4 ms·

While there are concerns with the bidding process, I think this is a pretty big "nothing", in the grand scheme. There is some pretty horrific anti-Boeing spin.

While there are concerns with the bidding process, I think this is a pretty big "nothing", in the grand scheme. There is some pretty horrific anti-Boeing spin. > Throughout this spring, NASA and Boeing had been working toward a July launch date of the spacecraft, which will carry two astronauts for the first time. > Asked whether Starliner might be able to launch this year, Stich did not offer a concrete timetable. "We're not really ready to talk about a launch opportunity yet," he said. "We're going to work the technical issues first, and then we'll sit down with the Boeing team when the time is right and pick a launch target." Reasonable and responsible as a response. However, Ars spins that response into: > Such an answer suggests that Starliner's launch on an Atlas V rocket ... may very well slip into 2024. I mean, a few month delay on a brand new space vehicle isn't "OMG, Boeing failed!" But even that is not enough: Ars doubles down, and now NASA's refusal to provide a concrete updated launch date means not only is it "[slipping] into 2024", but apparently almost to 2025: > Given the ongoing delays, it is now possible that Crew-9 flies next fall, before Boeing's first operational mission, Starliner-1. Which is hilarious (ambiguity about launches) as NASA doesn't even know when in 2024 (except that it will be at least Spring) Crew-EIGHT will launch... (and neither NASA nor SpaceX itself has made any communication on Crew-9 launch timeframes.) All 100% speculation. The "ongoing delays" in this context are "in June, Boeing announced that it would push back the July launch". I also question Ars' framing of this as "losing money"... it's R&D expenditures. Ars (and its Space editor, Eric Berger, who has written books about SpaceX) are pretty heavy proponents of SpaceX (which I generally am too, despite being less enthusiastic about its leader), and this article just reeks of subjective opinion, more so than objective neutrality.

adolph 3y ago
> > Such an answer suggests that Starliner's launch on an Atlas V rocket ... may very well slip into 2024. > I mean, a few month delay on a brand new space vehicle isn't "OMG, Boeing failed!" Atlas V . . . is America's longest-serving active rocket. In August 2021, ULA announced that Atlas V would be retired, and all 29 remaining launches had been sold.[ As of 10 November 2022, 19 launches remain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  The Atlas V has absolutely nothing to do with the launch delay. The "brand new space vehicle" is the Starliner. > that there were two serious issues with Starliner. One of these involved the "soft links" in the lines that connect the Starliner capsule to its parachutes, and the second problem came with hundreds of feet of P-213 glass cloth tape inside the spacecraft
  - imglorp 3y ago
    July CST-100 issues, announced right before a CREWed mission: * parachute "load limit data wasn’t correct and restest showed failure at a loading point" * wiring tape "flammable and will need to be replaced" * thrusters again: "Boeing also found more valve problems on the Crewed Flight Test capsule, as they were getting ready to load propellants onboard." These are all serious human safety issues; any could be fatal. If I worked at NASA, I'd ask for gold plated resolution of these before an astronaut goes near CST-100. source: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2023/06/twis-20230602/#more-94010 https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2023/06/twis-20230602/#more-...
  - Symmetry 3y ago
    Atlas V is also a ULA rather than a Boeing rocket. I'd be much more eager to trust my life to a ULA space vehicle than a Boeing one.
    - tekla 3y ago
      ULA is half Boeing
      - panick21_ 3y ago
        Yeah but Boeing brought the Delta into the marriage and LM brought Atlas. Pretty clear who brought to good stuff.
        mcpackieh 3y ago
housemusicfan 3y ago
> this article just reeks of subjective opinion, more so than objective neutrality The comments section of any Ars Starliner article is a must-read for me. These guys were devout Boeing haters and would endlessly praise SpaceX - that is, until Elon become public enemy #1 last year and they suddenly and abruptly shifted their hate and derision the other way. Not a single independent thought on that entire forum, unless you sort by most critical and painstakingly weed through the hidden comments. The articles are crafted to be red meat for their core readership. At least The Register is unashamedly a tabloid and doesn't pretend they're not. Interesting to see how they spin this.
- evandale 3y ago
  The haters don't want to admit space flight is really really hard and Elon, excuse my language, fucking nailed it. Richard Branson is a billionaire who tried to do spaceflight long before Elon and Virgin Galactic hasn't launched anything useful (before SpaceX) as far as I know. If someone thinks a suborbital flight is impressive I highly recommend them to play KSP and find out how easy that is compared to getting into orbit. edit: they have reached orbit; I stopped following Virgin after it became clear they can't do the job https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LauncherOne https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LauncherOne So many people want to erroneously believe Elon is some child with the mental capacity of a 3 year old with access to billions of dollars because they don't want to like him or give him credit for anything. It takes more than a pile of money to run a successful space program and how nobody can see that by now is beyond me.
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    > So many people want to erroneously believe Elon is some child with the mental capacity of a 3 year old with access to billions of dollars because they don't want to like him or give him credit for anything. I think the contrast between Musk's SpaceX and Twitter experiences is largely down to whether the organization grew up around Musk. SpaceX has an immune system built up for the nutty stuff, from Gwynne Shotwell on down. Twitter got thrown into the deep end with zero staff powerful enough or with the experience to do the post-idea cleanup work. It's a huge mistake to say "Elon had nothing to do with SpaceX's success". It's also a huge mistake to say "SpaceX's success means Musk's Twitter plans are good".
dotnet00 3y ago
Berger has a pretty good record with the estimated NETs. There have been several cases of him stating that a launch has been pushed back with a bunch of public pushback from others, only for him to turn out to have been pretty close.
briffle 3y ago
> I mean, a few month delay on a brand new space vehicle isn't "OMG, Boeing failed!" > But even that is not enough: Ars doubles down, and now NASA's refusal to provide a concrete updated launch date means not only is it "[slipping] into 2024", but apparently almost to 2025: A few month delay? It was originally supposed to fly in 2017. with Crews in 2020.
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  And SpaceX Crew-1 was originally supposed to fly in November 2016, and was then delayed a year, and then another two years, and then another year, finally flying in November 2020.
  - tekla 3y ago
    It was delayed the same amount of time as Starliner initially. Now Dragon is operational, and Starliner still isn't done with the final design/assembly of it.
ktpecot 3y ago
Well Starliner was originally contracted to be certified in 2017. So a few month slip on top of the 5+ year slip already maybe justifies some of the skepticism from ARS
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  Would be nice to see some of that skepticism applied to Crew-1, when it slipped 4 years, but Ars treated SpaceX announcements as gospel truth. Hell, the launch article for Crew-1 (https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/11/weather-permitting-todays-the-day-crew-dragon-flies-four-people-into-space/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/11/weather-permitting-t...) literally did not once mention that that launch was delayed, let alone 3 separate year+ delays. Just about SpaceX "saving" NASA from "wandering around in the wilderness with no access to space".
  - tekla 3y ago
    Except Crew-1 Happened in 2020, Staliner-1 has been delayed until probably late 2023, 2024. Demo-1 Happened before OFT-1. They both started at similar times and also their delayed missions were delayed by similar amounts initially. By all accounts, Starliner is behind is every possible way with much greater funding than SpaceX. SpaceX is at Crew 7, Starliner isn't even close to Starliner-1
    - FireBeyond 3y ago
      > By all accounts, Starliner is behind is every possible way with much greater funding than SpaceX. That's only true if you assume SpaceX strictly allocated budgets per program and that no revenue from their other missions have gone to the crewed flight programs. I'm not saying Spaceliner is a success, or that there are arguments to be made about each company's approach (you could argue that while Boeing's approach seems relatively glacial, Boeing also has far fewer smoking craters and damaged barges than SpaceX). None of that removes the fairly evident bias that Ars can be counted on to spin anything SpaceX in a positive manner (a la ignoring years of delays to talk of SpaceX saving the day for NASA, while a refusal to commit to a launch date following a just discovered issue for Boeing immediately implies more years of delays).
krisoft 3y ago
> I mean, a few month delay on a brand new space vehicle isn't "OMG, Boeing failed!" The hubub is not about the few more months of delay just anounced. The starliner and the dragon 2 started development around the same time to deliver about the same thing. The first crewed dragon 2 launched in 16 November 2020. It is not about the months of delay, but the years.
- Retric 3y ago
  Those were largely delays in funding (4+ years) not just the actual program. “In July 2010, Boeing stated that the capsule could be operational as early as 2015 with sufficient near-term approvals and funding.” “On September 16, 2014, NASA chose Boeing (Starliner) and SpaceX (Crew Dragon) as the two companies to be funded to develop systems to transport U.S. government crews to and from the International Space Station.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Starliner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Starliner
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    Scroll down to the "testing" bit. The pad abort test resulted in a parachute not working - they forgot a pin. https://spacenews.com/missing-pin-blamed-for-boeing-pad-abort-parachute-anomaly/ https://spacenews.com/missing-pin-blamed-for-boeing-pad-abor... The first orbital test failed to reach the ISS because it accidentally burned too much propellant. A second error nearly made it burn up on reentry and had to be fixed in orbit. The second orbital test failed to launch because the craft's valves couldn't handle humidity (despite being designed to launch from Florida). When it finally went (after a complete rebuild of those valves), multiple thrusters from two different systems failed in orbit. The third orbital test - the first crewed - has been now indefinitely delayed. It is well behind schedule.
    - Retric 3y ago
      You’re skipping over the bit where “After analysis and corrective actions it was launched on May 19, 2022, and completed a successful mission to the ISS, clearing the way for the crewed flight test.” They had an initial failure, and 1 delayed but successful mission. The 3rd mission is again delayed, that’s fairly normal for manned spacecraft. Rocket science is hard, news at 11…
bell-cot 3y ago
Objective reality seems to be that SpaceX's first (successful) crewed flight (to the ISS) was completed a bit over 3 years ago now. And SpaceX is well into its 6th operational NASA ISS mission since then. Vs. Boeing still has not finish assembling a Starliner capsule that meets NASA's safety spec's. Right now, "speculation" is saying that Boeing will ever successfully fly a Starliner mission.
- FreshStart 3y ago
  So money claw back and hand it to SpaceX?
  - throwawaymobule 3y ago
    Probably blue origin. NASA wants more than one supplier, for as much as possible.
    - ericcumbee 3y ago
      At this point it is probably going to be a human rated Dream chaser. they were the 1st looser in the original commercial crew contract. They seem to be on track for a test launch later this year for Commercial Resupply.
    - rst 3y ago
      Blue Origin is another company that talks a good game, but they've yet to put anything in orbit. If NASA is casting about for a second supplier, there were other rejected bidders on the current human space transport contracts (e.g., Sierra Space's Dream Chaser, still under development in a cargo variant) which seem less risky.
  - bell-cot 3y ago
    IANAL...but I'd give 100:1 odds that the NASA/Boeing contract does not give Uncle Sam the power to do that.
signatoremo 3y ago
Boeing was awarded the crew contract at the same time as SpaceX in 2014. The first crew mission was Dragon in May 2020. Fast forward 4 years, seven NASA and three private crews have flown on Dragon. None on Starliner. Can you say with a straight face that it isn't a serious delay? A few months, really? Keep in mind that Boeing was awarded $4.2B, compared to $2.9B for SpaceX, for the same number of flights. Not to mention that NASA was accused of favor treatment for Boeing during the development phase - See What we found section of [0] > Which is hilarious (ambiguity about launches) as NASA doesn't even know when in 2024 (except that it will be at least Spring) Crew-EIGHT will launch... (and neither NASA nor SpaceX itself has made any communication on Crew-9 launch timeframes.) Such is an ignorant take. The rotation of ISS mission is currently 6 months, so there are always two missions a year, in the Spring and the Fall, barring extraordinary circumstance such as with Soyuz MS-10. Crew-8 will fly in the Spring, to be followed by the first Starliner operational flight. However if Starliner upcoming test flight continue to be delayed it's entirely possible that Crew 9 will fly instead. > I also question Ars' framing of this as "losing money"... it's R&D expenditures. It's not Ars' framing. It's common knowledge - [1], and reported by Boeing itself - [2] Boeing on Wednesday reported a $257 million charge in the second quarter for its Starliner astronaut spacecraft program, bringing the program’s to-date overrun costs to $1.5 billion as delays continue. The aerospace giant blamed the charge on its decision last month to indefinitely delay the first crewed Starliner launch. > and this article just reeks of subjective opinion, more so than objective neutrality. The article is very short. Everyone should read and judge for themselves. I think it's mostly matter of fact without sensational takes. Can't say the same about your post (horrific anti-Boeing/reeks/hilarious). [0] - https://oig.nasa.gov/docs/IG-20-005.pdf https://oig.nasa.gov/docs/IG-20-005.pdf [1] - https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/26/boeing-has-lost-1point5-billion-developing-starliner-spacecraft-for-nasa.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/26/boeing-has-lost-1point5-bill... [2] - https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2023-07-26-Boeing-Reports-Second-Quarter-Results https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2023-07-26-Boeing-Reports-Secon...

adolph 3y ago

> > Such an answer suggests that Starliner's launch on an Atlas V rocket ... may very well slip into 2024. > I mean, a few month delay on a brand new space vehicle isn't "OMG, Boeing failed!" Atlas V . . . is America's longest-serving active rocket. In August 2021, ULA announced that Atlas V would be retired, and all 29 remaining launches had been sold.[ As of 10 November 2022, 19 launches remain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_V

FireBeyond 3y ago
The Atlas V has absolutely nothing to do with the launch delay. The "brand new space vehicle" is the Starliner. > that there were two serious issues with Starliner. One of these involved the "soft links" in the lines that connect the Starliner capsule to its parachutes, and the second problem came with hundreds of feet of P-213 glass cloth tape inside the spacecraft
- imglorp 3y ago
  July CST-100 issues, announced right before a CREWed mission: * parachute "load limit data wasn’t correct and restest showed failure at a loading point" * wiring tape "flammable and will need to be replaced" * thrusters again: "Boeing also found more valve problems on the Crewed Flight Test capsule, as they were getting ready to load propellants onboard." These are all serious human safety issues; any could be fatal. If I worked at NASA, I'd ask for gold plated resolution of these before an astronaut goes near CST-100. source: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2023/06/twis-20230602/#more-94010 https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2023/06/twis-20230602/#more-...
- Symmetry 3y ago
  Atlas V is also a ULA rather than a Boeing rocket. I'd be much more eager to trust my life to a ULA space vehicle than a Boeing one.
  - tekla 3y ago
    ULA is half Boeing
    - panick21_ 3y ago
      Yeah but Boeing brought the Delta into the marriage and LM brought Atlas. Pretty clear who brought to good stuff.
      - mcpackieh 3y ago

housemusicfan 3y ago

> this article just reeks of subjective opinion, more so than objective neutrality The comments section of any Ars Starliner article is a must-read for me. These guys were devout Boeing haters and would endlessly praise SpaceX - that is, until Elon become public enemy #1 last year and they suddenly and abruptly shifted their hate and derision the other way. Not a single independent thought on that entire forum, unless you sort by most critical and painstakingly weed through the hidden comments. The articles are crafted to be red meat for their core readership. At least The Register is unashamedly a tabloid and doesn't pretend they're not. Interesting to see how they spin this.

evandale 3y ago
The haters don't want to admit space flight is really really hard and Elon, excuse my language, fucking nailed it. Richard Branson is a billionaire who tried to do spaceflight long before Elon and Virgin Galactic hasn't launched anything useful (before SpaceX) as far as I know. If someone thinks a suborbital flight is impressive I highly recommend them to play KSP and find out how easy that is compared to getting into orbit. edit: they have reached orbit; I stopped following Virgin after it became clear they can't do the job https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LauncherOne https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LauncherOne So many people want to erroneously believe Elon is some child with the mental capacity of a 3 year old with access to billions of dollars because they don't want to like him or give him credit for anything. It takes more than a pile of money to run a successful space program and how nobody can see that by now is beyond me.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  > So many people want to erroneously believe Elon is some child with the mental capacity of a 3 year old with access to billions of dollars because they don't want to like him or give him credit for anything. I think the contrast between Musk's SpaceX and Twitter experiences is largely down to whether the organization grew up around Musk. SpaceX has an immune system built up for the nutty stuff, from Gwynne Shotwell on down. Twitter got thrown into the deep end with zero staff powerful enough or with the experience to do the post-idea cleanup work. It's a huge mistake to say "Elon had nothing to do with SpaceX's success". It's also a huge mistake to say "SpaceX's success means Musk's Twitter plans are good".

dotnet00 3y ago

Berger has a pretty good record with the estimated NETs. There have been several cases of him stating that a launch has been pushed back with a bunch of public pushback from others, only for him to turn out to have been pretty close.

briffle 3y ago

> I mean, a few month delay on a brand new space vehicle isn't "OMG, Boeing failed!" > But even that is not enough: Ars doubles down, and now NASA's refusal to provide a concrete updated launch date means not only is it "[slipping] into 2024", but apparently almost to 2025: A few month delay? It was originally supposed to fly in 2017. with Crews in 2020.

FireBeyond 3y ago
And SpaceX Crew-1 was originally supposed to fly in November 2016, and was then delayed a year, and then another two years, and then another year, finally flying in November 2020.
- tekla 3y ago
  It was delayed the same amount of time as Starliner initially. Now Dragon is operational, and Starliner still isn't done with the final design/assembly of it.

ktpecot 3y ago

Well Starliner was originally contracted to be certified in 2017. So a few month slip on top of the 5+ year slip already maybe justifies some of the skepticism from ARS

FireBeyond 3y ago
Would be nice to see some of that skepticism applied to Crew-1, when it slipped 4 years, but Ars treated SpaceX announcements as gospel truth. Hell, the launch article for Crew-1 (https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/11/weather-permitting-todays-the-day-crew-dragon-flies-four-people-into-space/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/11/weather-permitting-t...) literally did not once mention that that launch was delayed, let alone 3 separate year+ delays. Just about SpaceX "saving" NASA from "wandering around in the wilderness with no access to space".
- tekla 3y ago
  Except Crew-1 Happened in 2020, Staliner-1 has been delayed until probably late 2023, 2024. Demo-1 Happened before OFT-1. They both started at similar times and also their delayed missions were delayed by similar amounts initially. By all accounts, Starliner is behind is every possible way with much greater funding than SpaceX. SpaceX is at Crew 7, Starliner isn't even close to Starliner-1
  - FireBeyond 3y ago
    > By all accounts, Starliner is behind is every possible way with much greater funding than SpaceX. That's only true if you assume SpaceX strictly allocated budgets per program and that no revenue from their other missions have gone to the crewed flight programs. I'm not saying Spaceliner is a success, or that there are arguments to be made about each company's approach (you could argue that while Boeing's approach seems relatively glacial, Boeing also has far fewer smoking craters and damaged barges than SpaceX). None of that removes the fairly evident bias that Ars can be counted on to spin anything SpaceX in a positive manner (a la ignoring years of delays to talk of SpaceX saving the day for NASA, while a refusal to commit to a launch date following a just discovered issue for Boeing immediately implies more years of delays).

krisoft 3y ago

> I mean, a few month delay on a brand new space vehicle isn't "OMG, Boeing failed!" The hubub is not about the few more months of delay just anounced. The starliner and the dragon 2 started development around the same time to deliver about the same thing. The first crewed dragon 2 launched in 16 November 2020. It is not about the months of delay, but the years.

Retric 3y ago
Those were largely delays in funding (4+ years) not just the actual program. “In July 2010, Boeing stated that the capsule could be operational as early as 2015 with sufficient near-term approvals and funding.” “On September 16, 2014, NASA chose Boeing (Starliner) and SpaceX (Crew Dragon) as the two companies to be funded to develop systems to transport U.S. government crews to and from the International Space Station.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Starliner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Starliner
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  Scroll down to the "testing" bit. The pad abort test resulted in a parachute not working - they forgot a pin. https://spacenews.com/missing-pin-blamed-for-boeing-pad-abort-parachute-anomaly/ https://spacenews.com/missing-pin-blamed-for-boeing-pad-abor... The first orbital test failed to reach the ISS because it accidentally burned too much propellant. A second error nearly made it burn up on reentry and had to be fixed in orbit. The second orbital test failed to launch because the craft's valves couldn't handle humidity (despite being designed to launch from Florida). When it finally went (after a complete rebuild of those valves), multiple thrusters from two different systems failed in orbit. The third orbital test - the first crewed - has been now indefinitely delayed. It is well behind schedule.
  - Retric 3y ago
    You’re skipping over the bit where “After analysis and corrective actions it was launched on May 19, 2022, and completed a successful mission to the ISS, clearing the way for the crewed flight test.” They had an initial failure, and 1 delayed but successful mission. The 3rd mission is again delayed, that’s fairly normal for manned spacecraft. Rocket science is hard, news at 11…

bell-cot 3y ago

Objective reality seems to be that SpaceX's first (successful) crewed flight (to the ISS) was completed a bit over 3 years ago now. And SpaceX is well into its 6th operational NASA ISS mission since then. Vs. Boeing still has not finish assembling a Starliner capsule that meets NASA's safety spec's. Right now, "speculation" is saying that Boeing will ever successfully fly a Starliner mission.

FreshStart 3y ago
So money claw back and hand it to SpaceX?
- throwawaymobule 3y ago
  Probably blue origin. NASA wants more than one supplier, for as much as possible.
  - ericcumbee 3y ago
    At this point it is probably going to be a human rated Dream chaser. they were the 1st looser in the original commercial crew contract. They seem to be on track for a test launch later this year for Commercial Resupply.
  - rst 3y ago
    Blue Origin is another company that talks a good game, but they've yet to put anything in orbit. If NASA is casting about for a second supplier, there were other rejected bidders on the current human space transport contracts (e.g., Sierra Space's Dream Chaser, still under development in a cargo variant) which seem less risky.
- bell-cot 3y ago
  IANAL...but I'd give 100:1 odds that the NASA/Boeing contract does not give Uncle Sam the power to do that.

signatoremo 3y ago

Boeing was awarded the crew contract at the same time as SpaceX in 2014. The first crew mission was Dragon in May 2020. Fast forward 4 years, seven NASA and three private crews have flown on Dragon. None on Starliner. Can you say with a straight face that it isn't a serious delay? A few months, really? Keep in mind that Boeing was awarded $4.2B, compared to $2.9B for SpaceX, for the same number of flights. Not to mention that NASA was accused of favor treatment for Boeing during the development phase - See What we found section of [0] > Which is hilarious (ambiguity about launches) as NASA doesn't even know when in 2024 (except that it will be at least Spring) Crew-EIGHT will launch... (and neither NASA nor SpaceX itself has made any communication on Crew-9 launch timeframes.) Such is an ignorant take. The rotation of ISS mission is currently 6 months, so there are always two missions a year, in the Spring and the Fall, barring extraordinary circumstance such as with Soyuz MS-10. Crew-8 will fly in the Spring, to be followed by the first Starliner operational flight. However if Starliner upcoming test flight continue to be delayed it's entirely possible that Crew 9 will fly instead. > I also question Ars' framing of this as "losing money"... it's R&D expenditures. It's not Ars' framing. It's common knowledge - [1], and reported by Boeing itself - [2] Boeing on Wednesday reported a $257 million charge in the second quarter for its Starliner astronaut spacecraft program, bringing the program’s to-date overrun costs to $1.5 billion as delays continue. The aerospace giant blamed the charge on its decision last month to indefinitely delay the first crewed Starliner launch. > and this article just reeks of subjective opinion, more so than objective neutrality. The article is very short. Everyone should read and judge for themselves. I think it's mostly matter of fact without sensational takes. Can't say the same about your post (horrific anti-Boeing/reeks/hilarious). [0] - https://oig.nasa.gov/docs/IG-20-005.pdf https://oig.nasa.gov/docs/IG-20-005.pdf [1] - https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/26/boeing-has-lost-1point5-billion-developing-starliner-spacecraft-for-nasa.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/26/boeing-has-lost-1point5-bill... [2] - https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2023-07-26-Boeing-Reports-Second-Quarter-Results https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2023-07-26-Boeing-Reports-Secon...