Disaster! Boeing Starliner FAILURE...
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 06. 2024
- Disaster! Boeing Starliner FAILURE...
===
0:00-0:25: Intro
0:26-2:31: Starliner's new update
2:32-4:35: Boeing Starliner beat SpaceX
4:36-8:06: Why did Boeing fail?
===
#alphatech
#techalpha
#spacex
#elonmusk
#boeing
===
Disaster! Boeing Starliner FAILURE...
It seemed like the Starliner spacecraft would finally open the door to its heavenly journey on May 6, but it all turned into darkness.
Starliner scrubbed once again!
So, why? What happened? And when is the next launch window?
Why doesn't NASA focus on Dragon and skip Boeing Starliner?
How did Elon Musk react?
Let’s find out on today’s episode of Alpha Tech:
Disaster! Boeing Starliner FAILURE...
Boeing had a chance to restore some redemption to its tarnished name with the scheduled launch of the first crewed Starliner mission from Florida, a pioneering capsule designed to revolutionize human space exploration activities. However, despite the excitement from NASA, hundreds of Boeing employees, and even a "Godspeed" wish from Elon Musk, the flight ran into trouble.
Disaster! Boeing Starliner FAILURE...
The issue stemmed from a valve in the rocket's upper stage, prompting mission managers to issue a check command just two hours before liftoff.
It was a frustrating disappointment for commander Barry “Butch” Wilmore and co-pilot Sunita Williams, who were in the process of strapping in for launch when the scrub was announced. The moment brought to mind one of Wilmore’s favorite sayings: “You’d rather be on the ground wishing you were in space than in space and wishing you were on the ground.”
===
Subcribe Alpha Tech: / @alphatech4966
=== - Věda a technologie
From the world's best company run by Engineers, to the world's worst, run by Bean Counters.
GM suffered the same fate when Roger Smith took over as CEO.
Companies aren't, never were, and never will be run by Engineers ! When the CEO title is conferred, all other Technical titles are dropped
and if carried over is in name only.
Yeah cliches can be over used sometimes; this is an example.
If it says Boeing, Boeing, Boeing on the label, label, label, then you know it won't be stable, stable, stable.
Boeing and ULA can't fly ONE space-worthy ship yet for their $4.2 BILLION dollars, with $688 million in overruns while SpaceX converted their cargo ship to human rating, and built several, for $2.6 Billion. They have since been flying NASA and private flights for humans for 4 years and 14 missions for about $55 million per seat AT A PROFIT, and got awarded additional crew missions until 2030. For reference, Russia was charging $80 million per seat on Soyuz, and Starliner costs $90 million per seat.
wow
Are you missing the 155 ULA rockets launched since 2006? Also the that estimated cost of $55 million is an actual price of almost $75 million.
Ok whisky tab.. have another one 👽@duffy84
@@menotyou1234 oh i will. but what do you take issue with? ULA having 155 launches since 2006 or that the actual cost for crew dragon $65 million a passenger not including the cost of cargo, which is why i said closer to $75 million.
I think we're losing perspective here.
Crew Dragon, Starliner - assured US access to space if there is an issue, even if Soyuz, however unlikely, was to have an issue.
However, Sierra Space intend to have a crewed version of Dream chaser flying from some point on '26. BO are talking of having crewed access to space as well, whatever shape that many take.
Wonder who will get mysteriously killed for this.
Musk is absolutely correct about Boeing - - "Too many non-technical manages at Boeing". MBA's & lawyers telling engineers how to do engineering is a death spiral for a manufacturing company.
I find it quite a drastic difference between the engineers led companies in the 1960's going from nearly nothing to landing on the moon in ten years. The current moon mission has been twenty years using mostly old technology, and isn't even close. Maybe those engineers had a better idea. And they used slide rules because the computer was still in it's infancy.
It's scary enough getting on a Boeing plane I can't think how terrifying it must be sitting in their space capsule. I guess they have to pull straws to see who gets to sit by the door.
So you're scared to get on a Space Division capsule more than getting on a Airplane Division plane ?
Well then you'll be happy to know there are a lot of planes you will be flying on, to take away your fear a bit.
More than 10,000 Boeing-built commercial jetliners are in service worldwide, which is almost half the world fleet. The company also offers the most complete family of freighters, and about 90 percent of the world's cargo is carried onboard Boeing planes.
For decades, Boeing knows very well how to milk the contracts. Make my career last through retirement. Oh yeah, laughing to the bank.
Elon Musk said Boeing has "too many non-technical managers." 😂
It was not a Boeing nor a Starliner failure. It was a valve on the ULA rocket that was not functioning according to the procedures, so because there where people onboard and not some satellite, they decided not to risk anything and play it safe.
A failure is a failure. It could be a valve, a bolt, a human error or any number of reason.
@@raygan777able it is not about the 'failure' of the valve. it is about the failure of the videomakers all across the internet that are blaming it on Boeing, while it was the rocket, which is made by ULA and not by Boeing. Boeing has nothing to do with it. What is wrong with you Western people these days? Just like the politicians and media, they will lie and cheat and risk anything, just to get some attention.
@@JFJ12 Boeing should have picked a better partner. And by the Way, BOEING part owns the ULA. There are many other failed attempted attributed to the capsule. Notably, the one where it could not tell the right time. Or was that someone else's fault too? Let's not mentioned two dead whistleblowers.
@@raygan777ableIf it was a human error it would mean an Astronaut farted. Sending all the farty gas down into the valve pipe causing a blockage...Hell that's one hellva big fart..lol
Boeing can't keep doors on planes why does NASA think Starliner can do it?
It's not the same division of Boeing.
Nor landing gear that works properly. Two incidents with landings this year, a 737 and a 767 with gear that didn't deploy
@@robriot6882 those weren't fresh off the factory floor though. That could be poor maintenance or something
A Falcon 9 booster would've had it up there without issue.
If I was an astronaut, I would refuse to fly on the Starliner. Just too many issues, delays, uncertainties. I’ll fly SpaceX.
What, what? 200,000 lifetime cycles on a vehicle that hasn't flown even once..? How could the valve be beyond its lifetime usage when it hasn't been used yet..?
It's from Radio Shack, where you bought your batteries from.
The title of this is wrong. It was a problem with Atlas' second stage, not Starliner and it is hardly a "disaster." Putting up garbage titles makes people ignore your channel in the future. Us CZcams viewers mostly have a "one strike" policy.
I guess you don’t pay tax? Boeing is a disaster for the tax payer. Over 2 x the cost and still doesn’t work…
Hand in hand with all the fake tag photos on so many videos
There is now a problem with Starliner. New launch date of the 21st.
Unlike 20 years ago, fortunately, there is competition in space industry today.
How does a valve exceed it's 200,000 life cycle on a one time use Agena upper stage? Does ULA recover used valves at the bottom of the Ocean from spent Agena 2nd stages.
How many times have they TRIED to launch this Wonder.
The CEO of ULA described what they picked up on the accelerometers as a "buzzing" of the valve. It opening and closing cycling itself. If that fluttering was at 200 hz, then that valve would have exceeded it's 200,000 life cycle in less then 17 minutes.
Why did they leave out the connection between Boeing and ULA
Because this channel is CLICK BAIT ! Always has been.
It is a Boeing product. What can you expect from Boeing these days?
Why? What happened? Oh, that's right, Boeing made it.
Boeing wants NASA to kiss its booboo and write them a check to keep their stock holders happy.
You mean it's Boeing-Boeing
NASA gave Boeing Starliner almost two times the amount for the ISS vehicle than that of the Space X - Crew Dragon contract. NASA wants it’s payoff!😮
Thing about all this is, this latest launch attempt is not a Starliner issue but an issue with the ULA launch booster. So, I don't know why people are shitting on Boeing for this. That capsule just sits on top of the rocket that is made by someone else.
Still, not a good look. Remember, what one rotten apple can do?
You are smart enough to know ULA is a partnership between Boeing and Lockheed Martin, right?
Because the rocket is a 50-50 partnership with Boeing and Lockheed...and the failed valve was in the half that Boeing built.
From one of the best engineering companies on earth to the worst - because they moved to Chicago and let the bean counters take over from the engineers.
ULA and Boeing. The dream team!
Probably the only reason that the astronauts got into that boeing capsule is because they knew the ULA rocket wouldn't be going anywhere anyway.
Err.. Sorry... 200,000 cycles that caused the valve to fail. Sure if this was SpaceX with an very old Falcon 9.. But a brand new rocket???
Unless they have a box of old Space Shuttle parts that they pick from when building the rocket.
It opens and closes cycling itself. If that fluttering was at 200 Hz, then that valve would have exceeded its 200,000 life cycle in less than 17 minutes.
"don't even worry about it." -some challenger engineer, 1982
The Boeing influence is strong in the ULA partnership.
VALVES?! I thought valves for spaceflight were mastered back in the 50s/60s. WTF?😒 Can't reuse something that is unable to be USED in the first place.
Starliner is cursed and by extension the rocket it's attached to. I wouldn't want to ride in it!
Boeing has become an absolute embarrassment to themselves and to the ingenuity of the US space leadership. Boeing has become the epidemy of corporate Greed in this country!
Boeings name is on it, ENOUGH SAID!
There's not enough duct tape to make that Apollo-ish thing to work.
It feels like Boeing is building space ships as they do airplanes! Not well.
200,000 cycle lifespan? How? Very few launches of ULA rockets. Are they using parts from 1982?
At maybe 100 cycles per second whenever the tank is filled, it does not take so many tanking tests to "use up" the valve. I doubt it is even close to 200K but someone figured out that it might be. I don't know if the rate is 5 or 1000 per second
@@chrisalbertson5838 Did not know that. Thanks.
@@chrisalbertson5838and bad management failed to predict the failure time, which is so easy to do..! 🤖
It's ULA's problem, not Starliner. I get that Boeing is part of both, but it not the Starliner's team failure, this time.
Boeing went super cheap by using the spare bin of previous capsules like the Space Shuttle Program! Inside the control instrument panel a complete set of analog dip-switches, knobs and low resolution LCD screens from 1990s.😮
New name for this capsule.
The Boeing Starboner.
haha funny!
How it exceed it life cycle when it’s never been flown?
Exactly
Because it cycled many times a second - I think he said 40Hz, but don't quote me.
Space-X rules! Everyone else drools!
These legacy spacecraft companies have lost there way. Mismanagement I believe is a major factor. They should be relegated to support roles for the industry.
The Boeing Starliner project is all political.
It’s money and employment. We are a healthcare, war fair, well fair, government economy. And throw in space exploration, we really need that… 😮
The 2nd ULA stage has nothing to do with Starliner. Come on, speak the truth.
Hey, at least the door plug didn’t pop out this time……
Yet...give them time.
It's not the engineering depts that have failed Boeing, but it's layers of management. Management sucked the life out of the company by making "pleasing wall street" the company's focus. This management heavy expense is at the detriment of sufficient investment in technology and engineering talent.
For every paper pushing manager you lose one point five engineers. For every C level executive you lose between five and seven engineers. Simply put, when the executives moved to Chicago, they turned their backs on the engineering and manufacturing groups. Then setting up Spirit manufacturing to get out from under the union contracts, halved the quality of their products. I say halved because they hired less experienced and expensive workers and pushed them to work faster, often leaving mistakes for "someone" further down the line to fix. This resulted in bolts not being installed in plug doors because the skins were sealed up before they got to the fix-it crews. (FCC finding) resulting in a plug falling off. All preventable if the were allowed to build at a reasonable rate. So I point my fist at Boeing's executives relentless drive for faster production so they could increase profits ane 9f course, their bonuses... 😊
Starliner needs life alert , help ive fallen and I cant get up !
Did you see how the astronauts were walking in the space suits? Very uncomfortable in the private areas.
During the pressure testing, it didn't look like they had much in the way of range of motion.
What can you say about the US space industry when NASA head honcho said there is nothing to see on the far side of the moon because it is always dark.
How does a valve exceed its life span on an expendable booster?
LOL, the valve is designed to operate for 200,000 cycles... and during test they cycle it 199,950 times??
How NASA protocols not take into account the valve cycle history before attempting the launch? They should be glad if failed on the ground and not during launch
oops,boeing's involvement tells you everything you need to know as to why this this aint going anywhere fast,like their airplanes.
So a valve in the Atlas rocket failed and that's Starliner's fault? Also, SpaceX does not make a spacecraft qualified to travel as deep into space, which is what Starliner was designed to do.
Starliner is not Orion, Orian is the deepspace capsule, starliner is for LEO.
The trouble is that Boeing is no longer an engineering company, it is a marketing company. They consider their job done when they get money from the government, not when they deliver a product.
Nope, sorry. Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Boeing Defense, Space & Security and Boeing Global Services, and is supported by Boeing Global.
Don't see any Marketing Division.
@@Mity_Mo - That is because the whole management structure is the marketing division.
@@spacecadet35 Will Apollo ever get off the ground ? What does this mean for Boeing, North American Aviation, Douglas Aircraft Company, and IBM ?
Boeing keeps making money off their failures. Makes you wonder just what in the world NASA is doing to enable these cost overruns.
Time to pull the plug on Boeing
I worked for Boeing for 43 years and have seen many new aircraft get off the ground and I have followed their advances for Space. I believe they will overcome this problem as they always do. They are a great company and build great products. Their workforce is second to none. If it ain't Boeing, it ain't going!
😂😂 How.mich did they pay you to post this comment?
All good things come to an end.
If it's Boeing, I ain't going! I will stay home.
To overcome the problems get rid of the bean counters and hire REAL AERO SPACE ENGINEERS.
@@davidpage3893 The bean counters are a minor problem. Get rid of the DEI hires.
I’m no fan of all of this, but this was a problem with a booster valve not Starliner. In fact, if this has been an unmanned booster, they would’ve recycled and flown. Since it was the first version of this booster, they decided to be prudent and stand down.
I don’t have a problem with it , anymore than I had a problem with the Dragon capsule being postponed for a day or two and demo one.
Dragon was successful and continues with an unblemished record after 13 uses and reuse of several of the capsules. Starliner has had Multiple issues that were just ameture hour. The last valve problem took Multiple Months to resolve. How does that even happen?
The first flight, the people coding for the rocket didn't much communicate with the people coding for the capsule and that 11 hour screw up happened, further investigation showed (even more valve problems).
They have not Yet had a flight or demo without valve problems.
This time the valved "exceeded its life off 200k uses"... how does that even make sense? Surely they knew that and would have replaced it before putting humans in it the capsule? Wasn't anyone tracking expendable part usage. Like forgetting to change the oil in the car.
Boeing kills 350 people and THEN has a door blow out because it wasn't bolted in? Trash not taken out of fuselages? 787 logistical disasters (not mentioning the battery fires... those were forgivable), 777x years late after selling them.
People want the heads of the Boeing execs in Chicago for a reason. One wonders if they're all a bunch of DEI hires. Regardless, they need to empty and close the Chicago office building.
@@avgjoe5969 , I know all that; and I’d much rather we have DreamChaser than Starliner. BUT, the point is, the abort earlier this week had nothing to do with the Starliner, and was comparable to any Space Shuttle, Soyuz or Dragon Capsule aborted countdown.
@@michaeldemarco9950 Yep, fully reusable on falcon 9, not dependent on parachutes, just waiting for Musk to mount an expanded version for intercontinental transport to land on regular airports, with a ferry 0 stage to precisely land next to the swimming launch tower and adjacent runway for the return flight. Remount on the booster, while the pax wait to board the complete transport. The whole operation is routine for the pax, except for the vertical seat arrangement.
I could bet that this will happen
can we really expect any different executive fiat with boeing's starliner than we have seen with their 737 program?...
There is no deadline, if there is the slightest doubt, pospone. Hurry leads to inmense regret. Have people forgotten the push to launch Challenger, disaster due to launch on freezing conditions. Hours later it would have been safe..
The problem was with ULA, not Boeing.
"Was it the door?"
When you start putting people in space vehicles you don't want to rush anything. For a company that has doors blowing off its airliners, I'd be nervous about flying in Starliner. Musk is a horrible person, but I must give SpaceX credit for Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, and the Dragon capsule.
Boeing had some good engineers in the 50s-60s. I guess they died.
Where did all those valves come from? Have all the failed valves came from the same place?
Who is making them?
How long has this been happening?
Has the valve company been making defective valves?
How does that impact safety issues?
If it's deliberate, shouldn't there be repercussions? And if so, who has failed to enforce it?
And what is wrong with Boeing and others who haven't switched valve companies in all this time? Shouldn't company heads be rolling for not doing their jobs correctly?
Well get hired by Boeing then demand answers. You go boy !!
Report for misinformation.
The starliner had nothing to do with this scrub.
Boeing is the main contractor running the show.
@@elitnoctua the valve wasn't their hardware.
The rocket is a 50-50 partnership with Boeing and Lockheed...and the failed valve was in the half that Boeing built.
@@ghost307 the valve didn't fail tho. The control system went apeshyte and cycled it a hundred times a second for whatever reason.
The valve did it's job. Technically it didn't fail. They decided it used up enough of it's life in that known malfunction that it should be looked at.
Whatever caused the problem was in the brains or the actuators or the connections between, which I'd think if I understand it right is more Lockheed than boeing territory.
@@ghost307 it's not that boeing gets a pass for being a rotten company that's done for, it's just the starliner didn't cause this issue. It was just sitting there.
The problem is a valve in the Centaur upper stage, not Starliner. The next launch attempt in on the 17th. Can we wait until the flight has been done to say how it went?
Boeing is part of ULA..! 👽
Chances are this will be true of spacex in the future...
But spacex is not going anywhere anytime soon...
Meanwhile, in the same time Boeing and Nasa have gone billions over budget and estimated time lines not launching a new space capsule, China has launched dozens of missions and built their own space station.... 🤦
DISASTER …. BOEING ….. I THINK THERE IS A STRONG CONNECTION ….
Starliner should use a Falcon 9 also instead of the Atlas.
They will need to find another ride, because there are not many Atlas's left. I imagine they are banking on ULA's new rocket to get human flight certified.
At this point, you might as well ask Northrop Grumman to upgrade Cygnus. And I guarantee that would be safer (and less cursed) than Starliner.
Boeing lost its soul …
That is pretty lame the valve exceeded it's 200,000 cycle lifespan, yet the craft never left the ground.
Thats what happens when the wigs pay for their bonuses by buying used Tx'ed parts
@Mity_Mo
0 seconds ago
It's from Radio Shack, where you bought your batteries from.
Oh come ON! It's just ULA making new ways to fail. Name me ONE ULA project that hasn't gone over time and budget? I can't think of one and while 'space is hard'....the craft ULA have been using are well known and breaking no new ground like SpaceX which has pushed FAR beyond what UAL is struggling to do.
I'd be less harsh if ULA was developing a radical new approach to spacecraft...but they aren't. They're just struggling to use well proven technology successfully.
Boeing must be quite disappointed with ULA!
I don't agree with you that fix cost was the main problem with Starliner. Boeing has been designing and building planes for decades at fix cost, they should have use that business model instead of the fat cat federal contract model!!!
And, besides, what if the door blows off?
What? It's not like it's cold and the O-Rings are hardened. Just FLY! We got deadlines to catch!
Brave astronauts... I wouldn't fly on that thing...
Boeing is too used to the grift of blowing through other peoples money with VERY limited accountability. Billions have disappeared in "cost overruns". Edit. I say limited because there's some blackholes that the accountants weren't allowed to look at for security reasons.
We have to figure out something better than cryogenic valves. They have always been troublesome. Probably always will be troublesome. I have no idea what the replacement would be at this point though.
The government desperate to save the name Boeing. God protect our 2 astronauts.
Yeah but the name Boeing stares at you every time you pay for and board a flight. I guess you support them more.
More than 10,000 Boeing-built commercial jetliners are in service worldwide, which is almost half the world fleet. The company also offers the most complete family of freighters, and about 90 percent of the world's cargo is carried onboard Boeing planes.
I second that. The government has killed 17 Astronauts so far...
I honestly dont know why ANYONE might have been shocked, given who made the darn thing.😂
Starliner is welfare for a defense contractor.
Boeing seems to be having many issues in many areas - unfortunately.
I would love to be there.
Worked on NASA's launch of GOES!
Boeing is like disney its dead
Marcus of Queensbury English please !
A valve issue, really ? A smokey unknown voice in the shielded forbidden board room who asked about the size of his very special bonus check amount was more than likely.
Boeing lost its way with too many managers.
So the valve is USED UP before it's actually been used to get to space!?!? How is that crap even possible?!
Boeing needs to be dismantled and scraped for parts.
Maybe a few people could/should get other jobs in aerospace but the whole barrel is rotten.
It's a solenoid pressure valve. Sort of like a pressure cooker valve without the spring.
Any 9th grader knows that.
Now that you've extrapolated that to why do humans exist, you might want to ponder your navel next.
@@Mity_Mo so they used it up and didn't know that so it got sent to the launch pad...?
I still think what happened there is damming ft everyone at Boeing
Your snark has left you misunderstanding my point.
If the valve is 'fueled' and can run out how did they ignore that?
How did they miss this?
@@Jasonfallen71 Well they usually recycle the valve to re-seat it. It's a commercial valve sold by 3rd party as are most components in aerospace, military, governments, state/local/federal. Are you sure you passed the 8th grade.
@@Mity_Mo I can show you my diploma
Lol
Thing is at least I ask the ask right questions whereas ULA and Boeing are screwing up on the most basic of basic aerospace engineering.
Why would they use sucks finicky parts? How can SpaceX do what they do with such a rapid pace and ULA and everyone else save SpaceX works at a snails pace AND STILL screws it up?
You should be asking at ULA what criteria are you using to hire so-called professional engineers? Do any of them have educations that went past 8th grade?
What if it was a publicity trick for other unknown reasons to us?
It's a Boeing....it's not going!
With a few. changes, it could be an excellent carnival ride
Why did Boeing go to hell in a handbasket? They merged with McDonald Douglas. Two totally different companies oddly enough trying to do it the MD way. Insane, I know.
Douglas ? Bought out about 40 years ago. Maybe you have Alzheimer's disease, get a checkup.
Thanks for sharing, interesting statement. They have worn out a valve that’s rated for 200k operations on a disposable rocket system that hasn’t been even used once. Sounds like ULA has almost as many problems as Boeing. Sounds like the only way Boeing is getting star liner to orbit is if they borrow the teleportation technology from the secret section that used it to disappear the flight out of Malaysia. The videos on Friday from the Blaze network were amazing CGI. 😂 Almost believable.
Starliner has NO failure - the rocket is the problem - don'r blame Boeing!
Who built the rocket?
@@johnruckman2320 well would you look at that....Boeing and Lockheed Martin are the parent companies of ULA...
Boeing ain't Going. Boeing should stick to what they do best - Making aeroplanes. NO WAIT ! ! ! 😱
Boeing probably built the space program on minimum bid, just like it built its latest planes!
Built by the lowest bidders, with sloppy
Engineering and poor quality control.
A true flying coffin.
You must own a Ford. You seem like an expert.
boeing is bidding on NGAD with Lockheed Martin. I pray they don't give it to Boeing
So.......what's the issue with ULA and valves???????
They forgot how to manage a project, so they're chasing problems rather than anticipating them. Apparently they forgot how to make a valve... or more likely, hired someone who forgot.
When politicians try to do the work of engineers.
ULA can't afford to lose an Atlas V, there's only about 15 or 16 left and they're all spoken for.
They sent people to the moon in 60s. Seems like a solid foundation to build on.
Boeing was spoiled for decades due to no competition.
The valve has an inherent condition that is simply an outcome of using high-pressure oxygen and propellants through its chambers. Multipurpose and multifunctional. Nobody's "fault," not Boeing or ULA or even the manufacturers' "fault" or "defective" item. Simply the best available device for its intended function available on the market, doing its job as best it can.