3 ms·
It's now 4 1/2 years since Starliner's nearly-disastrous first (uncrewed) test flight, 4 years since SpaceX's successful crewed test flight, and 2 years since S
by bell-cot 2y ago
It's now 4 1/2 years since Starliner's nearly-disastrous first (uncrewed) test flight, 4 years since SpaceX's successful crewed test flight, and 2 years since Starliner's second (uncrewed) test flight.
At what point does NASA need to pull the plug on Starliner, and start looking for second-source Earth-LEO passenger service from companies which can actually do the d*mned job?
- ceejayoz 2y ago> At what point does NASA need to pull the plug on Starliner... At this point, I assume they're not doing so as a punishment. It doesn't cost NASA much to keep Boeing's feet to the fire here.
- macnetic 2y agoCommercial Crew is fixed-price contracts, whereas cost-plus contracts has been the norm in the US aerospace industry. Boeing is the one bleeding money here.
- ceejayoz 2y agoLike I said, it doesn't cost them much. It's not zero cost - people have to talk to Boeing, yell at them when things are broken, review fixes and proposals, etc.
- bell-cot 2y agoIf NASA's real goal is to have a reliable second-source provider, and their endless futzing around with Boeing is incompatible with that (due to limited NASA staffing, politics, or whatever) - then keeping Boeing's feet to the fire does carry high costs for NASA.
- ceejayoz 2y agoI suspect they think of it like a lottery ticket - there's a small but slim chance that Boeing eventually spends enough billions fixing it that it successfully flies. All NASA has to do is staff enough folks to go "nope fix that too"; the lion's share of the costs are Boeing's.
- bell-cot 2y agoSadly, "it successfully flies" is quite different from "it is a reliable second source, over time".