It never ceases to amaze me that Boeing managed to get almost twice the amount of $ compared to SpaceX for their commercial crew contract because they were considered the “safe” option. And yet...
It never ceases to amaze me that Boeing managed to get almost twice the amount of $ compared to SpaceX for their commercial crew contract because they were considered the “safe” option. And yet here we are a decade later where SpaceX’s crew dragon has had to be flying double duty for years because Boeing can’t build anything that works reliably anymore.
At least the contract isn’t cost plus, so Boeing is on the hook for the billion+ dollars in delays here but there needs to be a serious shake up in Boeing’s culture. Being slow and expensive with excellent results can be fine if everyone knows that going in but slow, expensive, and subpar is just disaster.
It seems that those decades of cost plus contracts completely destroyed their ability to get things done for any fixed amount of money. They became too used to being able to burn through cash at...
It seems that those decades of cost plus contracts completely destroyed their ability to get things done for any fixed amount of money. They became too used to being able to burn through cash at will because they were always able to ask for more, and the congressmen in their pockets were always happy to oblige.
The good news is that the problem was caught this time? But not by Boeing. Given their massive and seemingly endless QA problems, flying into hard vacuum on Boeing? How is this a good idea? After...
The good news is that the problem was caught this time? But not by Boeing.
Given their massive and seemingly endless QA problems, flying into hard vacuum on Boeing? How is this a good idea?
After the past year, I can only imagine being caught dead (pun intended) on a Boeing craft.
Boeing definitely deserves flak, but not for this. The issue was with a chattering valve on the Atlas V rocket which is operated by ULA, so if anyone then it's them being at "fault".
Boeing definitely deserves flak, but not for this. The issue was with a chattering valve on the Atlas V rocket which is operated by ULA, so if anyone then it's them being at "fault".
Is this splitting hairs? My preferred veterinary specialist is a "partner" in a larger "group" that is owned by private equity. Enshittification tends to roll down hill; I'm seeing costs go up...
Is this splitting hairs? My preferred veterinary specialist is a "partner" in a larger "group" that is owned by private equity. Enshittification tends to roll down hill; I'm seeing costs go up consistently. 🤞 that quality isn't going down but how can I tell?
I wouldn't say it's splitting hairs. It's a joint venture between LockMart and Boeing's Space Division, who aren't even the ones who have been in the news lately for QA issues. As...
Exemplary
I wouldn't say it's splitting hairs. It's a joint venture between LockMart and Boeing's Space Division, who aren't even the ones who have been in the news lately for QA issues. As @PleasantlyAverage said, they're a completely different group of engineers. They've been operating the Atlas V and Delta IV since 2006 without a single launch failure, and they just launched the first Vulcan in January which was also a success.
Launch scrubs happen all the time due to hardware, electrical, and weather issues. I know folks are out for blood when it comes to Boeing but ULA is a very reliable launch services provider and this particular scrub isn't really newsworthy. The very fact that they noticed the issue and postponed the launch means that they're doing things properly.
It never ceases to amaze me that Boeing managed to get almost twice the amount of $ compared to SpaceX for their commercial crew contract because they were considered the “safe” option. And yet here we are a decade later where SpaceX’s crew dragon has had to be flying double duty for years because Boeing can’t build anything that works reliably anymore.
At least the contract isn’t cost plus, so Boeing is on the hook for the billion+ dollars in delays here but there needs to be a serious shake up in Boeing’s culture. Being slow and expensive with excellent results can be fine if everyone knows that going in but slow, expensive, and subpar is just disaster.
It seems that those decades of cost plus contracts completely destroyed their ability to get things done for any fixed amount of money. They became too used to being able to burn through cash at will because they were always able to ask for more, and the congressmen in their pockets were always happy to oblige.
The good news is that the problem was caught this time? But not by Boeing.
Given their massive and seemingly endless QA problems, flying into hard vacuum on Boeing? How is this a good idea?
After the past year, I can only imagine being caught dead (pun intended) on a Boeing craft.
Boeing definitely deserves flak, but not for this. The issue was with a chattering valve on the Atlas V rocket which is operated by ULA, so if anyone then it's them being at "fault".
Yes, they do. ULA is just a 50/50 venture between Boeing and Lockheed Martin.
They still are different entities with separate management.
Is this splitting hairs? My preferred veterinary specialist is a "partner" in a larger "group" that is owned by private equity. Enshittification tends to roll down hill; I'm seeing costs go up consistently. 🤞 that quality isn't going down but how can I tell?
I wouldn't say it's splitting hairs. It's a joint venture between LockMart and Boeing's Space Division, who aren't even the ones who have been in the news lately for QA issues. As @PleasantlyAverage said, they're a completely different group of engineers. They've been operating the Atlas V and Delta IV since 2006 without a single launch failure, and they just launched the first Vulcan in January which was also a success.
Launch scrubs happen all the time due to hardware, electrical, and weather issues. I know folks are out for blood when it comes to Boeing but ULA is a very reliable launch services provider and this particular scrub isn't really newsworthy. The very fact that they noticed the issue and postponed the launch means that they're doing things properly.
Reasonable.
That thing looks more Kerbal than my rockets