3 ms·
That is fair. When a test fails you would also expect them to repeat the test before putting humans on, we will see if that happens.
by robryan 7y ago
That is fair. When a test fails you would also expect them to repeat the test before putting humans on, we will see if that happens.
- cmiles74 7y agoThe article in the Washington Post hinted that NASA might not require them to pass this particular test (automated approach to the ISS and docking). "It was unclear whether NASA would require Boeing to fly another test mission without crews onboard before allowing its astronauts to fly in the Starliner. Bridenstine said he wouldn’t rule out a mission with crews onboard, pointing out that the space shuttle had been piloted by astronauts, not computers."[0] While Boeing makes noises about how there's no systemic problem with their ability to write software in general, earlier in the same article NASA comes to their defense by pointing out that if the craft was manned then the test would have been... saved? That seems strong to me but that is word used in the quote. "NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine said at a news conference Friday that the failure would not have been life-threatening had astronauts been onboard. He said that had the spacecraft been crewed, the mission might have been saved. “They are trained to deal with a situation where the automation is not working according to plan,” he said." [0]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/12/20/boeing-starliner-launch/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/12/20/boeing-...
- bumby 7y agoDuring the post-event interview it was asked if testing docking was a hard requirement for NASA (with the implication the test would have to be redone before acceptance). The answer was no. If NASA wants this to be a new requirement they would likely have to pay extra for it