The Real Reason The Boeing Starliner Failed
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 вер 2024
- Everything you need to know about the saga of the Boeing Starliner spacecraft
Last Video: NASA Has A New Problem With The Moon Mission (Artemis)
• NASA Has A New Problem...
►Sign up for the weekly Space Race newsletter here: www.thespacera...
►Become a member today: / @thespaceraceyt
►Support the channel by purchasing from our merch store: shop.theteslas...
► Join Our Discord Server: / discord
► Patreon: / thespacerace
► X/Twitter: / thespaceraceyt
► Subscribe to our other channel, The Tesla Space: / theteslaspace
Mars Colonization News and Updates
• Mars Colonization News...
SpaceX News and Updates: • SpaceX News and Updates
The Space Race is dedicated to the exploration of outer space and humans' mission to explore the universe. We’ll provide news and updates from everything in space, including the SpaceX and NASA mission to colonize Mars and the Moon. We’ll focus on news and updates from SpaceX, NASA, Starlink, Blue Origin, The James Webb Space Telescope and more. If you’re interested in space exploration, Mars colonization, and everything to do with space travel and the space race... you’ve come to the right channel! We love space and hope to inspire others to learn more!
► Subscribe to The Tesla Space newsletter: www.theteslasp...
Business Email: sean@creatormill.com
#Spacex #Space #Mars
►Sign up for the weekly Space Race newsletter here: www.thespacerace.news/subscribe
►Become a member today: / @thespaceraceyt
►Support the channel by purchasing from our merch store: shop.theteslaspace.com/
► Join Our Discord Server: / discord
► Patreon: / thespacerace
► X/Twitter: / thespaceraceyt
Nope, boeings problem is DIE (DEI) and woke policies. Go woke, go broke
Guess we aren't winning the race this year. There's always next year. 😂😅😊
12:50
Actually just bc they’re a third party that Boeing clearly decided to use doesn’t mean it’s not Boeings problem. It most certainly still falls on Boeing for deciding to use that company to build its rockets.
If I had to fly on starliner on the next flight with only 2 crew, I'd want $10mil to be on it.
If I had to fly on crew dragon, I'd want a cool million.. but I'd also feel 10x safer than I would on Boeing's starliner
As long as there is no loss of life, or Alien creatures brought onboard. Then I am copacetic :)
I was an engineer in the tech industry starting in the late '70s. It was alot of fun and we produced some amazing and nearly flawless technology during the 20th century. It was exactly as this video says, those companies were created by engineers and run by engineers. Engineers were judged on their technical abilities above anything else. Honesty and high ethical standards were the rule, not the exception. Then came the 21st century. Almost overnight technology companies began to replace their upper management engineers with what I call "Wall Street money men". Everything changed rapidly. Profit margins became not just high priority, in many cases they were the only priority. Ethics took a backseat to profits. Engineers became less valued for their technical abilities and more valued by their willingness to take orders from non-technical management without question or technical debate. Engineers who would perform their work as dictated to them by non-technical management were rewarded, whereas engineers who insisted on maintaining high ethics and technical quality were marginalized or simply shown the door. This was my true experience over the span of 40+ years as an electronic and software engineer for well over a dozen different tech companies on both US coasts, much of that working for medical device companies some of which made no secret about letting me go for being too ethical in my refusal to cut corners that could possibly affect patient safety. Everything I've written here is 100% truth.
I was a young engineer out of college and I got a job with the DoD doing EMP Testing. I helped Boeing test the new Air Force 1 communications suite in TX. Those Boeing engineers and those managing were the best. I have fond memories of helping with that testing.
@@rockpadstudios I'm very happy that you had a good experience at that job 😊
Many in my early career went equally as well. I miss those times.
Yes... I thought it was just the SD aerospace company I worked for for 22 years, retiring early @ 58 in 2017... I loved the job for 20 years, but the last 2 years were tortuous... my stomach felt like it had a burning rock in it every morning when I got up and went to work... I'm so happy to be free of that boolshytte.
@stewartteaze9328 I'm equally happy for you! Thankfully I have my home paid off and am able to no longer have to work. I might have a meger retirement but the joy of being out of that corrupt industry makes it all worthwhile. I feel very bad for younger engineers who don't yet have the ability to retire.
I was at Hughes Space and Comm. when Boeing took us over. At first I thought that was a good thing, but found out quickly how ruthless and extremely arrogant they were. They had one of their hitmen come and talk to us, he was so proud of extinguishers personnel from the previous smaller aerospace companies Boeing gobbled up, it was frightening to hear him threatening us! I saw how intensely severe and arrogant they were when they rolled in. So many awful decisions so many layers of useless know nothing management making decisions sometimes holding important decisions up. Before I retired I could not believe they cut back on quality control inspectors…WTF! In aerospace testing, specifications and quality rules the day!
Thank you.
I had no idea that Doug Hurley said he would NOT fly on Starliner. This tells me he had no confidence in Boeing's engineering team.
Yea, he was disappointed in the culture of the Starliner team and I think this culture culminated in the terrible Demo 1 mission. While Starliner is more capable than Dragon on paper and *should* have appealed more to astronauts as it includes more manual flight controls, Dragon was simply executed better while Starliner was mismanaged.
Doug Hurley alias Chunky appears to have the good sense of a SNAFU big Corp circus BOEING and the inability to manage there aerospace projects and communicate honestly with there suppliers and customers. I hope men like DOUG HURLEY are consulted by key decision makers to oversee the boon doogle Starliner project. I hope the AMERICAN Public can get some measure of value from its expensive Starliner Space program and the other key contractors necessary to advance AMERICA space science program.
They stated exactly what he said about Boeing in this video
Wise choice
Did the star liner make it back? Yes… Were there issues? Yes, but the fact of the matter was and still is that the star liner did just what it’s supposed to do. I have worked on several Boeing aircraft and worked with several Boeing engineers on various projects. They are a big, cumbersome company at times but generally they do an excellent job at what they do. The fact the star liner made it back with the issues it had is mildly impressive and speaks volumes to its engineering AND the skill of it’s designers. Before you people all go jumping on the Elon Musk bandwagon just remember that he has given us the utterly stupid hyper loop, the starship that has blown up during launch multiple times (all while he swears that’s normal), and that god awful cyber truck.
Keep in mind Starliner only completed a pad abort test, not an in flight abort test like Dragon. Boeing was given a pass on this critical safety requirement and this is almost never mentioned. Glaring in light of all the new issues that have been discovered.
I did not know this. 😮
I worked for a British aerospace company for a while in the 90s. As part of my job I had to write test schedules to test the aircraft computer systems on test rigs. Most of the time we'd just adapt previous tests. One time I decided to write a new one from scratch, which revealed four faults in previously tested (and passed as OK) software. That did not go down well with my team leader. Their only interest was rubber stamping a passed test and passing it on, even though a problem gets an order of magnitude more expensive to fix if it is found later by actual flight tests! I left a few months later. I couldn't work in a company run by bean counters.
you should have been rewarded for finding errors.. sheesh.. that's literally the job.
This type of thing goes back years. I remember John Glenns statement.
"I felt exactly how you would feel if you were getting ready to launch and knew you were sitting on top of 2 million parts - all built by the lowest bidder on a government contract."
I remember when John Glenn said that when I was a kid. It started my awakening that still has momentum to this day.
You left out the part where Boeing had modified the Starliner software, disabling its ability to autonomously undock and return, WITHOUT TELLING ANYONE.
It's like they learned nothing from the MCAS fiasco on the 737MAX
Retaining the autonomous flight software would have meant a cost increase.
Engineer: "I want to retain it, for redundancy."
Bean counter: "Remove it!"
This youtuber is only interested in the generating of income, not getting the facts straight!
All software has to be rigorously tested for unintended behavior. Maybe it was too complex, and so if it wasn’t required, then it was safer to remove it.
@@jurgenbuchelt4384 sensible engineer (in writing): I note your demand, here are my objections and I want that verbal order in writing, thanks - for legal liability reasons.
Boy things have changed. In the old days, "If it ain't Boeing I ain't going" And now, rather domestic or space related, "If it's a Boeing, I ain't going"
Or from the astronauts perspective "it's Boeing so we're not going home."
its "if it says boeing, i aint goin."
idk how people from where yer from talk.... no one uses correct grammar and sentence structure..... "if its a boeing, then i shant be bothered with going" hell almost reads victorian. but i digress.... and uh ya... domestic or space related...... oh wow, ironically EXACTLY the business segments boeing is in.... IMAGINE that...... geez.
dead internet theory people, its real... and yall aint.
First, McDonnell/Douglas failed its legacy test, resulting in near bankruptcy prior to its controversial merger with Boeing. Then, the once famous engineering company that bear any burden and successfully solve any problem sacrificed its reputation of excellence in order to maximize its profits. Instead of “build it and they (customers) will come”, became a legacy of how cheaply can customer requirements be met. Talk about a very incredible fall from grace.
I would rather fly on a North Africa 727 livestock flight.
@@Bramon83 Who is talking? I would recommend you to seek out a professional..
Retired from United Space Alliance, when MD and Boeing merged the first thing the new management did was send us a "cost reduction expert". The writing was on the wall at that point.
And we all know that will inevitably lead to lower quality. There are other ways, but that's the Boeing way.
Yup, I was a quality control vendor (metrology/gaging/traceability, etc.) during that...scary, got out and never looked back. My instincts tell me that unknown valve expansion problem will lead to a mat'l substitution of some sort. (I.E. 400SS vs. 17-4PH, etc.)
US is becoming the next India
@@ronjones-6977 You mean McDonnell Douglas
"United Space Alliance (USA) " ... That's kind of weird isn't it?
Boeing needs to rehire that whistleblower and make him the Director of Quality Control and drive to make the changes necessary to change their failing reputation.
This is one of the best and complete story of the Starliner saga !!
Two thumbs up man....truly appreciated. Keep them coming brother....
This is exactly what went wrong. Don’t buy another company and then put their failures of management in charge of your company.
DEI happened.
Seen it happen many times..
People will never learn . 😢
😢
@@_________________404 i bet you the disaster and obsession with costs and shareholders where all brought to you buy old rich white men.,,🙄
@@_________________404 I agree with you. DEI or quotas is happening all over the Western world.
Don't buy the bullsht. The reason why boeing is going broke is diversity, feminism and woke policies. Go woke, go broke
Let's not forget that in addition to developing their own capsule, SpaceX had developed their own launch vehicle powered by their own engines. Boeing just had to build and verify a capsule.
🤣👍 On point, and noted.
SpaceX was also a fraction of the cost.
Plus, Boeing and Aerojet have been in this business for many decades. The experiential knowledgebase is vast... or at least it should be. I wonder how much brain trust gets lost with retirements, not preserved and passed down to successors. VALVES... valves should be a 100% known deal. If you change the materials in making them, stress test beyond specifications. Always. It seems Boeing and Aerojet didn't do it. Cost cutting? Who knows. The engineers need to be back in control of decision making.
@@cytherians agreed 100% with you and>>>. @user-rr9lv9ll4x CORROSION SPECIALIST in the USAF, and I will confirm that the problem with those thrusters and CORROSION is no excuse, as in, it should have never happened! using parts in those types of systems, they knew the problems were in the future, then they are trying to claiming they didn't know what caused problems.....HELL THEY KNEW they just wont admit to it! I back then, worked on both B-52s and KC-135s! most of the problems I worked on were, the skin of the aircraft. When corrosion was present, it would be a fine white powder type that could be brushed off with ya fingers! Stress, this would include NDI inspection of the dead bolts, BOLTS that held those huge engines onto the wings! and it goes on from there, We even dealt with piss causing the STEEL under the HEADS as the urine flowed down when some pissed the target, the toilet, common problem in combat aircraft that had HEADS/JOHNS! Put profit ahead of just plan doing it right, and having a product that does not fail when lives are on the line, IS A FAIL AT THE GET GO!
@@cytherians Boeing has also been replacing engineers with "Engineers" selected under the DEI programs.
I worked at Boeing for a few years, through the 737 crashes to the start of the pandemic. After the CEO left, the new one reorganized all the engineers to (sort of) report/work under him. I had said in a meeting that this was a good move that might bring back the engineering centric focus. Our team manager replied, “That's not how you run a business.” I feel like that sums thing up well like the ending remarks in this video.
Honestly, it's stunning how many problems in the modern world simply boil down to companies putting profits and shareholder interest above all else.
@@drenrin2120 Seagull management. Look it up
Sounds like the rot may be throughout much of the company and nearly impossible to ferret out
Education for Business Management does not prepair administrators to make engineering decisions. Education for Engineering does little to prepair engineers to make business decisions. When egos are mixed in then failure is all but assured.
I believe that cost plus government contracts only incentivize the contractors to continue to raise the cost of their projects. There is little to no incentive to meet dead lines or finish the project. Finishing means the cash flow ends. No business would deliberately end it's cash flow.
What I saw when they took Space n Comm over where I worked was a ton of arrogance..oh my gawd it was horrible. Not a team effort but do as I say or else! Get rid of their arrogance and way too much useless middle management is the key. Bring back quality control, tight engineering, let the older more experienced engineers run the show, have the older ones teach the new ones coming on board. Cmon Boeing you just need to get real!
I’m the daughter of an engineer who worked on parts of the Rocketdyne engines that powered the Saturn V moon rocket. I’m not an engineer myself but I’m still fascinated by what the human mind can accomplish and what dedicated engineers can build. This was a great explanation of the sequence of events that led to the Starliner failure and its aftermath. I hope that Boeing can get its act together and return to being a great company with a culture of safety over profits. I still don’t understand why Boeing allowed legacy leadership from a failing company to take control after the merger. It remains to be seen if the change in leadership will be able to save this once great company.
And I am your father's, brother's, nephew's, cousin's, former roommate.
Some people, like me, have gotten into the arrogant habit of looking for errors and misconceptions to correct, and, coming from Seattle, I admittedly was prepared to inform you of the REAL reason for Boeing's decline and likely demise. This was, as you so clearly pointed out, the result of its merger with McDonald Douglas, and designating MD's CEO to take over the helm at Boeing. But I am pleased to swallow my metastasizing ego bent on finding things wrong with UA-cam posts, and to thank you for getting it right.
It was Boeing's stupidity of allowing MD's profit-oriented culture to destroy history's best aerospace company and turn it into a manufacturer of customer-killing machines (think 737 Max).
Please get the history correct. Boeing did not build the Apollo, North American Aviation was the general contractor. They provided the first stage, engines were built by Ricketdyne. Boeing did not build the space shuttle, North American Aviation did.
And North American Aviation became Rockwell, which of course, developed the Space Shuttles.
The entire opening is propaganda. MD was just as engineer culture based as any other. Two of my uncles were engineers there(my dad would have too but " Monsanto paid more in 73'") and two more were line workers there(one building F15's). Never once has any of them said a disparaging word about MD in 76 years of combined employment....until Boeing came in.
Correct , And I pointed out that GM built the Lunar Rover ! 😅. Other than being wrong ,
This is a shit video ! 😂. Thanks !
@@user-qk5zw8sc7p It was North American - Rockwell when I worked there. Very soon after it became Rockwell International, maker of electric hand drills, skill saws, and space shuttles.
@@brianking9446 wow
The fact that Boeing’s module has had so many issues and is behind schedule, comes as no big surprise to me. My husband and I both worked for a McDonnell-Douglas subcontractor on the International Space Station. Working with McDonnell-Douglas was a nightmare. We definitely felt that McDonnell-Douglas personnel loved to create an adversarial relationship with their subcontractors. Nothing was ever their issue. Things were always caused by NASA changes or subcontractor screwups. Pointing fingers was their specialty. Working on Space Station was an honor, but “teaming” with McDonnell-Douglas was an absolute nightmare. It’s been over 25 years and hearing “You people” is still triggering. The astronaut that won’t fly on Boeing’s (aka McDonnell-Douglas) module, absolutely nailed it.
More like McDonald-Douglas huh?
"What do you mean, you people?" 😂
I think it has become pretty much the same every where. Todays engineers are being taught with same attitude as the profiteers and same teachers.
So many thruster failures. Shouldn't thruster and valve technology be perfected by this point? At least it sounds like the the software was designed for positive failure... meaning, shut down prematurely before a worse situation arises. But from what was described, it also sounds like a tremendous oversight on materials behavior. Valve seals couldn't handle the stress tests. This should be so basic and a non-issue. So embarrassing and ridiculous that Boeing couldn't get this right.
@@bowman4275no, it’s not fast food
It's heartbreaking to see an industry innovator fall this far and completely lose its way.
All in the name of profits at all cost. Greed truly destroys us all.
@@angelgallegos199When you place an accountant as a CEO in an engineering company this is the result.
@@angelgallegos199 A company cannot exist on greed alone. Just as we're currently seeing with Boeing, poor quality will eventually lead to a drastic reduction in market share, and thus no more profits to be had. They will either be "forced" to return to producing a quality product, or they will cease to exist.
it's happening all around us. Ford Motor Company struggles to manufacture reliable gasoline engines. They have been building engines for over 100 years and at one time, superlative at it.
Well, I gather when your head grows that big...
"Strand-ed: 1. left without the means to move from somewhere." ... Yes they are stranded until SpaceX gives them a ride home.
Eh. NASA has escape pods on the ISS and every crewed mission.
But being the first person to use one, of any kind, ever, and given that escape pods dont really have a lot of control where they land they are certianly the last choice.
Calling a machine with "catastrophic problems" leading to massive explosions prior to launch and software bugs both before docking with the space station and again prior to return flight (only discovered two hours before the astronauts would have crawled in for a return trip) that would cause the crew capsule to collide with the service module and explode in space, relying on a clock that was not set properly and so took the craft dramatically off-course on the way out, with (multiple, identified) faulty hardware, with helium leaks, failing thrusters, etc. etc. etc. cannot possibly referred to as a "surprising turn of events" or an "easy fix." It CAN be called a cluster-FK.
I think Boeing confused "crewed flight" with "crude flight"
“Screwed flight” is more like it.
LOL, but anyway, Spice must flow
Suni certainly isn't upset. She's a former commander of the ISS, and obviously enjoys space a ton. Since this was going to be her last mission, I'm sure she considers the extra time a bonus.
Well there is that!😁
Hopefully she’s not on a salary that OT would be amazing
I'd like to hear that from her own mouth.
@@1991RedRocker
"I'm in my happy place."
-- Sunita Williams
During CBS interview 9-13-24
@@atticstattic lol what else is she going to say? No one in that situation would be honest. You folks are hilarious. This is precisely the kind of kool aid drinking propaganda laced group think that led to this fiasco. They are stranded and not happy. They went on a 4 hour cruise and got stranded but sureeee nothing to see no big deal. Tell that to their family and friends and even them.
FYI Boeing did not build stage one of the Saturn V - Rocketdyne/Rockwell did - Boeing acquired Rockwell in the ‘90’s
NASA and Wikipedia beg to differ. Rocketdyne built the engines. Boeing built the structure at their Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans.
@@jeromeprater183 Rockwell also built the command modules and the shuttles. Also Rocketdyne was a subsidiary of Rockwell so Boeing owns them too. Although I'll be the first to say that the idea of renaming stuff like "Boeing DC-3" can go pound sand.
Rocketdyne (formerly a division of North American Aviation) is a rocket engine manufacturer. They built the F-1 engine for the first stage (S-1C) of the Saturn V rocket, which was manufactured by the Boeing Company. Since the 1990's, Boeing owns the human spaceflight heritage of Rockwell (North American Aviation) and McDonnell/Douglas, and thus own the know-how and IP of some of the Saturn V rocket, Space Transportation System (Space Shuttle), Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo craft. The Boeing Starliner spacecraft incorporates technologies developed by the heritages of the Apollo spacecraft and the Space Transportation System.
Good to know. Thank you.
There were so many inovative talented manufacturers that came out of the WWII conflict, but they were like sparklers and fizzled out, choked out by greed. It seemed to me and others, that Americans don't take pride in their work or their products any longer.
This is why private companies run by engineers with a passion for the craft are better than public companies beholden to the filth of options trading and wall street.
If I could divest my retirement of wall street and not lose me arse I would move it all to an alternative.
We need more Howard Hughes and less Fink and Soros
Sadly nowadays, Boeing = corporate failure, and NASA = underfunded bureaucratic nightmare.
And both need their staff "Engineer to Accountant" ratio raised.
accountants make terrible engineers and engineers are terrible accountants. people forget that Boeing's best CEO was a lawyer.
@@Pan_Galactic_Gargle_Blasterperhaps that's what they need. Someone who understands consequences of a lawsuit
Your coverage of this saga has been the best there is. Thank you
Thank you!
@@TheSpaceRaceYT I agree also.
Your
@@TheKetsa fixed it ta
ALSO: SUMMARY OF VIDEO: First pregnancy is space being tested.
As the video suggests, Boeing is NOT the company they used to be. The problem now is that the clock of opportunity has stopped ticking. NASA needs to cut Boeing loose, for good, and give contracts to companies that can actually live up to their arrogance. Space is hard, but for today's Boeing, its impossible.
I have not seen any public news indications that Boeing's management wants to change to go back to, as you put it, the company they used to be. They seem to like what they are now, whatever it is, and they're going to stick with it unless forced to do otherwise. Maybe they're hoping the public will accept them as they are now, but it doesn't matter. All that matters is their stockholders.
NASA wont be doing that. Boeing has the best lobbiest and has employee in nearly every state. Also, redundancy is always good in business. BUT Boeing should consider selling or spinning off that division or in the video said cut its losses and not fulfilled its NASA contract.
@@Tabula_Rasa1 doesn't matter what Boeing wants, if new companies start doing better than Boeing, well NASA will have no chance
Unfortunately in a company where ultimately engineering is everything, and safety can not be ignored without great peril to the company, solid engineering would take care of the stockholders. In an aerospace company where stockholders come first, the company is heading for the dustbin. i don't think Boeing will be or could be saved , it is only a question of how much debt they will run up before they go under.
They aren't? What was the most expensive project of WWII? Building an atomic bomb for the very first time from start to finish? Nope. The Boeing B-29.
Starliner. Built by accountants, not engineers.
Designed by accountants, built by engineers that are okay with that.
Boeing's new company motto: "It'll fly....we guess. Is lunch here?"
Nope, built by feminists and diversity hires
Listen to the engineers. They know what they are talking about. If they say you’ve got a problem let them solve it 🇺🇸🚀❤️
built by assistant managers
Where is your evidence, or is it just feeling? I think it is a bit more complicated.
I knew nothing about this capsule until I watched this video. I did understand the Shuttle & Apollo. Thanks for this!
Back in 1966 I bought McDonnell stock. It was a solid company that made the F4. Then McDonnell bought Douglas which was practically bankrupt because Boeing was successfully selling 707 and Douglas was late to develop a jet airliner. The cost cutting culture of Douglas infected McDonnell and eventually McDonnell Douglas was practically bankrupt. That is the company that Boeing bought and it was tragic to see the effects.
You labeled it the "Startliner" in the opening scene. Oddly enough, the Endliner seems more appropriate.
My uncle was a solid fuel engineer for NASA during the Apollo program. It’s like you are reading directly from the transcriptions of many of our conversations in the 90s.
in it's hay day, more than 500,000 Americans were involved in the Apollo program. congrats?
@@danger3_255 Its still cool
@@danger3_255 No need to lash out just because the older boys BF'd you at the orphanage.
I was working for Boeing at the time of the MD buyout, and it was like you could feel the atmosphere change from one day to the next. I have never been so happy that my time there was very temporary.
SUMMARY OF VIDEO: First pregnancy is space being tested......
My family was a McDonnell-Douglas family. My dad met my mom at Douglas in Long Beach, CA. After my mom died, my dad married another Douglas lady. My step-sis also worked for Douglas for a time. I myself worked for Douglas during the summer one year. All of this happened before the merger with McDonnell. After the McD-D merger, my dad continued to work for the company, and ultimately died of a heart attack in 1976 while still working for them. So I had a good overall feeling for Douglas.
I was a bit dismayed at the Boeing merger, because of course they were the competition to what I still kind of felt like was "my" company. But, oh well. Many years later when I was attending an air show at an US air base, I happened to run into a couple of Boeing employees who were doing something around the KC-10 display aircraft. They were old Boeing pre-merger employees, and expressed to me some frustration with the post-merger Boeing. This made me dismayed from an entirely different perspective!
So sad to see what Douglas has done to Boeing.
I have one question: Why won't NASA ask for a 3-seat starliner & have Boeing's CEO, the most confident dumb ass engineer and a shareholder onboard and launch the damn thing into space?
Everyone would be fascinated by it and hoping it'll go up into flames at any moment. "Forget about the ISS, it's fireworks time!!"
I would love to see an Audit of Boeing's Quality systems. As a matter of fact, I would love to do one. I bet that would be an eye-opener...
Like everything in America.... TOTALLY CORRUPT 😢
It made it back without killing anyone! Oh wait. No one was riding in it.
Well, at least it didn't land on anyone.
At least it didn't just fall out of the sky and disappear completely
SUMMARY OF VIDEO: First pregnancy is space being tested..
I worked at MDC from 1994-1999. Many of us were dumbfounded when Boeing inserted inept MDC executives into its executive team.
I suspect that was one of the conditions of the merger - although Boeing should have been well aware of the culture difference.
@@buggsy5 Nothing to do with cultures. That is not how executive management works. Culture is for lower managers and employees only.
@@buggsy5 True. We knew it. Now Boeing is in serious trouble.
If the flight is on a Boeing, I'm not going. It's terrifying to imagine how many poorly built aircraft are in the air this very moment.
cough Stonecipher cough
I totally agree if the focus is not on engineering then the focus must be on failure.
The reason NASA has a project plan is so they know what they are deviating from.
NASA does NOT listen to their engineers [can you spell o-r-i-n-g] and it cost the lives of dedicated crew ... shameful
@@jreynolds2184 I doubt too many ppl here will know what you're referring to... and yeah... I hope they learned with that one! It was a "known" issue that should've never happened.
Let us make shure they all "Learn" from their mistakes in future. This whole "Fiasco" is doing one thing only, keeping " Space" on the front page.
@@accumapmodels is this in reference to the crew that burned to death?
legends die yearly, Boeing has jumped to join the club
I worked as a contractor to a Boeing subsidiary on a FORTRAN program about 10 years ago. Once Boeing corporate found out we were there they cancelled our contract and said they would provide the software engineers. Five years later I found out they were still not working on the FORTRAN program. When they let our team go, I went to the person getting the responsibility for said program and told him I was ready to go to work with them. I never heard back from Boeing. The person we worked with only had a couple more years until he was going to retire. He told us the subsidiary was not the same since Boeing bought them and a lot of people had left and the rest were waiting to retire.
“Starliner never got a fair chance at success”
dude… Boeing literally got waaaaay more funding for Starliner. 🙃🙃
Plus boeing has kept finding delay after delay while SpaceX has made 12 successful manned flights to ISS.
I think that statement is directed at Boeing's bean counters and arrogant engineers screwing up their own capsule. A redundant option was a good idea but the company developing it shot themselves in the foot.
@@lawdemharcabatos522
Boeing got more money because they argued SpaceX already had a developed cargo capsule thus had a head start, that said Dragon 1 cargo is vastly different than the Dragon 2(both crew and cargo versions). This was an unfair argument but lobbyist for Boeing were able to squeeze more money out of the deal.
That said, if you look at the Dragon 1 cargo missions, they never experienced the issues Starliner has had, by their 3rd launch it was effectively flawless.
Those trying defend Boeing seem to hate Elon Musk or are Boeing shills trying to minimize social media damage. On these comments sections, one guy tried to use Starship as a comparison to Starliner because it keeps 'blowing up', completely ignoring the rapid iteration testing that SpaceX is doing with that project.
@@JarrodFLif3r starship Will Not fly even to the Moon. Never.
Starliner IS for the same Moon mission than starship.
Starship cant even reach orbirt empty.
There IS No need to hate Elon, just see what happens in the real world, Not your Melón Husky boot liking fantasy.
@@xiro6 A version of Starship will fly to the moon and eventually Mars!!!
You are naive if you think otherwise.
It says something when the engineers on Boeing's factory floor wont fly Boeing. But folks knew this was going to happen. When Boeing & McDonnell Douglas first merged The Economist featured a cover article with 2 camels ****ing and the caption "The trouble with mergers" with the emphasis of the article being "Who's on top?"
The truth is out there, people just do not want to listen.
SUMMARY OF VIDEO: First pregnancy is space being tested.
At this point they should be using Boeing management for the test flights as a requirement. I bet the quality will have a nice improvement.
Within 24 hours and you already have 150k views, that is awesome. I am stoked for you all
Boeing buying McDonnell Douglas and the results of that are a classic case of mergers, monopolies, and not enforcing antitrust laws.
Love your channel
I once heard an engineer at old Boeing say, we have never heard what overdue or over budget... until after the acquisition
The two Astronauts on the International Space Station are having a wonderful time, so nothing to worry about.
Whenever you remove engineers from the top of an engineering company and replace them with bean counters, it is no surprise that the failures will mount.
Full Credit is due please:
Original Moon Rover for the Apollo missions to the moon was designed and built by 3 major companies and their subsidiaries.
The Boeing Company and its PRIMARY subcontractor, the Delco Electronics Subdivision of GENERAL MOTORS, designed and built the first lunar rover in 18 months…and it worked!!!
Just trying to keep things straight.
I do enjoy your channel and view with great enthusiasm.
Thank you.
Thanks I thought there was others involved considering over 400,000 people worked on the apollo missions at its peak
@@idris4587 Yes, it is astounding to think how many folks worked on the Apollo and other NASA space programs, in every state, with good paying jobs for the time, in the 60's. It did "boom" the economy, with no talk of recession or depression, or inflation, like now!
@ronschlorff7089 And to think people thought apollo program was a waste of money. The amount of good it created when compared to what could of been spent on the military.
Too many people today don't even consider the idea that people who were in welding, fabrication, grinding, and extruding are as important as the engineers who designed these parts to begin with.
@@ronschlorff7089 The Cold War made NASA a priority. They were well funded with significant % of GDP going toward it. Today's NASA is underfunded and has too many milestone. It used to be just land people on the moon. Now it focus on Mars, Moon and Asteroid with less money.
@@idris4587 Yes, it was essentially a skilled job and almost "full employment" program and it could be again, with proper leadership!
They ARE stranded though. Just because they have experience and are currently okay with being there doesn't mean that they SHOULD be there. Also, their primary escape route left them behind. By definition, they are stranded there.
Also, I had no idea of the time and budget differences between Dragon and Starliner. SpaceX had 4 fewer years and half the money, and they absolutely blew Boeing out of the water.
Previously NASA closely managed private contractors. Now they have an approach that private enterprise should take more control over the management process. Private enterprise isn't always as efficient as some people make out.
One of the few honest videos ive watched regarding Boeings abysmal failures over the past few years.
The top three levels of management in a technical / scientific / engineering company should NEVER be bean counters (MBAs, economists, accountants, stock traders). These should be relegated to basement offices with no outside windows.
No separate offices but portable partitions.
MBA stands for Morally Bankrupt A$$hole
This could have been sensationalized, but thankfully it's accurate and professional. Thank you for that. Many of us may already know much of what's discussed here, but it's a great summary for those that don't and even includes a few things that I'd either forgotten or not been told.
I'm sick of the media using the word "stranded". Had this happened during the Shuttle days, Butch and Suni would have simply returned home in Starliner... perhaps even with a hole in the heat shield. Yes, the entire program is an embarrassment and should have been cancelled long ago, but global news that the astronauts were "stranded" when they had a ~99.4% chance of returning safely when NASA requires 99.64% is not nearly as dramatic as the media claims.
The biggest issue was that no one could determine an *accurate* risk factor as the thruster problem remains difficult to reproduce, but that uncertainly led NASA to make the right choice and simply push Butch and Suni to Crew 9. The downside is that 2 people lost their slots on Crew 9, but NASA made the safest choice and that's exactly what Congress and the public have demanded that they do in the post-Columbia era.
With all of that said, if I were a NASA astronaut on rotation to the ISS, I would want my name to appear beside the word Dragon, not Starliner ;). After that first test flight, I guarantee that NASA astronauts and their families were not keen on Starliner.
NASA could have selected Dream Chaser, but they wanted a "reliable" name like Boeing and the rest is History.
Well put
The media is properly using the word "stranded" in exactly the same sense that they speak of jet passengers stranded in, say Timbuktu, when their jet isn't satisfactorily operable. If the plane becomes deemed to have been brought to a safely operable condition, or an alternative airline can take them home, they are no longer "stranded".
Yes. Butch and Sunni are stranded. They are stuck. Their fellow astronauts are not stranded, because they are scheduled to remain on the ISS.
@@-danR Gilligan eventually returned too. But he was stranded until then.
I'm not sure where you are getting the 99.4% vs 99.64% figures (from some real world calculations or as illustrative figures to make a conceptual point), but as you note - there is no way to determine accurate safety figures, given the unknowns that cannot be quantified. When they don't know why the problem occurred, how can they know how likely it is that more or fewer will fail?
If anything is was underplayed surprisingly enough.
The successful return home - unmanned - doesn't change the perception of this troubled program. Every one of its test flights have raised separate concerns, from hardware to software deficiencies. If NASA certifies this thing for manned missions, then I would suspect a deal was made to bend the criteria. Too expensive to fail, or too politically connected to fail?
true, let's see if a change of administration affects things, and congressional oversight may have to take a more active role. They authorize this spending on contractors, for all of the gov't agencies!! Maybe Musk can help ferret things out going forward! :D
Boeing is impossible to fix. The MD poison has seeped so far in, that removing it would leave it with 0 manned leadership positions, probably a 1-digit amount of managers, and a employee base which stopped caring long ago.
The executives still not only got paid but got bonuses. How did the workers do?
Legend has it, Boeing used to test their designs thoroughly before putting them into orbit. Now they just kill whistleblowers. They should definitely accept their failures and scrub the entire Starliner project.
This video was fantastic. You’re on your way to be a titan of UA-cam.
I doubt it
Boing is on a bancruptcy speedrun 😂
Uncle Sam will bail them out. Too big to fail.
I've never shorted a stock ..
But this would be the one to do ..
😂
@@JarretXu what if they're doing a US bancruptcy speedrun too 💀 Boingnomics is working 💀💀💀🤣
spellcheck is free ...
The video glossed over the many actual hardware issues in the capsule itself - from faulty parachute links to flammable wiring. A lot that isn't "miscommunications" with Rocketdyne, but pure conspiratorial cost-cutting actions that violated detailed specifications, that Boeing hoped will not be discovered.
Given that - can NASA trust that they've discovered all the spec-violations that Boeing perpetrated? I'm sure they are confident that they did, as much as I'm sure that Boeing has more surprises instore for us.
You understand the business pretty well!
11:30 We had a system called Calypso at my old job, we called it Calapso, because it always failed. Probably a more fitting name in this case too.
This is the best video on the failure of Boeing and Starliner on the Internet. Great job.
Proudly claiming historical engineering skills from the 60s and 80s is fine in books and documentaries. It means 'jack' when it comes to efficiently build spacecraft 30-60 years later. All of the engineers who did the design work and manufacturing are at best lounging around in retirement homes.
I'd wager that there is a GREAT deal of wisdom and common sense that those retirees took with them, essentially lost because of the broken lines of succession. Today's engineers have to learn the hard way, again. Also, back in the day, there was the urgency of beating the Soviets to the moon... the stakes were critical, and everyone was at the their best. But now, arbitrary deadlines in a system that is all about maximizing shareholder returns will only lead to missed deadlines... or shortcuts to make said deadlines. It's not the Soviets we're are up against now... it's SHAREHOLDERS.
The industry no longer wants the best engineers. They want engineers, even less talented ones, who are willing to take technical direction without question from non technical money men. I know, I lived it for decades.
[Strange Beavis noises heard from the starliner] : BOIOIOIOIOINGGGG ...
That was the self-destruct timer.
Not sure how the F15 became a Boeing success when it is actually a McDonald Douglas fighter before the merger
Probably because of the two other variants the E which most of its life was under Boeing and the EX which is all Boeing.
Also most people don't differentiate between companies post merger. Especially when MD somehow kept their c-suite on after the merger.
Boeing employs the same engineers.
@@deancarter9688 most of the OG guys from the F15 are retired
@@TheMysteryDriver you don't they mentored they younger folks or documented their best practices before they left?
The Apollo Program prioritized engineers. At the time, individual engineers had signature authority over thousands of dollars. Ten years later during the Space Shuttle program, engineers no longer had signature authority, and just about had beg managers for pencils. This was a national problem that was not at all isolated to Boeing.
When the spacex goes up, send hair bands for Sunny. I know you’re all thinking that.
she won't use them, she likes to spread her dandruff all around and wave her hair in people's faces
7:43 To keep things in perspective, Boeing ex CEO David Calhoun's severance pay was $33 millions and his predecessor's pay was comparable too.
$33 million for running (or flying) a company into the ground. I'm a capitalist but these exorbitant payouts to ex CEOs need to stop.
@@michaelclausen9331 YEP.
@@michaelclausen9331 Not only CEO payouts. The top executive salaries/incentives are outrageous as well.
So Boeing has spent all the money?
But it wasn't all on Starliner, the CEOs have to be paid too!
And it's a major percentage of that budget!!!
Boeing makes other things, not just starliner.
Especially 45% pay rises!
Now the workers are on strike.
Boeing Test Plane in 70's: "That plane was build so sturdy I had to test a barrel roll on its maiden test flight
Boeing Today: Grounded
@@johnp5250
“what the hell were you doing?”
“Selling airplanes”
True story 😂
Boeing software is actually suicidal today.
Your comment about Barry and Sita's well being shows me that your channel is top notch. Great video! I learned things.
Excellent video!!! I am an engineer with 45+ years experience. This same thing is happening at other companies as well. I believe Boeing can make a come-back. But only if they recognize the error of their ways. It *IS* time to stop trashing Boeing, lets all just hope and pray Boeing opens their eyes in time....
"putting engineers back at the top priority list" Amen!!!
Not going to happen in the U.S. The trend has been going on for at least the last 20 years.
@@shooting4star2023 I actually think that if trump wins, engineers will have a renaissance as a result of incentivising manufacturing in USA.
@@FredCacti he's back, barring more "lone shooter" assassination attempts.
@@FredCactiHahahaha! Oh wait, you're being serious, let me laugh even harder, HAHAHAHAHA!
@@FredCacti Not sure how Trump could affect the situation in the positive. He doesn't have the slightest understanding of anything engineering related. "Hydra-zine... Well, hydra means water... zine sounds short for magazine. Ah, Boeing needs to read more magazines about water, that'll fix it!"
We were not captivated,in fact we were not surprised at all that a Boeing product failed
Thank you for this very clear exposition of the cascading failure that is the Starliner.
That's what happens when you build a space craft from leftover Boeing 737 MAX parts .
The same thing is happening in the airline industry. The airlines used to be about service, but they were able to do that because of regulations. That caused the price of flying to be higher, but it made the airlines safer and on time. Now the airlines are run by people who know nothing about service, they are accountants who look at the bottom line, not the product. Having been raised in an airline family, and working for a major airline for over 22 years, starting in 1985, I have seen airlines turn into bus companies. We used to work hard to make our customers happy, and arrive on time. Now aircraft seats are so small, and provide no room, so as to squeeze every last cent out of every aircraft. Passengers worry about getting the cheapest seat, but they don't realize that means they will be crammed together like sardines.
These days we seem to be worried about pennies at the cost of comfort, and worse yet we cut corners on safety.
Like most people my age, I grew up wanting to go to the Moon. If someone offered me a trip to space today but the only condition is I had to take Starliner, I would absolutely not get on that lemon. The entire program has just been one huge clusterf*ck and Boeing needs to be kicked to the curb. Meanwhile SpaceX continues to innovate and push forward more every day.
ok boomer
@@robertthallium6883 How original.
It's really wild that one option has such an incredibly high success rate that you may not even be too nervous riding it up while the other is a lemon.
Protecting shareholders is not the problem. You protect shareholders by ensuring that engineers run the show.
But that seriously reduces the dividends and the stock prices!
That's a good point
I dont think theu teach that in business school.
Engineers run the show = no need for fancy MBAs.
😅
@@JKHTX Intel made the same mistake and for 4 years AMD was kicking their butts. They still kinda are. I remember buying their shares at $6 a piece and it skyrocketing after Lisa Su took over as CEO... She's also an engineer, probably one that specializes in CPU die fabrication. Intel's CEO, a business guy, was promptly fired. I hate that it took an engineer from another country to force Intel to start acting like a real business again. It feels like all of our companies are falling to decadence, laziness, and corruption. GE was definitely one of them. I still have a whirl pool dishwasher from them.
@@TheRealRedRooster so shocking that building a safe, quality product that customers prefer reduces dividends and stock prices. It’s much better for Boeing to continue in the same way? Your strategy doesn’t seem to be working. Boeing has lost more than half its value, and it’s been more than 4 years since they’ve paid a dividend.
The issue people outside of government contracting don’t realize is that when you are the prime contractor you don’t just take the glory when your subcontractor’s perform well, you are also on the hook when things go poorly. Ultimately, it’s Boeing’s responsibility to ensure Aerojet Rocketdyne provides a quality functional product.
"Outer space" is usually misused. Something in earth orbit would not be OUTER space, but maybe inner space
That's an interesting question as to where "Outer Space" begins.
Talk to any Boeing Employee and they'll tell you that the focus is only on money money money money and not on safety safety safety.
THE BEST VIDEO ON THIS ANYWHERE.👏
Quality content.
Thank goodness for SpaceX
Now if they could just get rid of that fascist elite at the top.
Space X and Elon Musk .. who made it possible ..💯 😊
Literally only because he could throw money at it. The dude is a narcissistic right wing nut job man child in just about every aspect. As a person that loves their tesla, I wish elon would just stfu.
I hope Daddy sees this, bro
Sorry I don’t trust Musk at all,space is not for the arrogants is only for engineers ,they know what they are doing !
737 Max - That's all that needs to be said about Boeing's competency (or lack thereof).
Boeing told CNN: “Every day, more than 80 airlines operate about 5,000 flights with the global fleet of 1,300 737 MAX airplanes, carrying 700,000 passengers to their destinations safely. The 737 MAX family's in-service reliability is above 99 per cent and consistent with other commercial airplane models.” Mar 4, 2024,
It's been 5 years since the last 737 MAX crash.
That's 5 x 365 x 5000 = 9,125,000 successful takeoffs and landings since last fatality
and 5 x 365 x 700,000 = 1.28 billion passengers safely travelled on the 737 MAX during that time.
Boeing actively witheld information about the aircraft to pilots. Thats unforgivable @@rays2506
@@rays2506 - The meaning is that PEOPLE HAD TO DIE before Boeing got it right.,
@@rays2506Tell that to those who died.
@@MikeJones-rk1un Tell that to those who don't died. Idiot
"In the summer of 2024" .. half the planet is having summer and the other half of the planet, southern hemisphere, are in winter.
Regarding the safe return of the two delayed astronauts. There's a difference between saying that these are experienced personnel who know the risks, and saying that there's no problem with their return. There is no reason to expect that there will be no deaths. Including in this case. I wish them well, but I see no reason to assume that the same company that made the mess in the first place has the ability to clean it up.
It's not the same company cleaning it up, they're riding back on the SpaceX Dragon.
Fixed Cost vs Cost Plus is a big game changer with unanticipated consequences that need to be well thought through early on.
This is the first I learned of the silicon seal problem on Starliner. Good storytelling, thanks.
teflon seal not silicon . and silicon is a crystaline solid you mean silicone
We will probably lose a crew dragon at some point; soyuz wasn't perfect and no crewed vehicle will be.
But.
Boeing inspires no confidence.
Starliner has repeatedly failed.
We need to move on to something else, like that space plane, Sierra
Human rated Dream Chaser when
But we really don't. All these years of not having a backup, hasn't been that big of a deal.
And even having no way to put people into space for a long time, paying the Russians for rides, was vastly cheaper than this trash has been.
And the fact is, the ISS only has a few years left now. What's the point?
@@williamcase426 If Sierra space had the money Boeing has been given they wud do incredible things
Was? Soyuz is still flying. There was one delivering and returning crew to the ISS in March 2024.
@@miken3963 And still leaking it's hypergolic fuels all over the place as well. Far from perfect.
As an old school kinda guy, I think there is too much A.I. involved in the functioning of the space craft. In the 1960s, the computer had the calculating power of a wristwatch, and the astronauts did a lot of the work mechanically, and it worked way better.
The best 28:30 I have spent on this subject. Bravo!!! (my uncle worked on the Space Shuttle wind tunnel division)
Pull all Boeing contracts. Indict Boeing management criminally.
Appreciate your thorough start-to-finish chronicling of all the key steps on the Boeing path to failure
First video I’ve seen that has concisely put it all together
Thank You
RIP Boeing
Management always has a scapegoat.
If management can not take the truth, then they should get out of the way. Management failed on the space shuttle launch with the solid rocket booster failure.
As an engineer and pilot I hope we are allowed to learn what caused the thruster failures and it isn't just swept into the corporate classified dustbin.
I grew up in the 60's in the San Fernando Valley. I remember when RocketDyne would test the Saturn-5 engines which could be heard all around the Valley. Sadly, there is nothing left of RocketDyne in Canoga Park, nor is there anything left of Lockheed in Burbank. That was a phenomenal time of engineering, guts, and an attitude of failure is not an option. The problems we see today are as this excellent video points out, the engineers were pushed aside in favor of money people. The main problem with software is that with few exceptions, the people writing software know little, nor want to know about hardware and the intricacies that go with the hardware. The kids at SpaceX seem to have the right attitude due in no small part of who heads the company.
Well this sucks.
I had faith in Starliner. I watched the first launch live. I watch the crewed launch live. I was excited.
But this?
This is just stupid.
It’s time for nasa to put out some more contracts for crew and cargo. Sierra Space, Rocket Lab, the works.
The Boeing contract was the brainchild of Congress, with the help of corporate lobbying......
The contract was won by SpaceX. There was only one contract, until SpaceX won it.
@@lordgarion514 What? Boeing had the better proposal. SpaceX was the second choice.
@@AmbientMorality I would say that Boeing may have had what appeared to be the better proposal. It is starting to appear that USA/Boeing may have been the worst possible choice of all the bidders.
People forget that the first Space Shuttle test flight was much worse. The difference is not that in the past things were working but today not, the difference is, that in the past there was no alternative nad no competition and as a result of that no one played the „good/bad“ game.
No, people don’t forget that the first Shuttle flight was worse. They remember that the idiotic thing was an expensive death trap that should never have been allowed to fly.
@@TheGreatAmphibian If only safe space flights were allowed, there would be none. :)
I have recently been wondering WTF has happened to the once great Boeing. This video was exactly what I was hoping for. Thank you very much for an excellent and informative explanation.
Turns out NASA said that several thrusters failed during reentry and if it hadn't been for emergency backup thrusters the capsule may not have survived reentry.