Or way back in 2015 when it was originally contracted to be ready. All they have to do is get all the not-particularly-innovative technology working properly. By next year for sure. Or maybe the year after that...

      You've got to wonder what it will take to get NASA to stop shoveling money at these clowns.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Opportunist on Monday July 04 2022, @01:40PM (4 children)

    by Opportunist (5545) on Monday July 04 2022, @01:40PM (#1258012)

    Make the crew for the first trip the board of directors. You bet your ass that the security will be through the roof.

    • (Score: 4, Funny) by turgid on Monday July 04 2022, @04:58PM (1 child)

      by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 04 2022, @04:58PM (#1258054) Journal

      There is a story that when the Boeing 747 was under development there was a problem with the engines, which had been newly developed for the project by Pratt and Whitney. When the engines went through a particular range of RPMs they would often explode.

      One day the CEO of Pratt and Whitney was invited for a test flight with Boeing's chief test pilot to demonstrate the problem.

      When at a suitable altitude, he increased the power of engine number 1, which exploded.

      He then increased the power of engine number 2, which also exploded.

      Then he reached for the throttle of engine number 3 and asked the Pratt and Whitney guy whether he'd like to see that one too. Needless to say, he was already convinced.

      The problem was that the combustion chamber walls were too flimsy and flexed when the pressure got to a certain level and caused a explosion.

      • (Score: 4, Touché) by janrinok on Monday July 04 2022, @07:06PM

        by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 04 2022, @07:06PM (#1258072) Journal

        That's the way to win an argument!

    • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday July 04 2022, @09:45PM (1 child)

      by Immerman (3985) on Monday July 04 2022, @09:45PM (#1258096)

      Shoot, lets fix the perpetually slipping schedules while we're at it. Require the Board to fly on the scheduled completion date for any vehicle - whether it's ready or not.

      Now, I don't imagine that would actually get the thing flight worthy a whole lot sooner - but it would hopefully get them to propose a realistic timeline, instead of claiming "we can get this done in four years", and have it still not flight worthy almost a decade later. Let NASA/Congress choose bids based on actual time frames, rather than ridiculously optimistic "estimates" whose only goal seems to be to secure contracts that wil become too expensive to cancel.

      • (Score: 2) by turgid on Tuesday July 05 2022, @09:15PM

        by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday July 05 2022, @09:15PM (#1258378) Journal

        The problem isn't just the timeline concocted by the PHBs, which is always wrong, but also that they insist on telling the engineers how to do it "to keep them focused instead of wasting time on enjoyable engineer stuff." When engineers say a problem needs investigating and solving, PHBs take it to mean that undemocratic Marxist lazy engineers want to have fun playing with toys instead of making profits for the business,

  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 04 2022, @05:04PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 04 2022, @05:04PM (#1258055)

    The picture of the landing was a trip back in time. Just like everything in Hollywood is a remake, we have the "new" Apollo II. Next time land them in the Salton Sea, for better authenticity, the ocean would be better still, landing in the desert is too much like Russia/China, and we hate them, right?

(1)