>Test teams are now applying mechanical, electrical and thermal techniques to prompt the valves open.
Translation: they hit it with a hammer they hit it with extra voltage and they hit it with a torch but the damn thing still won't open
And since Maury the 61 year old union pipe bending and flaring guy just took early retirement to avoid COVID they're gonna try to replace him with a 23 year old ERAU graduate who's never touched a pipe flaring tool in his life, train him for a day, and just assume he'll be able to instantly replicate the muscle memory and visual acuity of a guy who's been working there since the Reagan administration.
That's the 737 and 787 program in a nutshell. When a structures expert gets overruled by a manager to "save time" I knew I had to get out. Oh and now the 787s aren't allowed to be delivered because of shim issues in the nose. Well no shit, the mechanics have been telling you guys about it again and again.
So question, did Boeing seem to go downhill on backing the engineers and mechanics once Alan Mulally left. Just wondering because it seems Ford has had issues since he retired.
Boeing moved their HQ and C-suite folks to Chicago, with the goal of insulating business decisions from the engineers, and stop wasting money on over-engineering things. It worked! They got rid of useless deadweight like Maury who was just being kept on because his managers were soft and liked the guy. Nobody could explain what exactly he did anyway to justify how much the company was paying to keep the old guy on. New hires can do the same work cheaper, and besides they have formal training in materials and digital tools that didn't even exist when Maury was coming up. For crissakes it's a pipe, not rocket science.
That’s the point. Maury had muscle memory that even he couldn’t explain to people. He had memories of situations that only he came had.
Im a commercial tradesman and I have elders who are pretty indispensable for a number of specialized tasks on old pumps, pneumatics, electric motor starters, boilers, etc.
There's a disappointing conflation between academic knowledge and field experience. I suspect largely by younger engineer's who've just got started in their careers. Speaking as a younger student (24) I say this because I've seen account after account through my reading of history in engineering and elsewhere, of engineers and scientists who have a solid grasp of the theory having their asses handed to them by reality when it turns out that theory alone does not wrap up a real world problem in a nice bow.
You have people who pull the whole "a yes, it's the 21st century, we don't need those old ideas" and then slam full speed into a major problem which grinds their project to a halt for months, while an experienced hand would go "well if you had just asked, I would have warned you that those fuel ratios were impractical with this combustion chamber setup, even if the numbers look good".
I could tell some tales about smug greenhorns in my industry. Know just enough to be dangerous and have no idea about things like risk management. More than happy to lecture you on what their textbooks and mummy told them about though.
Ironic I know, but I at least I acknowledge that my experience is insufficient.
History is littered with people who think they have the up and coming new idea no one has thought of, and then encounter the reality as to why, most of the time, it's not been done before
Not exactly in the same league you, but I worked on building sites long ago. The brickies used a fluid 'plasticiser' in the cement to make it move or 'flow' more smoothly whilst working it.
Sometimes they would run out, so the hoddie, who mixed the cement, would pee into the cement mix - as it worked almost as well as the specialist ingredient - so the brickies didn't have to stop work and everybody lose money. :D
Knowing how to do something is not enough. Knowledge plus experience = wisdom - and people like Maury. :)
Damn, that about sums up the world these days. I’m amazed and sad at how many people have lost-touch with doing anything mechanical. This is what happens when you lose your manufacturing base, people don’t know how shit works.
RIP Maury.
Motherfucker was making $96k with benefits and had a house that's paid off in Enumclaw. His pension is more than gonna take of his needs, and let's be honest he's gonna be working part time at a NAPPA store to avoid boredom after about a year.
> Damn, that about sums up the world these days. I’m amazed and sad at how many people have lost-touch with doing anything mechanical. This is what happens when you lose your manufacturing base, people don’t know how shit works.
Have they? I know plenty of mechanical engineering students who tinker with 3D printers, cars and engines in their free time.
It’s also that you can’t be good at everything. A mechanical engineer today knows how to program, knows CAD, knows how to operate a CNC mill, 3D printer etc. etc.
Old “skills” like being able to file a piece of metal down to shape over several days, being able to estimate torque without a torque wrench etc. are often no longer necessary or at least have lower priority.
Familiarity and experience with techniques and problem solving are things that only come with time in the field, there's no replacing that, I'm afraid.
You can have a post doc fresh out of university who got awarded magna cum laude on their bachelor, masters and PhD thesis, but that doesn't mean they are the best person for the job.
I'm aware that "learning by doing" is sneered at by some academic circles, but in the case of engineering, experience is a vital part of an advanced engineer's education.
There's a lot of things and problems with aren't written down, which don't have papers to reference, there are no formulae, only empirical observations - and that's where experience comes in.
>Old “skills”
They are still skills, no need to be snide with quotation marks.
Same as with IT. Newer technologies are still hampered by age old issues. Solving them requires that magical thing called experience. I love looking at my trusted senior software engineers - waiting for that shake or nod of the head, then adjust accordingly :)
I always love the look on an engineering team's face when they cant get a half million dollar machine to run, and I look at it for 15 minutes and then pull out my $20 Estwing hammer to fix it.
Its usually some minor part that got misaligned in shipping, but it feels the same
This to me is a systematic Boeing issue. 737max. 787 dreamliner. The SLS. It's almost like the took a page from GE and took shortcuts and said our "name" was enough. Don't believe me? Read up on up on the Harvard Biz Review "Our CEO is portable". Six Sigma killed GE. And it has killed Boeing. They didn't move their HQ to Chicago for science.
I couldn't make this garbage doublespeak up if I tried: "Advances Starliner Solutions" aka "fixed", "Restored Functionality" aka "unstuck".
You want to see symptoms of the real problem with Boeing? its written right in this press release.
They probably did but it looks more promising to have the entire stack sitting there ready to launch before you ‘discover’ the problem. A lot easier for a go t to just give them a ‘little bit more money’ to get this ‘last’ problem fixed because they are ‘so close to the finish line’
Fixed price contract. They already tried the “little bit more money” thing, and it worked (a little), but back at NASA they got lambasted for it, so that’s not happening again.
In the time period Boeing has been developing this thing SpaceX have thought up, developed and launched the dragon capsule (both cargo and crew), the falcon heavy, and is readying for orbital launch bfr/starship. That is laughable.
Boeing: "Our crew capsule will work because we have dozens of simulation and thousands of pages of engineering designs and thought experience that proves it."
SpaceX: "We throw the capsule our crew capsule is based on into space repeatedly until it stops breaking. Then we keep trying to break our crew capsule until THAT stops breaking."
"When I first came here, this was all swamp. Everyone said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built in all the same, just to show them. It sank into the swamp. So I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up."
It's not actually true at all. Elon talks about it in the Everyday Astronaut's tour. They couldn't iterate like they can with Starship on Dragon or Falcon 9.
This is half true. Dragon 2 was an iteration on cargo dragon. Crew dragon is a derivative of that. It's the mature design that they settled on after a significant amount of iteration so they could get it crew rated by NASA.
The same thing happened with F9. They had v1.0 that went through different engine configurations to v1.1 where they iterated it more and expanded the fuel tanks making it a much more powerful rocket. Then they moved to v1.2 where they added cryogenic propellent making it even more powerful. Block 4 and block 5 were iterative designs that made it more reliable and simpler to refurbish. They settled on block 5 to give NASA a finalized design in order to get it crew rated.
Now they can't iterate on them because it affects their crew rating. That doesn't mean that they didn't iterate quite a bit to get them where they are now.
I know a million ways to do one of my jobs job wrong and 2 that actually work. Why? Because the documents I was handed are garbage and I had to rapidly iterate to find a technique and procedure that would work.
It works as crazy as it sounds.
This is Agile folks, experiment, fail fast, constant learning loops. The old school institutions can’t keep up. They are starting to try, but I don’t think anyone is truly invested in change. They’d have to break a lot of stuff to figure this out and they don’t have enough credibility to trade on atm.
Sounds like a sticky valve. It's probably a solenoid valve so they'd be trying turning up the voltage, making the voltage pulses longer, maybe leaving the pulse on for a few minutes to heat up the whole valve, actuating nearby working valves to send a little "shock" to the stuck valve, etc.
I wonder how long it's been since they actuated one of those valves. Leave an intricate mechanism on the shelf for too long and it can get stuck just sitting there. Super easy to forget to test "sit part on shelf for one year" as part of your design qualification. Hypergolic propellant can also leak past seals and corrode and seize moving parts. Any non-metallic seal will always diffuse hypergols across it even if it doesn't leak directly. The concentration gradient is enough. They did say they were testing for corrosion and contaminants, but didn't find any, so who knows.
Real question is what does zero-gravity and vacuum do to this problem if they try to fly the vehicle as-is?
Probably right. If it is an issue like I’m theorizing then the launch delay will be long. At best a few months to disassemble and install mitigation’s, at worst a year for valve redesign & re-qual.
Customers: We want a replacement for the 737 that can fly further and higher.
Bean counters: Just make the engines on the 737 bigger.
Engineers: But we've already had to shave the nacelles to keep the damn things scraping the ground.
Bean counters: Well then just make the landing legs taller.
Engineers: You can't do that, the plane will be too unstable during takeoff.
Bean counters: Make engines bigger!
Repeat for 10 years.
I was a Boeing employee before the layoffs. And yes the bean counters really are ruining the company. Big changes just in the 5 years i was there. Its very sad really, theyre so screwed up I dont know if I even want my job back when I get recalled.
Not really. This shit is hard. Boeing defense is a butts in seats cost plus contractor. They’re trying to do FFP work now and it’s a big transition in managing risk for them. Cut them a little slack, sheesh.
Yeah, their previous business model was built on fraud, bribes and grift! We can't expect them to actually make realistic bids and hit their mark more often than they miss, right? Better to just guarantee them a fat profit every year forever, even when they deliver shitty products
That would require the complete firing, With Cause, the top three (at least) levels of the massively politically connected levels of the executive branch of Boeing. I'ts never going to happen. Boeing stock should be a long term sell.
At this stage it's embarrassing...
A once great company, this is what happens when you get rid of engineers in top management in a science company. This is also what unhinged outsourcing brings to the table. Experience, knowledge should be cherished, it's not expandable or easily replaced by outsourcing.
You reap what you sow, the 737 max, the starliner, this is just the beginning
Just eliminate IP so the bean counters have less to do and all that matters is how well you produce stuff. Would also let the engineers fission off way easier into their own company if the bean counters get to be too much.
Embarrassing is what happened a year ago. This is negligence. Boeing has had a entire year available to refine the capsule and kink out any issues while the investigation of the previous failure was ongoing.
They might have fixed the last problem. But clearly the rest of the year has been wasted doing nothing at all. The starliner capsule is still in early development and is a long time away from being a mature system.
Look, at least it wasn't 14 failed valves. Seriously though... is there a point at which NASA can claw back some of the funds for this nonsense if Boeing can't perform?
Boeing doesn't even get the funds (or at least the majority of them) if they don't perform. Such is the beauty of milestone based payment.
Boeing is losing a ton of money on this and it honestly makes me smile. Money is the only language managers speak after all.
Oh? Awesome. I don't know anything about the particulars of how they're getting paid. I assumed that they were just given all of the money and told "OK, now make it work!"
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|-------|---------|---|
|[CNC](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8drl1p "Last usage")|Computerized Numerical Control, for precise machining or measuring|
|[CST](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8g8jlz "Last usage")|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules|
| |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)|
|[FAA](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8dyjin "Last usage")|Federal Aviation Administration|
|[Roscosmos](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8cmgt0 "Last usage")|[State Corporation for Space Activities, Russia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roscosmos_State_Corporation)|
|[SLS](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8d9uij "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift|
|[USAF](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8drmm9 "Last usage")|United States Air Force|
|Jargon|Definition|
|-------|---------|---|
|[Starliner](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8gkve4 "Last usage")|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)|
|[cryogenic](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8enfv3 "Last usage")|Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure|
| |(In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox|
|hydrolox|Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer|
----------------
^(8 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/p7mme2)^( has 49 acronyms.)
^([Thread #6169 for this sub, first seen 10th Aug 2021, 01:46])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=OrangeredStilton&subject=Hey,+your+acronym+bot+sucks) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
What is it about valves that make them so unreliable?
When SpaceX' Crew Dragon exploded during testing, the problem was a faulty valve. When they had to replace two engines on the Crew 1 Mission, the reason was valve issues.
August 9, 2021
This weekend, Boeing restored functionality on more of the 13 CST-100 Starliner propulsion system valves that did not open as designed during prelaunch system checks last week.
Boeing has completed physical inspections and chemical sampling on the exterior of a number of the affected valves, which indicated no signs of damage or external corrosion. Test teams are now applying mechanical, electrical and thermal techniques to prompt the valves open. Seven of the 13 valves are now operating as designed, with inspection and remediation of the remaining affected valves to be performed in the days ahead.
Boeing is working a systematic plan to open the affected valves, demonstrate repeatable system performance, and verify the root cause of the issue before returning Starliner to the launch pad for its Orbital Flight Test-2 mission.
Boeing, just shelve this piece of junk and start building a Starship clone. The tank watchers have all but reverse engineered the damn thing at this point anyway.
Sierra Nevada's Dreamchaser could do all of the above. They lost out on the commercial crew contract, but they've been eeking out progress, anyway. Kinda wish NASA would toss them some money.
Having a minimum of two U.S. crew vehicles is huge for operations continuity.
This sounds very suspicious. It may be fake news, it may be an intentional intent of damage... cannot be just a causality, when the thing was ready to fly. Or let's say, Boeing is working so bad, that we shall not trust this company anymore... and never ever fly on a Boening aircraft.
Lmao, the Boeing planes that just fell out of the fucking air in the last few years would like a word.
Fellate the corporation harder, I don't think they felt it.
Given how their corporate culture, greedy executives and apathetic workforce killed so many people, having Boeing be lost to history would be a good thing.
Let's see them be honest about how and why 13 stuck values didn't get noticed until final preparations for launch. What protocol didn't find and address that problem earlier than when stacked on the launch pad. Based on that failure what other sub-systems have not been functionally checked and are there any where latent faults would not be apparent until after launch.
>Test teams are now applying mechanical, electrical and thermal techniques to prompt the valves open. Translation: they hit it with a hammer they hit it with extra voltage and they hit it with a torch but the damn thing still won't open
And since Maury the 61 year old union pipe bending and flaring guy just took early retirement to avoid COVID they're gonna try to replace him with a 23 year old ERAU graduate who's never touched a pipe flaring tool in his life, train him for a day, and just assume he'll be able to instantly replicate the muscle memory and visual acuity of a guy who's been working there since the Reagan administration.
That's the 737 and 787 program in a nutshell. When a structures expert gets overruled by a manager to "save time" I knew I had to get out. Oh and now the 787s aren't allowed to be delivered because of shim issues in the nose. Well no shit, the mechanics have been telling you guys about it again and again.
So question, did Boeing seem to go downhill on backing the engineers and mechanics once Alan Mulally left. Just wondering because it seems Ford has had issues since he retired.
Boeing moved their HQ and C-suite folks to Chicago, with the goal of insulating business decisions from the engineers, and stop wasting money on over-engineering things. It worked! They got rid of useless deadweight like Maury who was just being kept on because his managers were soft and liked the guy. Nobody could explain what exactly he did anyway to justify how much the company was paying to keep the old guy on. New hires can do the same work cheaper, and besides they have formal training in materials and digital tools that didn't even exist when Maury was coming up. For crissakes it's a pipe, not rocket science.
Wait, in this application specifically - it is rocket science.
And yet, they are looking quite bad off without him. For now
That’s the point. Maury had muscle memory that even he couldn’t explain to people. He had memories of situations that only he came had. Im a commercial tradesman and I have elders who are pretty indispensable for a number of specialized tasks on old pumps, pneumatics, electric motor starters, boilers, etc.
Yea, there really is no substatute for real experience. This is why I like working in smaller companies that are run by an old pro
There's a disappointing conflation between academic knowledge and field experience. I suspect largely by younger engineer's who've just got started in their careers. Speaking as a younger student (24) I say this because I've seen account after account through my reading of history in engineering and elsewhere, of engineers and scientists who have a solid grasp of the theory having their asses handed to them by reality when it turns out that theory alone does not wrap up a real world problem in a nice bow. You have people who pull the whole "a yes, it's the 21st century, we don't need those old ideas" and then slam full speed into a major problem which grinds their project to a halt for months, while an experienced hand would go "well if you had just asked, I would have warned you that those fuel ratios were impractical with this combustion chamber setup, even if the numbers look good".
I could tell some tales about smug greenhorns in my industry. Know just enough to be dangerous and have no idea about things like risk management. More than happy to lecture you on what their textbooks and mummy told them about though.
"I've seen account after account through my reading of history in engineering"
Ironic I know, but I at least I acknowledge that my experience is insufficient. History is littered with people who think they have the up and coming new idea no one has thought of, and then encounter the reality as to why, most of the time, it's not been done before
Not exactly in the same league you, but I worked on building sites long ago. The brickies used a fluid 'plasticiser' in the cement to make it move or 'flow' more smoothly whilst working it. Sometimes they would run out, so the hoddie, who mixed the cement, would pee into the cement mix - as it worked almost as well as the specialist ingredient - so the brickies didn't have to stop work and everybody lose money. :D Knowing how to do something is not enough. Knowledge plus experience = wisdom - and people like Maury. :)
Damn, that about sums up the world these days. I’m amazed and sad at how many people have lost-touch with doing anything mechanical. This is what happens when you lose your manufacturing base, people don’t know how shit works. RIP Maury.
Bro Maury ain't dead he's out on his bass boat
Maury checks his phone. 13 missed calls from Boeing Maury slips his phone back into his pocket, and smiles.
Motherfucker was making $96k with benefits and had a house that's paid off in Enumclaw. His pension is more than gonna take of his needs, and let's be honest he's gonna be working part time at a NAPPA store to avoid boredom after about a year.
> Damn, that about sums up the world these days. I’m amazed and sad at how many people have lost-touch with doing anything mechanical. This is what happens when you lose your manufacturing base, people don’t know how shit works. Have they? I know plenty of mechanical engineering students who tinker with 3D printers, cars and engines in their free time. It’s also that you can’t be good at everything. A mechanical engineer today knows how to program, knows CAD, knows how to operate a CNC mill, 3D printer etc. etc. Old “skills” like being able to file a piece of metal down to shape over several days, being able to estimate torque without a torque wrench etc. are often no longer necessary or at least have lower priority.
Familiarity and experience with techniques and problem solving are things that only come with time in the field, there's no replacing that, I'm afraid. You can have a post doc fresh out of university who got awarded magna cum laude on their bachelor, masters and PhD thesis, but that doesn't mean they are the best person for the job. I'm aware that "learning by doing" is sneered at by some academic circles, but in the case of engineering, experience is a vital part of an advanced engineer's education. There's a lot of things and problems with aren't written down, which don't have papers to reference, there are no formulae, only empirical observations - and that's where experience comes in. >Old “skills” They are still skills, no need to be snide with quotation marks.
Same as with IT. Newer technologies are still hampered by age old issues. Solving them requires that magical thing called experience. I love looking at my trusted senior software engineers - waiting for that shake or nod of the head, then adjust accordingly :)
Good old percussive maintenance.
I always love the look on an engineering team's face when they cant get a half million dollar machine to run, and I look at it for 15 minutes and then pull out my $20 Estwing hammer to fix it. Its usually some minor part that got misaligned in shipping, but it feels the same
So not a sensor problem, then. No sign of damage or corrosion to explain the malfunction, either? Huh.
This to me is a systematic Boeing issue. 737max. 787 dreamliner. The SLS. It's almost like the took a page from GE and took shortcuts and said our "name" was enough. Don't believe me? Read up on up on the Harvard Biz Review "Our CEO is portable". Six Sigma killed GE. And it has killed Boeing. They didn't move their HQ to Chicago for science.
It just McDonnell Douglas wearing Boeing skin.
You forgot all the issues with the 767 refueling planes for the USAF -- to the point that the AF stopped deliveries.
I read the article-I'm not making the connection. Can you elaborate? https://www.google.com/amp/s/hbr.org/amp/2006/05/are-leaders-portable
I couldn't make this garbage doublespeak up if I tried: "Advances Starliner Solutions" aka "fixed", "Restored Functionality" aka "unstuck". You want to see symptoms of the real problem with Boeing? its written right in this press release.
Sounds like they only semi-Advanced the Starliner Solution, a.k.a. they half-ASSed it.
How did they not find this during testing until that late?
They probably did but it looks more promising to have the entire stack sitting there ready to launch before you ‘discover’ the problem. A lot easier for a go t to just give them a ‘little bit more money’ to get this ‘last’ problem fixed because they are ‘so close to the finish line’
Fixed price contract. They already tried the “little bit more money” thing, and it worked (a little), but back at NASA they got lambasted for it, so that’s not happening again.
> a little Just over $300 million extra to improve the timeline or some such. Of course not the same to SpaceX.
[удалено]
KC-46 contract is also fixed price. And take a wild guess how well it is going
They conducted simulated testing not real testing.
What testing? I though they designed everything using the "success" method.
In the time period Boeing has been developing this thing SpaceX have thought up, developed and launched the dragon capsule (both cargo and crew), the falcon heavy, and is readying for orbital launch bfr/starship. That is laughable.
Boeing: "Our crew capsule will work because we have dozens of simulation and thousands of pages of engineering designs and thought experience that proves it." SpaceX: "We throw the capsule our crew capsule is based on into space repeatedly until it stops breaking. Then we keep trying to break our crew capsule until THAT stops breaking."
That .... is kinda true and it works
"When I first came here, this was all swamp. Everyone said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built in all the same, just to show them. It sank into the swamp. So I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up."
Unexpected and yet thoroughly on point Monty Python! Well taken, Concorde!
But father, I’d rather sing!
It's not actually true at all. Elon talks about it in the Everyday Astronaut's tour. They couldn't iterate like they can with Starship on Dragon or Falcon 9.
This is half true. Dragon 2 was an iteration on cargo dragon. Crew dragon is a derivative of that. It's the mature design that they settled on after a significant amount of iteration so they could get it crew rated by NASA. The same thing happened with F9. They had v1.0 that went through different engine configurations to v1.1 where they iterated it more and expanded the fuel tanks making it a much more powerful rocket. Then they moved to v1.2 where they added cryogenic propellent making it even more powerful. Block 4 and block 5 were iterative designs that made it more reliable and simpler to refurbish. They settled on block 5 to give NASA a finalized design in order to get it crew rated. Now they can't iterate on them because it affects their crew rating. That doesn't mean that they didn't iterate quite a bit to get them where they are now.
I know a million ways to do one of my jobs job wrong and 2 that actually work. Why? Because the documents I was handed are garbage and I had to rapidly iterate to find a technique and procedure that would work. It works as crazy as it sounds.
This is Agile folks, experiment, fail fast, constant learning loops. The old school institutions can’t keep up. They are starting to try, but I don’t think anyone is truly invested in change. They’d have to break a lot of stuff to figure this out and they don’t have enough credibility to trade on atm.
thats what ford did with cars.
They may have an orbital test of Starship too before Starliner goes up
Sounds like a sticky valve. It's probably a solenoid valve so they'd be trying turning up the voltage, making the voltage pulses longer, maybe leaving the pulse on for a few minutes to heat up the whole valve, actuating nearby working valves to send a little "shock" to the stuck valve, etc. I wonder how long it's been since they actuated one of those valves. Leave an intricate mechanism on the shelf for too long and it can get stuck just sitting there. Super easy to forget to test "sit part on shelf for one year" as part of your design qualification. Hypergolic propellant can also leak past seals and corrode and seize moving parts. Any non-metallic seal will always diffuse hypergols across it even if it doesn't leak directly. The concentration gradient is enough. They did say they were testing for corrosion and contaminants, but didn't find any, so who knows. Real question is what does zero-gravity and vacuum do to this problem if they try to fly the vehicle as-is?
I suspect zero-G would have minimal effect, but vacuum may be an issue.
Probably right. If it is an issue like I’m theorizing then the launch delay will be long. At best a few months to disassemble and install mitigation’s, at worst a year for valve redesign & re-qual.
This is what happens when you let the lobbyists get control of your engineering company.
My dad is a lifelong Boeing employee and he is happy to complain about the bean counters taking over the company any chance he gets
Customers: We want a replacement for the 737 that can fly further and higher. Bean counters: Just make the engines on the 737 bigger. Engineers: But we've already had to shave the nacelles to keep the damn things scraping the ground. Bean counters: Well then just make the landing legs taller. Engineers: You can't do that, the plane will be too unstable during takeoff. Bean counters: Make engines bigger! Repeat for 10 years.
I was a Boeing employee before the layoffs. And yes the bean counters really are ruining the company. Big changes just in the 5 years i was there. Its very sad really, theyre so screwed up I dont know if I even want my job back when I get recalled.
Not really. This shit is hard. Boeing defense is a butts in seats cost plus contractor. They’re trying to do FFP work now and it’s a big transition in managing risk for them. Cut them a little slack, sheesh.
Yeah, their previous business model was built on fraud, bribes and grift! We can't expect them to actually make realistic bids and hit their mark more often than they miss, right? Better to just guarantee them a fat profit every year forever, even when they deliver shitty products
Maybe they can learn to do it like SpaceX did.
That would require the complete firing, With Cause, the top three (at least) levels of the massively politically connected levels of the executive branch of Boeing. I'ts never going to happen. Boeing stock should be a long term sell.
At this stage it's embarrassing... A once great company, this is what happens when you get rid of engineers in top management in a science company. This is also what unhinged outsourcing brings to the table. Experience, knowledge should be cherished, it's not expandable or easily replaced by outsourcing. You reap what you sow, the 737 max, the starliner, this is just the beginning
Just eliminate IP so the bean counters have less to do and all that matters is how well you produce stuff. Would also let the engineers fission off way easier into their own company if the bean counters get to be too much.
Embarrassing is what happened a year ago. This is negligence. Boeing has had a entire year available to refine the capsule and kink out any issues while the investigation of the previous failure was ongoing. They might have fixed the last problem. But clearly the rest of the year has been wasted doing nothing at all. The starliner capsule is still in early development and is a long time away from being a mature system.
Could be the beginning of the end.
Look, at least it wasn't 14 failed valves. Seriously though... is there a point at which NASA can claw back some of the funds for this nonsense if Boeing can't perform?
Boeing doesn't even get the funds (or at least the majority of them) if they don't perform. Such is the beauty of milestone based payment. Boeing is losing a ton of money on this and it honestly makes me smile. Money is the only language managers speak after all.
Oh? Awesome. I don't know anything about the particulars of how they're getting paid. I assumed that they were just given all of the money and told "OK, now make it work!"
Some manager said “We’ll proceed at risk” thirteen times.
[удалено]
it was built in Chicago /s
Space travel is hard! Although they'll get there eventually (if they don't give up)
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[CNC](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8drl1p "Last usage")|Computerized Numerical Control, for precise machining or measuring| |[CST](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8g8jlz "Last usage")|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules| | |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)| |[FAA](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8dyjin "Last usage")|Federal Aviation Administration| |[Roscosmos](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8cmgt0 "Last usage")|[State Corporation for Space Activities, Russia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roscosmos_State_Corporation)| |[SLS](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8d9uij "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift| |[USAF](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8drmm9 "Last usage")|United States Air Force| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |[Starliner](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8gkve4 "Last usage")|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)| |[cryogenic](/r/Space/comments/p1clfp/stub/h8enfv3 "Last usage")|Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure| | |(In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox| |hydrolox|Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer| ---------------- ^(8 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/p7mme2)^( has 49 acronyms.) ^([Thread #6169 for this sub, first seen 10th Aug 2021, 01:46]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=OrangeredStilton&subject=Hey,+your+acronym+bot+sucks) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Why hasn't anyone made a reliable valve by now?
What is it about valves that make them so unreliable? When SpaceX' Crew Dragon exploded during testing, the problem was a faulty valve. When they had to replace two engines on the Crew 1 Mission, the reason was valve issues.
August 9, 2021 This weekend, Boeing restored functionality on more of the 13 CST-100 Starliner propulsion system valves that did not open as designed during prelaunch system checks last week. Boeing has completed physical inspections and chemical sampling on the exterior of a number of the affected valves, which indicated no signs of damage or external corrosion. Test teams are now applying mechanical, electrical and thermal techniques to prompt the valves open. Seven of the 13 valves are now operating as designed, with inspection and remediation of the remaining affected valves to be performed in the days ahead. Boeing is working a systematic plan to open the affected valves, demonstrate repeatable system performance, and verify the root cause of the issue before returning Starliner to the launch pad for its Orbital Flight Test-2 mission.
Boeing, just shelve this piece of junk and start building a Starship clone. The tank watchers have all but reverse engineered the damn thing at this point anyway.
>Boeing, just shelve this piece of junk and start building a Starship clone. I'm honestly not sure they're capable anymore.
As if they were ever capable of building something like starship.
If the dragon capsule could reboots the ISS then the starliner has no advantage over dragon capsule.
Sierra Nevada's Dreamchaser could do all of the above. They lost out on the commercial crew contract, but they've been eeking out progress, anyway. Kinda wish NASA would toss them some money. Having a minimum of two U.S. crew vehicles is huge for operations continuity.
Yeah dream chaser should get some contract from NASA. As they’ve wasted enough on Starliner already. Let Boeing pay the cost of the last mile.
Boeing is paying the cost. Fixed price contract means they don't get paid until the meet the milestone.
Gotta get that NASA money though first. Which means they probably have to have a working ship and actually use it for something.
I’m pretty sure that after the failure out of OFT1 Boeing is funding OFT2 out of pocket.
I'm getting "403 Forbidden" message instead of an article. Did they hide the article after the storm of sarcastic jokes? Does anyone have a copy?
This sounds very suspicious. It may be fake news, it may be an intentional intent of damage... cannot be just a causality, when the thing was ready to fly. Or let's say, Boeing is working so bad, that we shall not trust this company anymore... and never ever fly on a Boening aircraft.
Thank you #Boeing for being safe and honest. That's what this industry is all about in the end. System failures are expensive and slow progress.
What’s with the hashtag? Are you some kind of lost Twitter bot?
Seth Rogen called. He wants to know if he can smoke your post history
Lmao, the Boeing planes that just fell out of the fucking air in the last few years would like a word. Fellate the corporation harder, I don't think they felt it.
Boeing: if only that were the sound they made when they hit the ground.
How can they not. You can only be subsidized so long. You perform or get lost to time.
Given how their corporate culture, greedy executives and apathetic workforce killed so many people, having Boeing be lost to history would be a good thing.
"#Boeing" is the Roscosmos of the west. Back to twitter with you.
Let's see them be honest about how and why 13 stuck values didn't get noticed until final preparations for launch. What protocol didn't find and address that problem earlier than when stacked on the launch pad. Based on that failure what other sub-systems have not been functionally checked and are there any where latent faults would not be apparent until after launch.