3 ms·

I'm fairly certain that sources from NASA have said the opposite regarding scrutiny. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/07/science/boeing-starliner-nasa.html http

I'm fairly certain that sources from NASA have said the opposite regarding scrutiny. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/07/science/boeing-starliner-nasa.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/07/science/boeing-starliner-... As it turns out, the official that admitted this was the same Steve Stich. Dragon was held to a higher standard, they were the newcomers and the corrupt snakes in Congress were looking for any excuse to justify canceling commercial crew and just giving Boeing a blank check again.

GMoromisato 2y ago
For development, you're right. I think NASA considered Boeing a known quantity and trusted them to develop Starliner, while they scrutinized SpaceX because they were worried that they were too cavalier. But I meant a higher standard for how much risk NASA is willing to take in this instance. If something had gone wrong with Dragon Demo-2, there was no other way to bring down the astronauts. They would have accepted relatively high risk because they had no choice. But with Starliner, because they have Dragon, they don't need to accept that risk. The risk NASA will tolerate is lower now, because they have an alternative. That's what I meant by a higher standard.