Smooth background sounds and production. Pretty superficial reporting. Not a lot of technical information here. Not this isn’t the worst report but, frankly, boring!
Stop giving boeing govt contracts. They've been milking the cow for decades and people only realize how bad it has gotten now that a real competitive company is in the mix.
@@KendallSeabury They don't deserve any more contracts at this point, even if its a win win for NASA. And frankly, it isn't a win win when your astronauts get stuck in space because the agency decided to keep working with an unreliable Boeing
@@tadmvmbno they’re correct: before Both SpaceX and Boeing got the contract, Congress only wanted one provider: they wanted Boeing because of its legacy and supposed experience and a lot of lobbying. Thankfully NASA went with two providers
even more proof that they're right: boeing was paid double the amount spacex did. Yet SpaceX did it faster, for cheaper, and boeing went well over their budget. SpaceX was the backup when the contracts were made
Boeing didn't have great leadership in upper management and people were running away More than one Boeing whistleblower died before testifying and that seems suspicious
That's not true. While you could say, many of the best want to work at SpaceX, the major problem of Boeing is politics. Its all about DEI and lack of ambition and working culture. SpaceX is "WAR" machine when it comes to fast development and trying crazy new things
The actual issues are likely on the upper management, even though Musk is a horrible boss to have he is mostly busy liking racist tweets so he doesn't seem have much time to ruin things at SpaceX. (Compared to the upper management of Boeing who seems to have intentionally ignored/moved on from fixing problems in their spacecraft due to cost overruns and delays which is probably one of the main reasons why they launched it with this many safety issues.)
When Space X goes to pick them up, they should bring the Boeing CEO & a couple other Boeing Executives so they can "safely" fly back on Starliner to prove to us it was safe.
There are two space companies, both from the *same country,* both were asked to make a spacecaft, one made it cheap and prefect without delays, the other one made it expensive and defected with delays, how? and why?
@@ZiggyMercury nothing is perfect, but Spacex has the edge. Their falcon9 launch system has the record for consecutive successful launches and the dragon2 capsule has completed many missions (including 10 crewed missions).
This might aught to be the final nail in Boeing’s coffin. Boeing has lost its credibility and reputation for safety and reliability. At the same time, we all became aware of its executives’ culture of grift and short term thinking. Should the company be trusted as a government supplier of any product, let alone aerospace and defence? Perhaps it’s time to break Boeing up into smaller companies, to distribute management and accountability, before one more person dies as a result of Boeing’s endemic incompetence and negligence?
This smells a bit like the Columbia disaster of 20023, and it seems to me that NASA has decided - and I salute them for it - not to take the same risks they took with Columbia (especially since they don't have to): with Columbia, there were people inside NASA who warned that the foam strike seen shortly after take off may be detrimental, but the higher-ups in NASA didn't do anything about it. Turns out the foam strike was, indeed, detrimental, and Columbia's crew burned to death upon re-entry. Now, the only "saving grace" for NASA's management from 2003 is that their ability to do something about it (if they decided not to ignore the foam strike) was very limited at best, and non-existent at worst. This time it's different, and I'm glad that NASA doesn't just choose to roll the dice with the lives of these two astronauts.
Is way different, main issue here is lack of pressure in the engines, which isn't really a big deal, but can have a catastrophic result, Columbia was kinda unavoidable, it was an accident and once you launch the shuttle there is no abort. Starliner have a lot of ways to solve this issue, Nasa decided to do the safest thing and return unmanned, but the most likely scenario is that the capsule performs the reentry without issues, since they already "fixed" many of the issues with the thrusters.
@@evanfinch4987 It is quite similar to Columbia. However in this case, NASA has learnt from the mistakes of Challenger and Columbia, and have urged engineers to come forward with their opinions. The engineers thought that it would be unsafe - so NASA is following that advice.
They didn't burn up. That would have been better. They survived the breakup, and died when the cabin hit the water. There was a plan to make the cabin much like a fighter cockpit (ejection) in an emergency, with parachutes to bring it down safely. Due to additional (weight and cost) required for such a system, it was rejected. Sad but true, they were alive until they hit the water. All the astronauts were recovered.
i was just talking to a friend about this and literally said "there's no way Boeing will return on a Space X craft, unless they had to". looks like they had to. unbelievable they didn't have a backup plan.
@@MrMleewilson Read this section from Wikipedia "Musk was born in Pretoria, South Africa, to Maye (née Haldeman), a model, and Errol Musk, a businessman and engineer." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk
@@MrMleewilson Read this section from Wikipedia "Musk was born in Pretoria, South Africa, to Maye (née Haldeman), a model, and Errol Musk, a businessman and engineer." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk
@@MrMleewilsonwatch his interviews, he definitely knows an extensive amount about the design of Space X rockets at the very least. It’s clear he’s not reading off a script cuz he can answer advanced technical questions while looking at away from the camera (away from any potential teleprompters)
and because of that, the russians are angry that the "American broomstick" is saving NASA! Roscosmos is in the dumps right now and they're close to failing because of Spacex
Yeah that's the crux of the issue all the Musk-haters conveniently ignore. If it weren't for SpaceX, we'd still be hitchhiking on Soyuz capsules, directly financing the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Michael Massimino is a former astronaut too. A lot of these older retired astronauts are real oldspace promoters, pretty set in their ways. It's different with active duty astronauts from what I've read.
The people on the top that got away with destroying Boeing need to be held accountable. Anything short of jail is not accountability. They need to go to jail.
you do realize, the problem is *us* , right? Because the shareholders, the ones that Boeing CEOs must prostrate themselves, legally, fiduciary, before the altar of, are ourselves? Our retirement and investment funds?
@@WinterXR7 What do you propose? That NASA says goodbye to 4 billion or whatever they gave them and ask a new company to start from scratch. That would take another decade.
Astronauts know there’s risk, but I can’t imagine being in the Gilligan’s Island situation. 8 day trip turns into 8 months. Takes a lot of mental toughness.
SpaceX ftw! This is what happens when you have company not bogged down with bureaucracy and red tape, they are actually able to deliver on their product! SpaceX, Blue Origin, Sierra Space, Rocket Lab and others like them will be the future of space exploration.
Boeing: "We are willing to take the risk with the astronaut's lives." I find it funny Boeing said the "data" support using Starliner. Really? Constant real-world failures on this vehicle, but let's look at the paper data.
@@joshuawarrington9417 You have to ignore reality to make this worldview work. If hiring smart people were the unusual variable at spacex, every other space startup would be doing well.
Great summary of the history and issues along the way. Next up is Starliner’s uncrewed return. There will be significant learning from that event to help inform what changes are needed to improve Starliner before another crewed mission to ISS.
To have competition between the 2. If you have competition, ideally they will fight each other to improve and create the best product. That's how it is supposed to work. But, clearly, SpaceX just has better talent and resources. They should've chosen a different competitor like Blue Origin
I have an MBA myself but after looking at how SpaceX works, I’m convinced the real issue with Boeing is that pandering to shareholders dividends means taking a safety approach over risk taking every time. Safety is indeed critical but there’s a whole science behind risk management that delivers top not safety as SpaceX shows which allows them to continue innovative approaches to greater services. Boeing could never have dared to design and incorporate a transparent dome over their Calypso spacecraft the way SpaceX did for the Dragon capsule!
If we step back and look at the situation. I am not sure there has ever occurred a situation with US astronauts that a US crew vehicle has had a issue in orbit and NASA has a completely different US crewed vehicle available to return that crew. Just shows you how much crewed spaceflight has changed in the last decade+.
“We’re in a kind of a new situation here and that we’ve got multiple options,” said Ken Bowersox, associate administrator for NASA’s Space Operations Mission Directorate, on August 7. “That’s something that we’re going to have to deal with in the future - we could find ourselves in a situation where we need to bring a (SpaceX) Dragon crew or a (Russian) Soyuz crew back on a Starliner." Wow....... Boeing have failed miserably with their first proper Starliner flight but NASA are pointing out how the same company will be out there rescuing SpaceX or Russian crews.
I've been thinking along those lines for a couple weeks now... I'm guessing they'd have to wash the ones they've got, but the opportunities to do so on board the ISS are limited, to say the least...
"Boeing says it's ready to go" astronauts turn and look at each other with concerned looks "I can't believe I'm saying this, but can someone call Elon?"
Boeing were given 5 billion to make starliner, Musk was given 1.5 billion for Dragon. and have done a 20x better product. Up with startups, down with big defence companies.
Your figures are off and not by a little. Space X was awarded 2.6 billion to design and build Dragon. Boeing was awarded 4.2 billion to design and build Starliner. Boeing also spent at least 1.4 billion more to get Starliner flight worthy and still couldn't get it right. The engineering culture at Boeing has apparently suffered because of poor management oversight.
@@haiscore2614Makes sense, but the US might need an backup just in case if there would be an issue with the Crew Dragon capsule at a time where it might not be an good idea to ask Russia for a Soyuz flight. (Probably the worst case scenario) The biggest issue however comes from people who doesn't know much about SpaceX or people who hate them in spite of Musk. (Because they're not capable of realizing that those two are not synonyms)
but now, it has been reported that the connections for space suits are incompatible between the two vehicles,, so NASA will need to send different space suits to the ISS before the stranded can return.on Dragon. That is a NASA failure to ensure interoperability between vendors. Their goal was to have redundancy, but this is a clear failure of that goal.
Well, to be fair, NASA is beholden to Congress for all of its' funding. Ruffling too many feathers, too early in the game, would not be a wise decision.
NASA was already privately coordinating with SpaceX (and other stakeholders) on planning this out months ago. This was just the final decision that was made and announced. It's not like they are only now starting to shuffle the Crew Dragon missions around. It also took time to gather data (e.g. the White Sands thruster tests) before the data came back and it helped them make the decision. They knew they had time to gather the data because the astronauts aren't really in any danger and don't need to be "rescued" ASAP. It's also not like they are begging SpaceX to send a spacecraft to help them anyway. SpaceX already has a Crew Dragon on the schedule to deliver 4 astronauts and goods to the ISS. NASA is the customer of that and gets to ask for change in the manifest, so they are pulling 2 NASA astronauts off that trip to give room for the 2 astronauts they need to take home but those are missions that NASA is already paying for to begin with.
Don't understand how this could happen. Before it goes into space, every space vehicle has to go into a high bay, then all the air is sucked out of the high bay, and the vehicle is rotisseried between heaters and freezers for the expected duration of a nominal mission, with thrusters and avionics tested the whole time. Usually, this is how the company sells off requirements from the customer. If there are material defects and bad equipment, it should be found at that point. The actual flight should be a boring formality.
Boeing taking nothing but L the last several years. If it was my life I would definitely take space x over Boeing. It sure seems like Boeing has lost its way. Maybe to many cooks in the kitchen or too many different projects at once. Civilian Planes, military contracts, and space.
@@TomNook. Bloat would be too much at one time. Maybe they should try making their airplanes perfect , instead of twenty different things at once. Why do you even feel the need to pick at what I said, I really don't understand. When we both agree they're doing a horrible job.
Crew Dragon is way better than Soyuz. But yeah, obviously Soyuz is a thousand times better than Starliner right now. All of that said, NASA and Roscosmos haven't really broken up. They're still doing seat swaps.
Me, along with others in comments of space related channels, have long known this is how things would play out. Why ANYONE would even TRUST a Boeing rocket when, they can't even address quality issues with their AIRPLANES! Boeing built a rocket that leaked on the way up and, got stuck once up there due to unreliability. SpaceX has built, and demonstrated, the engineering prowess to both launch a rocket and then, have it return and precisely be "caught" with "arms" on the landing pad. The obvious contrast is glaring.
Read more about NASA’s decision to use SpaceX instead of Boeing here: on.wsj.com/3MnqZ6o
Smooth background sounds and production. Pretty superficial reporting. Not a lot of technical information here. Not this isn’t the worst report but, frankly, boring!
SpaceX did it for ~2 bn $. Boeing took ~4 bn $, delayed it and still failed. SpaceX is really on another level.
If that is true, there has to be an investigation on both side.
@@keselekbakiak Even if the Starliner hadn’t any problem it cost 90m$/seat almost the double of the Space X crew dragon (55m)
management was trash. Starts from the top
@@keselekbakiak Not just an investigation, there needs to be a clawback.
Boeing is quite frankly a clown act.
Boeing announces StarLiner Max.
But, does it come with MCAS?
😂😂😂😂
@@allancopland1768 instead of causing it to crash into the ground, the starliner mcas causes your plane to burn up in the atmosphere
Much cleaner
😂😂😂
Stop giving boeing govt contracts. They've been milking the cow for decades and people only realize how bad it has gotten now that a real competitive company is in the mix.
Actually the contract with NASA is if they go over the budget then Boeing is footing the bill for any cost over runs. its a win win for NASA.
@@KendallSeabury They don't deserve any more contracts at this point, even if its a win win for NASA. And frankly, it isn't a win win when your astronauts get stuck in space because the agency decided to keep working with an unreliable Boeing
@@KendallSeaburySo that means they can remove bolts and nuts on it so save costs
@@Dr.Kraig_Renno, that is not how it works, Doctor… 🙄
@@KendallSeaburyactually the contact Boeing won gave them much more money than spaceX got. For the same deliverables. Boeing robbed nasa blind.
Boeing is now a symbol of embarrassment and failure
Only for American industry and work culture.
Did you see the 737 MAX? this was inevitable
@@dantetre No, us Europeans see it too. Boeing looks bad.
@@dantetre American *_CEO_* work culture
made in USA 🇺🇸 USA🇺🇸 🦅
This is what happens when you let a bunch of MBAs run an engineering company instead of engineers.
We call them MBAs "BEAN COINTERS" in the industry, they killed most of the R&D work to save money and kill all innovations.
Sorry I meant "BEAN COUNTERS"
So True!
Another attack of "The smartest people in the room". They always start out with flawed premise.
Cherry on top: Gone woke
If Boeing CEO salary wasnt 33 million dollars (45% increase from last year) maybe they would had money on sealing those pipes properly xD
Well he’s not the ceo anymore and no whether he takes 1 dollar for 100 million, really doesn’t make a difference
@@davidajayi1207 It's a symbol. Hybris leads to downfall
Boeing got a governmnet hand out of more than 4 billion, for two astronauts, halfway. SpaceX got two billion for 50 astronauts.
33 mil is nothing compared to budget.
55 billion is.
You do realize Elon Musk is the richest man in the world, no? His pay is far above any Boeing CEO's pay.
This is why you shouldn't allow people who have the background of business & accounting to make decisions on science and technology related things.
Unless you have enough money and power and you can wrangle your government to fund you forever!
business guy went into space news at 9
most engineers can‘t run operations efficiently. they are tools of the masters of the universe - MBAs
@@giacomocasanova2893spoken like a butthurt MBA
So Boeing got humiliated again.!
Sad thing is that company clearly has no sense of shame hence their constant incompetence.
Technically its Aerojet Rocketdyne mistake this time with the thrusters, but Boeing is going to take the heat.
Surprised
2 deadly plane crashes, and now 1 broken space capsule
they chose profit over safety
SpaceX was considered the "BACKUP" option in the SpaceX vs Boeing race..................
You misinterpreted what he said
They need two companies to back each other up! Any company can have setbacks no matter how good they are
@@tadmvmbno they’re correct: before Both SpaceX and Boeing got the contract, Congress only wanted one provider: they wanted Boeing because of its legacy and supposed experience and a lot of lobbying.
Thankfully NASA went with two providers
................
@@clevergirl4457Boeing got complacent, they were so used to failing and still receiving billions in funding.
even more proof that they're right: boeing was paid double the amount spacex did. Yet SpaceX did it faster, for cheaper, and boeing went well over their budget. SpaceX was the backup when the contracts were made
The problem is all the good engineers have left Boeing for SpaceX. Boeing needs to start paying more or offer more perks
Boeing didn't have great leadership in upper management and people were running away
More than one Boeing whistleblower died before testifying and that seems suspicious
That's not true. While you could say, many of the best want to work at SpaceX, the major problem of Boeing is politics. Its all about DEI and lack of ambition and working culture. SpaceX is "WAR" machine when it comes to fast development and trying crazy new things
Bingo brother ! this is what I've been saying...and throw in money, power and politics...
Boeing and SpaceX are the same in this case. Both running with Elon.
The actual issues are likely on the upper management, even though Musk is a horrible boss to have he is mostly busy liking racist tweets so he doesn't seem have much time to ruin things at SpaceX.
(Compared to the upper management of Boeing who seems to have intentionally ignored/moved on from fixing problems in their spacecraft due to cost overruns and delays which is probably one of the main reasons why they launched it with this many safety issues.)
Boeing ... BOEING ... GONE!
Going woke, ... going ... gone
🌬️
@@kobusg7460 Boeing is failing because they went woke? 🤣🤣
@@Arcwol These folks are brilliant aren't they
boeing makes your freedom sustainable. their missiles makes you a free citizen
When Space X goes to pick them up, they should bring the Boeing CEO & a couple other Boeing Executives so they can "safely" fly back on Starliner to prove to us it was safe.
There are two space companies, both from the *same country,* both were asked to make a spacecaft, one made it cheap and prefect without delays, the other one made it expensive and defected with delays, how? and why?
How do you know the one from SpaceX is "perfect"?
@@ZiggyMercury nothing is perfect, but Spacex has the edge.
Their falcon9 launch system has the record for consecutive successful launches and the dragon2 capsule has completed many missions (including 10 crewed missions).
Its been proven many times@@ZiggyMercury
Political kickbacks, corruption.
Arrogance🤷😤
This might aught to be the final nail in Boeing’s coffin. Boeing has lost its credibility and reputation for safety and reliability. At the same time, we all became aware of its executives’ culture of grift and short term thinking. Should the company be trusted as a government supplier of any product, let alone aerospace and defence? Perhaps it’s time to break Boeing up into smaller companies, to distribute management and accountability, before one more person dies as a result of Boeing’s endemic incompetence and negligence?
Too big to fail
Well said
Can I have one of those pieces?
@@astrofpv3631 Yeah...Nokia
I suggest naming two of those broken up pieces North American Aviation and McDonnell Douglas. No particular reason.
When the coach replaces you with someone from the other team. 😂😂😂
Surprised Starliner's door didn't fall off...
Ironically it did fall off before the launch. Boeing just picked it up and put it back on and called it a day. I'm surprised it's still on there.
It hasent fell off BUT the software failure has made it so the door wont let the liner undock 😂
One of the astronauts must have been a whistle blower. 😂
😅😅😅😅
My uncle worked for Boeing as an engineer and left many years ago because the company was not run well. Just putting that out there
It is all over the news. Boeing is not doing well now
He should try to apply for space x or other countries rocket companies.
I left Boeing 12 years ago… bad management
Hopefully he’s somewhere safe and hasn’t spoken out publicly.
@@stachowi SpaceX is growing like crazy, if you want a front row seat into the future you could apply there.
"Elon Musk please save us we are too incompetent to build a safe capsule!!" - Boeing
Musk is very incompetent. SpaceX got successful because they hired people who are actually competent.
Elon Musk is a socialist that loves dictators.
This smells a bit like the Columbia disaster of 20023, and it seems to me that NASA has decided - and I salute them for it - not to take the same risks they took with Columbia (especially since they don't have to): with Columbia, there were people inside NASA who warned that the foam strike seen shortly after take off may be detrimental, but the higher-ups in NASA didn't do anything about it. Turns out the foam strike was, indeed, detrimental, and Columbia's crew burned to death upon re-entry. Now, the only "saving grace" for NASA's management from 2003 is that their ability to do something about it (if they decided not to ignore the foam strike) was very limited at best, and non-existent at worst. This time it's different, and I'm glad that NASA doesn't just choose to roll the dice with the lives of these two astronauts.
Smells nothing like Columbia.
Is way different, main issue here is lack of pressure in the engines, which isn't really a big deal, but can have a catastrophic result, Columbia was kinda unavoidable, it was an accident and once you launch the shuttle there is no abort.
Starliner have a lot of ways to solve this issue, Nasa decided to do the safest thing and return unmanned, but the most likely scenario is that the capsule performs the reentry without issues, since they already "fixed" many of the issues with the thrusters.
@@evanfinch4987 It is quite similar to Columbia. However in this case, NASA has learnt from the mistakes of Challenger and Columbia, and have urged engineers to come forward with their opinions. The engineers thought that it would be unsafe - so NASA is following that advice.
They didn't burn up. That would have been better. They survived the breakup, and died when the cabin hit the water. There was a plan to make the cabin much like a fighter cockpit (ejection) in an emergency, with parachutes to bring it down safely. Due to additional (weight and cost) required for such a system, it was rejected. Sad but true, they were alive until they hit the water. All the astronauts were recovered.
20023!?
i was just talking to a friend about this and literally said "there's no way Boeing will return on a Space X craft, unless they had to".
looks like they had to. unbelievable they didn't have a backup plan.
SpaceX is the back up plan!!
Unless they were made to
Just tell Boeing both are whistleblowers, they'll find a way.
Boeing has a CEO that’s business first minded. SpaceX has a CEO who’s an actual Engineer that has the passion for space.
Yeah I love SpaceX
Musk is not an engineer.
@@MrMleewilson Read this section from Wikipedia
"Musk was born in Pretoria, South Africa, to Maye (née Haldeman), a model, and Errol Musk, a businessman and engineer."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk
@@MrMleewilson Read this section from Wikipedia
"Musk was born in Pretoria, South Africa, to Maye (née Haldeman), a model, and Errol Musk, a businessman and engineer."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk
@@MrMleewilsonwatch his interviews, he definitely knows an extensive amount about the design of Space X rockets at the very least. It’s clear he’s not reading off a script cuz he can answer advanced technical questions while looking at away from the camera (away from any potential teleprompters)
We would still be begging the Russians for a ride to space without Space X!
Yeah the Chinese are stealing their tech as we speak though
and because of that, the russians are angry that the "American broomstick" is saving NASA! Roscosmos is in the dumps right now and they're close to failing because of Spacex
Yeah that's the crux of the issue all the Musk-haters conveniently ignore. If it weren't for SpaceX, we'd still be hitchhiking on Soyuz capsules, directly financing the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Gotta love how the professor says that Boeings failure is really great cause it gives them an opportunity to recover! Wow!
It sure sounds like that professor has a consulting job with Boeing
Failure is great when it’s not the real thing.
same guy will be on tv after a 777X engine pylon falls off in flight "they will bounce right back from this!"
Michael Massimino is a former astronaut too. A lot of these older retired astronauts are real oldspace promoters, pretty set in their ways. It's different with active duty astronauts from what I've read.
Failures can be useful if they can properly learn from it, however their history with the Starliner suggests otherwise...
If it’s Boeing, you ain’t going…
…home.
😂 Cracked me up
Oh wow I am so surprised 😐
Boeing has been on a pedestal for far too long.
Good keep reading and believing the tweets
The people on the top that got away with destroying Boeing need to be held accountable. Anything short of jail is not accountability. They need to go to jail.
you do realize, the problem is *us* , right? Because the shareholders, the ones that Boeing CEOs must prostrate themselves, legally, fiduciary, before the altar of, are ourselves? Our retirement and investment funds?
@@leeswecho by them taking shortcuts and outright lying on safety test do you really think that helped the shareholders? Do you think the stock is up?
Shareholders may have pressured them for maximizing profits at the cost of safety and innovation. They need to be held accountable as well.
Giligan’s Space Station. It was only supposed to be a 192 hour tour, a 192 hour tour…
“If it’s Boeing I’m Not Going” 2024 change of motto.
The Astronauts stuck in space: "It's Boeing so We're not going."
I feel SpaceX won but NASA can’t say it because of partnership/money.
Everyone knows they won, having both options available is what NASA wants.
@@RandomPerson-VMaybe that option shouldn’t be Boeing…
@@WinterXR7 What do you propose? That NASA says goodbye to 4 billion or whatever they gave them and ask a new company to start from scratch. That would take another decade.
@@Hanno300bc Fair point.
They launched almost 100 rockets last year. I don’t think NASA and Boeing combined have done that since their founding.
Let’s pray and hope that they are able to return to earth safely, amen.
Don't worry, they will return to earth.
Astronauts know there’s risk, but I can’t imagine being in the Gilligan’s Island situation. 8 day trip turns into 8 months. Takes a lot of mental toughness.
This is what happen when you let BlackRock and Vanguard MBAs to run an engineering company.
At thus stage Space X only competition is Space X
Corporate greed will never beat great engineering.
Corporate greed over quality and safety is a stain on Boeing
What sound does a space craft when it crashes into the earth? Boe--ing!
🙄
At the time they were extremely hostile towards SpaceX. Now they say that they want two companies in the field.
It’s starting to make a whole lot of sense why V-22s crash all the time.
Great point!
This is one of the most unacceptable things to ever happen in American astronautics history.
One of, but not the only. The burning capsule with Gus Grissam, the o-ring on the Challenger were just as bad. At least no one died in this one.
SpaceX ftw! This is what happens when you have company not bogged down with bureaucracy and red tape, they are actually able to deliver on their product! SpaceX, Blue Origin, Sierra Space, Rocket Lab and others like them will be the future of space exploration.
Sierra Space 🤍
Boeing: "We are willing to take the risk with the astronaut's lives." I find it funny Boeing said the "data" support using Starliner. Really? Constant real-world failures on this vehicle, but let's look at the paper data.
Great document.
Very informative,
Thank you
DB
if the psychological state of the stranded astronauts start to deteriorate then it will be a really bad situation.
You may hate Musk, but just look at Boeing
I love Musk.
SpaceX and Musk aren't synonyms.
@@RandomPerson-V They are though
they aren't tho
@@joshuawarrington9417 You have to ignore reality to make this worldview work. If hiring smart people were the unusual variable at spacex, every other space startup would be doing well.
Have u seen Boeing’s leadership, Boeing is about maximizing profits not about engineering safe and reliable spacecraft…
I just pray they come back safely. That’s it !! Their families are waiting for them.
Forgot to mention how Boeing got almost twice the amount of money than SpaceX dor the crew transport program
Great summary of the history and issues along the way. Next up is Starliner’s uncrewed return. There will be significant learning from that event to help inform what changes are needed to improve Starliner before another crewed mission to ISS.
4:18 "Boeing has now flown...half of one"
Dude, that's like a short king saying they're 5ft 6 and a half
Unfortunatly Boeing is unreliable. They were great for so long this new reality hasn't sunk in yet.
Replace Boeing with US Congress and it still works.
Why didn't they use SpaceX from day one instead of Boeing? 🤔
Because they paid Boeing billions of dollars to do this project
starliner?
did you watch the video? They literally said they hired both companies so they could have multiple options to take astronauts to the space station.
To have competition between the 2. If you have competition, ideally they will fight each other to improve and create the best product. That's how it is supposed to work.
But, clearly, SpaceX just has better talent and resources. They should've chosen a different competitor like Blue Origin
They plan this years in advance before SpaceX was even as mature as they are today.
Makes you appreciate the accomplishments made by SpaceX.
I have an MBA myself but after looking at how SpaceX works, I’m convinced the real issue with Boeing is that pandering to shareholders dividends means taking a safety approach over risk taking every time. Safety is indeed critical but there’s a whole science behind risk management that delivers top not safety as SpaceX shows which allows them to continue innovative approaches to greater services. Boeing could never have dared to design and incorporate a transparent dome over their Calypso spacecraft the way SpaceX did for the Dragon capsule!
If we step back and look at the situation. I am not sure there has ever occurred a situation with US astronauts that a US crew vehicle has had a issue in orbit and NASA has a completely different US crewed vehicle available to return that crew. Just shows you how much crewed spaceflight has changed in the last decade+.
Too many “business” folks running an engineering company does that to you
Thanks to DEI
Just cancelled my upcoming flight on a Boeing 787. Will be shopping for an Airbus flight instead.
Brilliant suicide idea. Airbus has a poor safety record compared to Boeing.
Cmon, you know that 787 is definitely coming back to earth. lol
So sad how this mission has perfectly reflected Boeings internal struggles. There is no replacement for quality control but they keep cutting it
Finally, they should have left it up to the professionals in the first place.
The question should be focused on leadership. What is going on at the top at Boeing?
The old CEO just got fired and the position got replaced by a former engineer. Maybe promising, but idk.
If the Starliner comes back to earth fine without the astronauts, it would be a life saver for this Boeing program.
Will we ever know if that happens with honesty though? We are not in a time of trust worthy comments.
@@TheRadioAteMyTV If it goes boom, it goes boom if it comes back usable then we'll see launched again. Simple as.
"SpaceX stepping up to the plate! 🚀👏 Loving how they're ready to support NASA's missions when needed. Teamwork makes the dream work! 🌌💪"
Impressive teamwork, SpaceX and NASA! 🚀
“We’re in a kind of a new situation here and that we’ve got multiple options,” said Ken Bowersox, associate administrator for NASA’s Space Operations Mission Directorate, on August 7. “That’s something that we’re going to have to deal with in the future - we could find ourselves in a situation where we need to bring a (SpaceX) Dragon crew or a (Russian) Soyuz crew back on a Starliner."
Wow....... Boeing have failed miserably with their first proper Starliner flight but NASA are pointing out how the same company will be out there rescuing SpaceX or Russian crews.
Somebody is using DEI, and Somebody is not
some people have brain cells, and you do not
Glad you didn’t use the headline stranded in space. Glad you have integrity and common sense
Thank gods it was leaks that were the problem. Boeing sure knows how to handle those.
Hopefully they have Netflix on the ISS. I would binge watch everything for the next 8 months.
You know they didn't bring extra underwear.
Nor did they think they would be celibate for 8 months out of nowhere, and forget about Christmas.
I've been thinking along those lines for a couple weeks now... I'm guessing they'd have to wash the ones they've got, but the opportunities to do so on board the ISS are limited, to say the least...
"Boeing says it's ready to go" astronauts turn and look at each other with concerned looks "I can't believe I'm saying this, but can someone call Elon?"
Downfall of Boeing…..
Very smart that they required to American companies. Not one! 3:35 very smart.
If it's Boeing, it ain't going (back, with humans)
Boeing were given 5 billion to make starliner, Musk was given 1.5 billion for Dragon. and have done a 20x better product. Up with startups, down with big defence companies.
Your figures are off and not by a little. Space X was awarded 2.6 billion to design and build Dragon. Boeing was awarded 4.2 billion to design and build Starliner. Boeing also spent at least 1.4 billion more to get Starliner flight worthy and still couldn't get it right. The engineering culture at Boeing has apparently suffered because of poor management oversight.
Elon to the rescue
GOD TRUMP MUSK RFK TO THE RESCUE WENDY DARLING; THE CALVARY IS COMING
Boeing literally Gillian’s Island the astronaut’s 😂
Did you just make "Gillians Island" a *_verb_* ?
Michael Massimino sounds so much Neil...had to take my phone out of my pocket to check the man!
NASA needs to have an option besides space X.
Yes, but they also need a spacecraft that actually works, which Boeing is not capable of supplying.
They had one it was starliner LOL
Why? SpaceX actually delivers working solutions. Wasting the already limited NASA funds for "more options" is a bad move.
@@haiscore2614Makes sense, but the US might need an backup just in case if there would be an issue with the Crew Dragon capsule at a time where it might not be an good idea to ask Russia for a Soyuz flight. (Probably the worst case scenario)
The biggest issue however comes from people who doesn't know much about SpaceX or people who hate them in spite of Musk. (Because they're not capable of realizing that those two are not synonyms)
Having a fully functioning rocket ship is more important than having a bunch of mediocre choices.
Elon : Let that sink in...
Michael Massimino message in this interview: hello Boeing … I can play ball for you … get me into your C suite
but now, it has been reported that the connections for space suits are incompatible between the two vehicles,, so NASA will need to send different space suits to the ISS before the stranded can return.on Dragon. That is a NASA failure to ensure interoperability between vendors. Their goal was to have redundancy, but this is a clear failure of that goal.
This doesn’t only make Boeing look bad, but also NASA. They waited over 6 months before they finally swallowed their pride and asked for help
Well, to be fair, NASA is beholden to Congress for all of its' funding. Ruffling too many feathers, too early in the game, would not be a wise decision.
NASA was already privately coordinating with SpaceX (and other stakeholders) on planning this out months ago. This was just the final decision that was made and announced. It's not like they are only now starting to shuffle the Crew Dragon missions around. It also took time to gather data (e.g. the White Sands thruster tests) before the data came back and it helped them make the decision. They knew they had time to gather the data because the astronauts aren't really in any danger and don't need to be "rescued" ASAP.
It's also not like they are begging SpaceX to send a spacecraft to help them anyway. SpaceX already has a Crew Dragon on the schedule to deliver 4 astronauts and goods to the ISS. NASA is the customer of that and gets to ask for change in the manifest, so they are pulling 2 NASA astronauts off that trip to give room for the 2 astronauts they need to take home but those are missions that NASA is already paying for to begin with.
First Boeing lost to Lockheed Martin with respect to the F35. Now Boeing is losing to SpaceX. This must bring back painful memories.
Once again, private enterprise must do what government cannot. Keep giving them your tax dollars, folks! It’s working out soooo well. 😂
Boeing is a private enterprise
Last time I checked, Boeing is a private company.
did you watch the video ? its a fixed price contract which Boeing has made a $1.4B loss on so far ...
Don't understand how this could happen. Before it goes into space, every space vehicle has to go into a high bay, then all the air is sucked out of the high bay, and the vehicle is rotisseried between heaters and freezers for the expected duration of a nominal mission, with thrusters and avionics tested the whole time. Usually, this is how the company sells off requirements from the customer. If there are material defects and bad equipment, it should be found at that point. The actual flight should be a boring formality.
Boeing taking nothing but L the last several years. If it was my life I would definitely take space x over Boeing. It sure seems like Boeing has lost its way. Maybe to many cooks in the kitchen or too many different projects at once. Civilian Planes, military contracts, and space.
None of that actually. Too much emphasis on management culture, politics and the corruption and bloat that comes with it.
@@TomNook. Bloat would be too much at one time. Maybe they should try making their airplanes perfect , instead of twenty different things at once. Why do you even feel the need to pick at what I said, I really don't understand. When we both agree they're doing a horrible job.
Shouldn't have broken up with Russia. Their Soyuz is a time tested vehicle.
Crew Dragon is way better than Soyuz. But yeah, obviously Soyuz is a thousand times better than Starliner right now.
All of that said, NASA and Roscosmos haven't really broken up. They're still doing seat swaps.
Elon is the greatest man of this generation
He just got lucky
Before he started meddling in politics.....
Wake up! Elon Musk is just a actor. He is a simple muppet promotor.
@@mcfly7 He is a rich narcissist.
I'm thinking that when you start using the term "buckets" to categorize problems, you've got too many.
Boeing, “DEI is our strength”. MLK “judged on our character and not the color of our skin”
One-trick pony, Robert.
Me, along with others in comments of space related channels, have long known this is how things would play out.
Why ANYONE would even TRUST a Boeing rocket when, they can't even address quality issues with their AIRPLANES!
Boeing built a rocket that leaked on the way up and, got stuck once up there due to unreliability. SpaceX has built, and demonstrated, the engineering prowess to both launch a rocket and then, have it return and precisely be "caught" with "arms" on the landing pad.
The obvious contrast is glaring.
Boeing.. What a disgrace?
Are they having the stock price discussions in this situation also at every chance they get? I'm curious
GOD BLESS SPACE-X AND ELON MUSK!
PLEASE VOTE FOR TRUMP AND VANCE TO
STOP THE THREAT TO OUR FREEDOM
AND DEMOCRACY! THANKS TO RFK JR.!
Such a matter of shame for Boeing. One of the established company has to seek help from a startup.
Boeing sucks on god. I almost died on one of their planes. Never again been on a plane since 2016. Boeing smoking percs , and meth